Muslim workers, Swift can't resolve Ramadan issue

Chris Casey, The (Greeley) Tribune

Published September 8, 2008 at 1:19 p.m.

Text size

Sara Loven © The (Greeley) Tribune

Greeley JBS Swift meatpacking plant Muslim employees congregate in Lincoln Park at 10th Avenue and 9th Street on Monday Sept. 8, 2008 to hear the comprimise reached by the Somali Muslim community leaders and the executives at Swift. The workers are asking the company to allow them to have their break at 7:30 p.m. to break their fast.

Photo by Sara Loven © The (Greeley) Tribune

Abdullahi Abdirahman, a Somali community leader in Greeley, spoke to the Muslim Swift workers about the negotiations between the company and the workers regarding their break times on Monday at Lincoln Park at 10th Avenue and 9th Street. About 150 second shift workers attended the talk.

More Local News

Comments

September 8, 2008

1:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

me2 writes:

so pray in your head and carry a candy bar.
September 8, 2008

1:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

CWW writes:

Tough toenails. If you're religion is more important than your job, you made your choice. Don't whine about it. You should be happy you get to stay home to fast and pray.
September 8, 2008

1:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

sue27 writes:

Changing a break time for a few weeks seems fully reasonable and within the company's ability. Since the workers asked for the change before Ramadan began, and were granted the adjustment, the company needs to stick with it. If the praying period lasts longer than a standard break, can't the workers stay a bit late to cover for it?

For the other workers who are complaining, does the company have time off for Christmas?
September 8, 2008

2:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Buckwheat writes:

I have no problem with them marching. The company changed their minds at the last minute after they had already agreed to a specific request. I'd be pzd also. I don't care what religion they are, a deal is a deal and Swift should have stood behind it.
September 8, 2008

2:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

blacksho89 writes:

Doesn't that plant process pork?

Mmmmm....bacon......
September 8, 2008

2:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hambone writes:

12 hours without food? do it all the time. It's called sleeping.

Isn't Ramadan a month long? Seems like a bit of request.

Maybe they can get a jobs driving cabs here in town. Should be able to take their breaks when Muhammed says so.
September 8, 2008

2:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

don3422 writes:

I see no problem with the company allowing them to change their break time to allow them to pray, in fact they would be doing something good without it costing them anything.
September 8, 2008

2:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

DeimosJB writes:

A private company should be allowed to run its business however it likes. If it wants to conduct its business in English only, or have its breaks at a certain time, or mandate a certain dress code, it has every right to do so. Of course consumers have a right to support or not to support such firms, and therein is the beauty of capitalism.
To answer AmaranthArticia, yes, I have gone 12 hours without food many times. Most posters here probably have. It's called fasting, and it's done by many religious people in the world, such as Christians. Some fasting, such as mentioned above, also involves no drink. It's not a burden, and you get used to it very quickly. In fact, I find that by using the time that I would have normally devoted to food to prayer instead, I feel more energized than if I had eaten a meal.
September 8, 2008

2:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Squatch writes:

Very nice to see Americans get the shaft again to save money. Thanks again for selling America out I guess if there was a way to send all the meat to another country to be packed you would do it. At least they got rid of the illegal’s just to bring legal Muslims that wont leave & Disappear after their Visa's expire. Jobs well done!
September 8, 2008

2:49 p.m.

Suggest removal

riverrafter writes:

First- is the time change they requested impacting the normal operations of the company? Is it a burden on other workers to accomodate them?
Second- Why was the request first accomodated and then denied? Was in in response to the other worker's protests?
Third- If the request can be reasonably accomodated and the plant operations not impacted, what purpose would it serve to deny the request?
Flex schedules are the heart and soul of any productive company. Happy workers are more committed, more productive and more loyal.
What's really going on here?
September 8, 2008

2:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

kathyM writes:

Don't get your shorts in a twist. History is merely repeating itself. The same panic of "OMG they're taking over!" happened when the flood of Irish (Catholics) came to the U.S. Employers were baffled then, too, that the Catholics dared want to go to Mass during the week or take time off for religious holidays that the Protestants rejected during the Reformation (e.g., 500 years ago). The same freakout happened when JFK--a Catholic--ran for President. Some predicted JFK's win as the beginning of forced Catholicism in the U.S. Sounds ridiculous today, doesn't it?

Things won't go to *(#&*% in a handbasket because Muslim immigrants want to live here. The huge Muslim community in SE Michigan (Detroit) is an example. Those folks have done all the good things that millions of new Americans do: work hard, raise their families, follow their faith, contribute to the community. Add the beautiful mosques, interesting cultures (and awesome foods), and you have another great ingredient for our Melting Pot.

This insulated part of the country is not so insulated anymore. Get over it.
September 8, 2008

3:06 p.m.

HSTOWEL writes:

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
September 8, 2008

3:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Scott writes:

In a production line environment it is darn tough to change the schedule without impacting the product flow of the production line. If you don't like the pace, timing of breaks or anything else, then find another job.

Scott
September 8, 2008

3:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

ActualThinker writes:

Aren't many of you critcizing these Muslims the same people that complain about taking prayer out of schools, and other religious issues? So is it only relevant then what the religion is YOUR religion but anyone who believes different can deal with it?
September 8, 2008

3:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Marshdale writes:

You people are way to freaked out over this. They are people, human beings like the rest of us. Maybe we should make all christians work on Christmas. Would you like that?
September 8, 2008

3:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

blacksho89 writes:

Marshdale: Sure. Christmas is not a Christian holiday.
I prefer not to work on Resurrection Sunday, though.
September 8, 2008

3:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Scott writes:

Marshdale,
1: Christmas is a Federal holiday, just like Memorial Day, The 4th, etc.. President Grant made Christmas a Federal holiday.
2: A number of Christians do work on Christmas day. The first that come to mind are emergency services workers, hospital employees and the military.
3: <repeat> If you don't like the pace, timing of breaks or anything else, then find another job <repeat_end>

Scott
September 8, 2008

3:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Marshdale,

Being that 7/8 or roughly 75-83 percent of American's are Christian or of that particular faith group (Catholic, etc,) and over 60 percent of store, local, state, and national are operational during Christmas......I am afraid I do not follow? I'm Christian and I work Christmas, if only half a day?

You lost me, thats stupid sounding. Please rephrase that. Most your type love bashing the Christian Majority every time you want to assert a point. Please research your facts before you blurt out your stupidity and bias.

As for the subject of this article? Why should they, Muslims' always be favored over other religious (not racial) groups? Is it because the risk of vast and violent behavoir, the "consequences" so to speak, for not obeying they're demands?

If they refuse to work the schedule demanded, supplied and agreed upon when they were hired, than they dont work. Period. Stupid people like you ruin the work force by lobbying to submit to every whim of every minority. Its a business, let it do its job. If they want something that works for them seek elsewhere that isn't time demanding.

I.
September 8, 2008

3:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

jugdish writes:

Big_D

"paying Americans a living wage"

you refer to this several times. Do you know what these Somalis and other Muslims mentioned in the article get paid? I'll bet its several dollars north of minimum wage. What is a living wage to you for working in a meat processing plant? $60 grand a year and a pension plus benefits? You threw it out there. Back it up with some facts and figures.

Working in a meat processing plant is nasty work most americans avoid. there are many americans who could come to work at Swift and earn money. But they won't take the job.

Like Eddie, I suspect many of them are holding out for a management position.
September 8, 2008

3:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

deriko2282 writes:

Swift is once again making itself famous by highlighting its practice of hiring immigrant workers only to pay them less than standard wages and denying them the same rights as citizens. If only conservatives would realize that their financial supporters (Swift&Co.) are the ones bringing foreign workers to the US at the expense of American jobs, only for their personal profit.
September 8, 2008

3:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

windbourne writes:

Some of you really need to grow up. What is wrong with you. If were told to report to work on Xmas day, Thanksgiving, july 4th, etc, or be fired, you would be LIVID. More importantly, these folks are going for long periods of time with little food/water. All they wanted was a bit of time for a small feast. This is in a FOOD PLANT. Worse, these ppl have knives. You get tired and sloppy without food. More mistakes are made. These ppl were not asking for more money. These are not illegal aliens from mexico that some of you state. These are simple folks living here legally, trying to make a living by doing an honest day's work.
September 8, 2008

3:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

scootertrash writes:

I agree with Scott, many christians work on Christmas, besides the ones he mentioned, there are waiters and waitresses and many other occupations catering to everyone elses needs on that day. A company should be able to make it schedules how ever they want, if the workers don't like it, they can find a new job!!
September 8, 2008

3:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

riosmom6 writes:

Many members of my (Christian) family work on Christmas, Easter and many other religious days. We plan our family celebrations to accomodate their work schedules. It's pretty single minded to think Christians employess don't have to work on their holidays. In addition, I've never know a Muslim, Jew or Buddhist who objected to getting a day off at Christmas, either !!
September 8, 2008

4:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

mt writes:

What is wrong with you windy. People are told all the time to go to work on those holidays or be fired. Do you think all of america takes those days off and the country shuts down? What about the non muslims that work at the plant that don't want their break times to change for someone elses religion. The muslims knew the breaks and the times when they took the job. The company should not have to change to make it more comfortable for the employees. The employees should quit if they don't like it and find a more accomidating job. If they work with knives and it is dangerous when they don't eat then they should eat and not fast. Plain and simple. Do the job your employeer pays you for, follow the rules or move on to other employment.
September 8, 2008

4:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

TheDenverB writes:

racism is alive and well in Denver, Colorado today.

"Islam isn't a joke, and it needs to leave American shores and stay in its historical boundries of the Middle East; where it can do less harm."

You are a joke and need to leave American shores, sir.
September 8, 2008

4:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

Red writes:

Wow. Denver is a lot more closed minded than I ever thought we were.
You all need to open your eyes and close your mouths and think a bit.
September 8, 2008

4:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

Kinetic1 writes:

I have never seen such a bunch in intolerant folks in all my life! Really! Do you think Jesus would tell them to "Carry a candybar?" What happened to love they neighbor? Do unto others, etc...
September 8, 2008

4:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Brockage writes:

Kvetch, kvetch, kvetch -- that seems to be the major hobby of moslems. Try for a new hobby like maybe adapting to the larger world around you instead of deluding yourself into thinking the world is going to conform to your desires.

In other words, grow up. It's about time.
September 8, 2008

4:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

BroncoDan writes:

Why can't we all just get along...
September 8, 2008

4:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

mrwiizrd writes:

"Islam:
When owning another human being as property is just what you need to do."

Might want to take a quick look back at what Christians did to Africans a few hundred years back.
September 8, 2008

4:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Red writes:

Brockage-
Practicing religion does not mean you adapt to the world around you.
Grab a dictionary and look up the word 'respect'.
Then try to put it into practice.
September 8, 2008

5:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

junglegymco writes:

Wow - the fanatical nut jobs are out in force today. What's so tough about asking a company to make a minor agreement for a religious act (and remember nut-jobs - ALL religious freedom, NOT just Christianity, is an inherent part of our Constitution. It's called FREEDOM OF RELIGION). This is also a FLAGRANT violation of Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964 that says employers must make a reasonable accommodation for religious beliefs. I hope SWIFFT gets a SWIFT kick in the a** for its disgustingly anti-religious behavior. And I hope you whiners also try to become more American and actually try to DEFEND the U.S. Constitution and the laws of our land, instead of trying to find ways around them when they conflict with your bigotry.
September 8, 2008

5:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

TheDenverB writes:

"Try for a new hobby like maybe adapting to the larger world around you instead of deluding yourself into thinking the world is going to conform to your desires."

some would say the same thing for the Christians in this country... or specifically to you for wanting them to conform to what you see as 'the larger world' (when my guess is that your view of the world is myopically smaller than most Muslims who come over to America from another country to better themselves like your ancestors did).
September 8, 2008

6:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

coarizona writes:

Many people work on their religious or personal holidays. I think when you apply for a job you agree to the conditions of employment. If it infringes on your religious or personal needs...time to get another job.
September 8, 2008

6:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

roger44 writes:

many of you seem to forget this is the United states of America.
20 years ago Americans were doing this work at a wage of around $19 an hr. When they brought in the illegals it went down to around 11 bucks. now they compensate by using these people. if you start letting these folks use religion as a reason to disrupt production, then you had better prepare to do the same with every one in the plant. do that and you may as well close the doors.
September 8, 2008

6:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

DenverB writes:
"racism is alive and well in Denver, Colorado today.

"Islam isn't a joke, and it needs to leave American shores and stay in its historical boundries of the Middle East; where it can do less harm."

You are a joke and need to leave American shores, sir."

What race is Islam?????

************************************************

As for those trying to make a moral equivalence between Christianity and Islam, does it occur to you that your Christian examples are hundreds of years old, because there are no current ones? Islam **CURRENTLY**calls for forcing all non-Muslims to convert, submit to Islamic rule under Sharia, or be warred upon. It calls for making non-Muslims feel "subdued." There is no such equivalent to these mandates in other religions. So-called "radical Muslims" are nothing other than Muslims who take their religion to heart.
This business in Greeley is the camel's nose under the tent (pun intended) and is a classic case of "Sharia creep."
September 8, 2008

6:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Thewiseman writes:

Just wait for the next civil war! It ain't going to be pretty.
September 8, 2008

6:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

tfooq writes:

why do the crazies always come out on the newspaper article comments? Are there people who seriously just wait for an article to be posted that mentions or hints at the existence of an underrepresented population so that they can say racist/classist/sexist things?

why do you spend so much time being bigots? is it really that rewarding?
September 8, 2008

6:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

tfooq - can you name ANYTHING on Earth that is more sexist than Islam???
September 8, 2008

7:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

PACE2008 writes:

the workers are part of a union?
September 8, 2008

7:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

windbourne writes:

mt; re-read the article; They had asked the management and had permission. For some odd reason, they reneged on it. What was being asked for, and had been granted earlier, was not a big deal. And BTW, I worked there when it was Monfort (pre-conagra). The old man would gladly have allowed it as long as ppl got their work done.
September 8, 2008

8:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

jpkiljan writes:

Well, even Ebenezer Scrooge let Bob Cratchit have Christmas day off. I hope Swift doesn't think the Ramadan fast is just another kind of "poor excuse for picking a man's pocket every twenty-fifth of December!" It's a good company with good products and it helps Colorado's economy. I try to buy products from companies that treat their employees well and I'm willing to pay that extra nickel a pound for my bacon if that's what it takes. Why Swift seems to go out of its way to attract bad press is a mystery to me. -J
September 8, 2008

8:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Rocky2 writes:

Give them a taste of the good 'ol American worker, FIRE them Like Reagan fires 11,000 striking air traffic controllers Aug. 5, 1981 ...

Go to Work!
September 8, 2008

8:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

Delcycer writes:

There are a lot of circular, self-deceptive dreamers out today! "It's called Capitalism!"

Really. Because it's unregulated or under regulated market forces that pulled those wages down, to the point where most of white America was just too "good" to do the job. It is underegulated market forces that export jobs. It is a part of our Constitution that companies must make reasonable accomodations in circumstances like these.

If the accomodations weren't reasonable, they should have been refused in the first place--and they weren't. Which means that any way you slice it, someone or several someones in charge of operations management at Swift is an idiot, period. Or a coward. If you can't say no to people in the first place you shouldn't be in management. And if you back down when employees question a decision, you shouldn't be in management.

Seems to me that no matter what the reasons are, someone up in Greely has NO BUSINESS managing a business.
September 8, 2008

8:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

navymom writes:

What's with disappearing posts? There were a number of posts from mytwosense on here earlier to which I wanted to respond but did not have time and now they are gone. This happens often. Can anyone tell me why?
September 8, 2008

9:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

HopiMedicineMan writes:

That's all I need, another flock of immigrants. We can beat the white liberals. They'll just turn the country back to us because they think it's ours. But the Koran indicates all land unowned by Muslims is frontier. It's going to be harder to remove them.

Navymom,
Posts disappear all the time. Mytwosense is intelligent, has some potential, and certainly not one of those adolescent name-callers. Why they remove her stuff I have no idea. I've had posts removed too.
September 8, 2008

10:12 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hola writes:

Non immigrants don't show up to work they get fired. Immigrants have more rights than citizens. Shameful.
September 8, 2008

10:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Hola writes:

Love the Burqas too. Women forced to hide themselves out of shame of being women. Welcome to the new West I guess.
September 8, 2008

10:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

jhdteacher writes:

reversal of religious accommodations?

how about not reporting to work because you're torturing and slaughtering helpless animals?
September 8, 2008

10:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

solar_satellite writes:

I'm not going to address the substance of the article, but I do want to address the subject of religion. Mohameddanism (which has nothing to do with peace, and so should not be called Islam) is not a religion, but a unitary system of beliefs concerning religion and society. It doctrinally divides the world into dar-al-Islam (the house of Peace) and dar al-Harb (the house of War); we live in the latter. Mohameddanism does indeed scripturally sanction making war on anyone who opposes it until the entire world is subjugated to itself. It scripturally sanctions killing or enslaving anyone not "of the Book", i.e. Jews or Christians, and this is exactly what happened to the Persian nation, whose people were Zoroastrian (only a tiny remnant survive, the Parsees) and the Hindus of northern India. "People of the Book" have a slight dispensation made for them in that while they must still be subjugated, they may keep their lives, property, and faith, so long as they submit to Mohameddan overlordship (as Dhimmis). It is certainly true that Christians have killed and enslaved, but there is no scriptural basis for those actions; they are not specifically enjoined on Christians (or Jews) as jihad is on Mohameddans. If you read the Old Testament, you will find numerous instances of God instructing the Jews to go smite this or that nation, but there is nothing like the blanket, specific injunction to convert, kill, or enslave the rest of the world which is explicit in the Mohameddan Hadith (the sayings of the Prophet) and Koran in either the Old or New Testaments. For these reasons, it is naive to think that Mohameddans are part of any "melting pot", or to imagine that their extreme and bellicose beliefs can mellow. It is true that Mohameddanism is not monolithic, and it is important to distinguish its doctrinal character from the behavior of individual adherents, but its relation to other belief systems is in no wise comparable to that which exists between say Catholicism and Protestantism. I commend the book 'The Sword of the Prophet' to you. While it is true that this was written by a partisan Orthodox Christian from the Balkans, where the conflict between Christians and Mohameddans was sharpest and of the longest standing, I have never heard the author's contentions about the nature of Mohameddanism refuted.
September 8, 2008

11 p.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

solar_satellite - good post. Minor point - Islam means "submission"
Peace is "Salaam"
September 8, 2008

11:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

MileHighPatriot writes:

Islam: religion of intolerance
September 9, 2008

1:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

1world writes:

If the company agreed to allowing different break times in respect for Ramadan, the break times should be honored. Any other answer to this are shades of prejudice.

There are very few negative statements above that have any other basis to them than a prejudice toward an innocent group of people. It is a shame that there are so many people that are that narrow minded to have succumbed to the Fear Mongering that our politicians, religious leaders and radio show hosts have espoused since 9-11.

I spent 5 years working in the Middle East and have met and worked with some very kind and amazing people. I have also had rockets, mortars and IEDs land or explode very near where I lived or the vehicles I was driving. Not once did I consider accusing the people I knew of being the same people that were set on mayhem and terrorism.

I realize that there are misguided people in the world that warp religion to their own misdeeds. That can be said about Christianity. How many hundreds of thousands (or millions) of people have been killed in the name of Christianity? If it were a group of Right Winged Christian Fundamentalists that bombed the towers, would we be so quick to malign them as a whole?

It takes a shallow person to have prejudice and it takes a malignant shallow person to try to spread that seed of hate. I am not Muslim, so don't think that I am here defending a faith I believe in. I just think it is ignorant to slander any group to make yourself feel better. Does hate really make a person feel better? I always found it to be a waste of energy... although I do hate small minded individuals... stupid one too!

Solar-Satellite, well written. I cannot refute anything of what you stated. I will however, and not as eloquently, state that there are very few individuals that are the extremists who espouse to follow dar al-Harb. From my experience, I have only met those who follow peace. I am aware that others are not of the same mind and have been for thousands of years. I am also aware that the intolerance for contradicting Mohammed is nil among every sect. I would also have to say that it is EXTREMELY unpopular to contradict Jesus and the writings of the bible within any of the many strains of Christianity. The only difference is that most of the Christians wouldn't have a clue on how to set an IED properly to detonate when their "enemies" are passing by.
September 9, 2008

1:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

ajcole22 writes:

solar, great post. i couldn't have said it better, and i couldn't agree more.
September 9, 2008

4:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Let's see here, they'll pack and handle the swine against thier religious beliefs, but working certain holidays they refuse? Somethings not right with this picture.
September 9, 2008

5:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

roger44 writes:

bet if swift figured up the cost of having production stopped by these folks, they were hired because ICE raids the joints, they might figure out it would cost effective to offer a living wage and get some folks in there that show up for work and don't make such demands for religious reasons.
September 9, 2008

6:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

WOW, what a load of intolerance i see here today! To me at least, this seems like a simple story, the company AGREED to a request, then changed their minds, making the company wrong. Seems pretty black and white to me. But suddenly, this has turned into an anti-Muslim, anti-Immigrant bashfest. Give a few bigots an inch, and they'll take a mile! Now, in all fairness, the company should have and maintain one policy, either cater to the various groups and allow the change across the board for each religion, or deny it for all religions. When I lived in western Connecticut, our schools took off Rosh Hashanah, meaning I would have to find a babysitter or take off work, yet nobody seemed to mind taking off a primarily Jewish holiday, or screaming about the demands of one religion over the majority. And were it the case here, that management were asked to make a small concession for Passover, no one would have a problem, but if they then went back on it, by God you can believe there would be a hailstorm of fury! Yes, this country was founded by Christians, but Islam was just as prevalent in the world (especially in close proximity to eastern) back then as it is now, and yet the founding fathers said nothing in the Constitution (written by Catholic and Protestant men) about this country being the sole domain of Christianity. Islam was perceived as a major threat against Christianity in the 1700's by the Catholic Church, and their were Catholics at the Constitutional Congress, yet nothing in the Constitution about Islam. They could have very easily said this will be a Christian country, but not have a national church and almost all probably would have been fine with that, but instead they made it more inclusive by saying that Church and State will NOT be intertwined. Some of you need to stop being "strict Constitutionalists" only when it benefits you! Don't use the Constitution and Christianity to hide your bigotry. Oh, and last I checked, the Koran, the Bible, and the Torah are all based on the Old Testament, and agree almost perfectly with each other in their stories, lessons, etc..., so if the Koran is a version of the Old Testament, which is handed down to us by God (and Protestants have their version of the Old Testament as well), then how is the Koran, or Islam, NOT?
September 9, 2008

6:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"Scott writes:

In a production line environment it is darn tough to change the schedule without impacting the product flow of the production line. If you don't like the pace, timing of breaks or anything else, then find another job.

Scott"

You're absolutely right Scott, EXCEPT that the company heard the request and AGREED to it. In doing so, I would HOPE that before they had agreed to it, they had considered the impact on production line flow, scheduling demands, impact on other shifts, etc..., wouldn't you? IF not, then very poor management, if so, and then they renegged on that AGREEMENT, then very poor management! PERIOD! Anything else in this discussion is superflous...
September 9, 2008

6:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

1968camaro writes:

Leave the country!
September 9, 2008

6:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

fiesty writes:

DeimosJB- that might have been a valid argument if it wasn't for the fact that Swift agreed to this weeks ago, yet all of a sudden changed their mind. The workers are right in holding the company to its word.
September 9, 2008

7:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Heidioftherockies writes:

Gregu writes of "intolerance" but I invite Gregu to go to any Muslim country and try to impress upon those governments and societies his/her own religious beliefs. GOOD LUCK! How naive are Americans. Oh it feels so good to preach "tolerance" but in this world today "tolerance" cannot be one-sided and is often impracticable at best, and possibly deadly. As Ayaan Hirsi Ali said of Muslims last night at an interesting Vail Symposium presentation, "one fifth of the world's population is responsible for 2/3 of the violence." We are an open so people are free to come here and practice their religion, but they must also embrace our society as a whole. If they are unhappy with that, let them go elsewhere. This PC stuff has to end.
September 9, 2008

7:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

MRWIZARD:

Might want to take a look and see what African's did to Christian/Europeans/non-Muslim's a few hundred years back, and perhaps what Islam, in several countries TODAY, are doing to African's RIGHT NOW (SLAVE TRADE).

Stop pointing to stuff HUNDREDS of years ago and LOOK AT TODAY you moron.

I.
September 9, 2008

7:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

T1anda writes:

Boycott all products made by Swift and company!! They need to be put out of business for many reasons!!
September 9, 2008

7:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

gregu710 - Telling the truth about Islam, as solar_sat and others have done, is not Islam bashing. And the Koran is no more based on the Old Testament than is MAD Magazine. Muhammed ASSERTED that his musings were in the "Abrahamic tradition" (as Muslims like to claim Islam to be) so that he could piggy-back on the wide and long-standing acceptance of those religions in his neck of the woods to try to legitimize and empower his own self-delusions, aka "Islam." He was no more in the Abrahamic tradition than Jim Jones was. Muslims believe that Muhammed, who had hundreds of prisoners beheaded, who had critics and those who mocked him assassinated, is "uswa husanna" - an excellent exmple of conduct. Knowing that makes it possible to understand the Beslan slaughter, the beheading of Christian schoolgirls in Indonesia, the Iraq beheadings, the Madrid bombing, the London bombing, the murder of Theo van Gogh, the ongoing murders of Buddhists in Thailand, the murders of Christians in the Phillipines, the constant parade of indictments of Muslims possessing bomb-making materials and guide books, the calls by bin Laden and al Zawaheri for "crusader blood," the list goes on and on.... did I forget anything???

Check this out:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
September 9, 2008

7:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

Heidi, I invite you as well to go to South Carolina where I used to live and try to convert people to Judaism, or Hinduism. While you won't be publicly stoned, you also won't get a anything close to a warm welcome. As far as the Middle East goes, well, I can also point to numerous Islamic countries where Orthodox Christian and Jewish communities live and have coexisted for centuries. Take me anywhere in the world and I can show you intolerance, bigotry, and extremism. Was it an Islamic extremist who took down the Federal Building in Oklahoma City years back? As I recall, Timothy McVey claimed to be a Christian Patriot. I am NOT for any form of political correctness, but I am just as opposed to the "this is a Christian Country" stance as well, because, sorry, the times are a-changin'! We either adapt to the world around us or become excluded from the world around us, cause ya know what Heidi, there are MANY more Muslims in the world than there are Christians, and we'd be better off figuring out how to coexist than to win a war with them (that didn't work out so well for the Germans against the Russians in WW2, who outnumbered them 20:1, now did it?) Further, just because we see that things are screwed up in the Middle East or Pakistan does not mean we should do something about our own back yard? That's a pretty crappy argument. The United States was founded on the premise of being a beacon of hope, prosperity, and religious tolerance for the rest of the world, or has that changed to "religious tolerance for those of my faith only"?
September 9, 2008

7:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

gregu - you said"As far as the Middle East goes, well, I can also point to numerous Islamic countries where Orthodox Christian and Jewish communities live and have coexisted for centuries"

It's called "dhimmitude."
Another good term to know: jizyah.

Here's a reading recommendation:

"The Myth of Islamic Tolerance"

The "peace" that non-Musloms "enjoy" in Muslim lands is similar to that "enjoyed" by anti-bellum slaves in the South: know your place, and we might not kill you.
September 9, 2008

7:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

RockyMtnMac writes:

Does Swift give Catholics the day off for Good Friday????
September 9, 2008

7:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

JSeifert writes:

Workers refuse to work fire their dumb butts and hire someone that will work. There are people who would love to have a job right now so fire their butts and hire AMERICANS SWIFT.
September 9, 2008

7:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

RockyMtnMac writes:

Does Swift give Jewish employees the day off for Yom Kippur?
September 9, 2008

7:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

SheikYurBooty, can you then explain to me the Catholic Inquisition, the Witchhunts of Europe, the slaughter of Muslims in the Crusades, and the Pogroms by the Russian Orthodox against the Jews which resulted in the deaths and expulsion of millions of Jews, all acts carried out in the name of God and the Church? As far as the conduct of Muslims against other religions during the time when Islam began, I guess you are completely overlooking the "excesses" of the Catholic Church during the same time then? Funny, but most of the mainline religious scholars who are working to patch up the rifts between the various western religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) all seem to agree that the Koran IS based heavily on the Old Testament, and even point to Muhammeds writings about Jesus Christ. If ALL Muslims were as you indicate, why did Muhammed speak well of Christ as a great prophet (and the Jews don't recognize Christ as the Son of God either!!!) instead of denouncing him as an infidel or worse? Islam believes that the Koran succeeds the Old Testament, just as Christians believe that the New Testament succeeds the Old Testament. BOTH Judaism and Islam say that there is ONLY one God, and do not recognize Christ as anything other than a Prophet. In fact, because of these beliefs by Judaism, most Jews were hated and persecuted up until the Holocaust openly and in numerous countries. And to this day, there are still many who feel that way. Your argument doesn't hold water.
September 9, 2008

7:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

LuvAmerica writes:

LOUIE writes:
"Let's see here, they'll pack and handle the swine against thier religious beliefs, but working certain holidays they refuse? Somethings not right with this picture."

FWIW, It's a beef processing facility.
September 9, 2008

7:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

LuvAmerica writes:

gregu710 writes:
"Yes, this country was founded by Christians..."

FWIW, it wasn't.

"The United States is in no sense founded upon the Christian religion." -George Washington
September 9, 2008

8:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

SheikYurBooty, after reading the reviews, I think I'll pass on this book:
From Publishers Weekly
"this collection that sets out to debunk the theory that Muslims are tolerant of non-Muslims. Although the theme merits exploration, this book does not clarify it. The essays' authors frequently cite jihad and dhimmi as intolerant principles within Islam, but do not define them."

"Several authors also quote the Qur'an out of context and describe Muslims with large generalizations. Yasser Arafat, of the PLO, is presented as representing Muslim attitudes—a characterization most Muslims would probably disagree with"

"Comments describing alleged troublesome behavior by Muslims lack sources and citations"

"Some authors ignore basic Islamic concepts; Bat Ye'or, for example, says that the dhimmi treatment was considered "justified by the superiority of the master-race," although the Qur'an STRICTLY STATES though that ALL RACES ARE EQUAL in Islam"

Just as I do not judge the Merits of my own faith by the actions of some of it's followers, I don't judge Islam by the Merits of it's followers. The Bible was handed down to us by God, and contains the Word of God according to my Bible School lessons from growing up, yet the Bible and the Word of God have been used to justify some of the most horrible acts in history that equal the acts of Muslim extremists. So, do I judge a Religion by its misguided followers or by it's tenets and message?
September 9, 2008

8:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

cassidy22 writes:

I can NOT believe how intolerant, ignorant, bigoted and uneducated the people are who have responded to this post. What is SO wrong with allowing people to have religious differences? All people who practice Islam are not terrorists, religious extremists are. Just the same as I believe that the extreme Christian fundamentalists in this country are terrorists - influencing our government in ways that take my rights away.

I grew up in a very culturally diverse area - I was surrounded by children who were Islamic, Jewish, Hindu and even Buddhist. My friends were African American, European, Asian, Middle Eastern - and good old American mutts, like me. I was a minority as a Christian in my neighborhood. I loved it. I learned about other countries' cultures, got to try great new foods, and learned how to love and accept my neighbors. And by the way, the only people in my area that caused problems and hurt other people - were the white supremists. The only ones who caused violence and destruction in our neighborhood were the skinheads. Everyone else just wanted a safe place to raise their families, in a country that was FOUNDED on religious tolerance.

So where do any of you get off thinking that you are better than anyone else? Where do you get off telling other people to "go home" THIS is their home. Get off your high horse and learn how to accept people for their differences. Let go of your own anger and hatred, and maybe you'll even make a new friend, and enjoy life a little better.
September 9, 2008

8:13 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

LuvAmerica
please re-read, I said it was "founded by Christians" which is not the same as founded on Christian principles. All of the signers of the declaration were of Judeo-Christian upbringing and belief, but they did not refer to the Bible or other religious texts as the basis for any laws.

Also, with regard to my earlier response to SheikYurBooty, I often see people mis-stating that "Islam" translates to "submission" as if it holds a negative connotation. Per the Koran, Islam does mean "Submission" but the people that quote that quote it out of context, because the Koran says it means "submission to the will of God". I believe the Bible also tells us to submit to the Will of God, and we are often told when good or bad things happen that it's all according to God's Plan....
September 9, 2008

8:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

toocool writes:

Brifely, our question of the day is ... how did so many Somali's end up in Greeley, Colorado?
September 9, 2008

8:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

MarineGrunt, uh, yes, the Russian Pogroms continued right up through World War I, and then took on a new life under the Soviets. And Henry Ford openly published anti-semitic newspapers in Detroit during the 1920's as I recall as well. And of course, the McCarty era, where Jewish authors, screenwriters, etc... were a special target for "anti-American activities investigations". And, although debatable, the refusal by our and the British governments to bomb the trains going to Auschwitz to slow down the slaughter of Jews during the last months of the war. Do i need any more?
September 9, 2008

8:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

actually, I don't believe Big D or I or others have said that you will be welcomed in other countries as you are here. As I mentioned before, do we want our country to mirror things in Syria or Saudi Arabia, or do we want our country to mirror our beliefs in our founding principals of religious tolerance and opportunity? Which is it? I was under the crazy impression that we hold ourselves to a much higher moral standard than Libya or Syria, and thus people loved our country, because it was a beacon of hope.... I guess I'm just foolish that way.
September 9, 2008

8:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

I would agree Marine. My philosophy is stamp out religious extr, strike that, extremists of ANY kind, they're dangerous to not only us but their own people (as many ordinary Iraqis of both Sunni and Shiite persuasion have finally realized!), and they do nothing for society as a whole. And in general, the people who generally end up suffering the worst from the actions of extremists of any kind are those furthest removed from the reason for the action of the extremists (like the kids in the daycare center at Ground Zero in Oklahoma City).
September 9, 2008

8:33 a.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

gregu - like many who are slaves to moral equivalence to defend the undefendable, you reach back to cite attrocities of ancient history to excuse the everyday horros committed today and everyday in the name of Islam. Who TODAY is slaughtering innocents while screaming "Praise Jesus" or "Praise Yahweh" or "Praise Buddha" etc?

"If ALL Muslims were as you indicate, why did Muhammed speak well of Christ as a great prophet" - Muhaamed defamed Christ, who asserted and whose followers believe that he was the Son of God. Muhammed asserted that Christ was a mere prophet and that his followers altered the texts to claim that he was a God or Son of God. Muhammed started out trying to gain the support of Christians and Jews in the Arabian peninsula by flattering them so they would be inclined to defer to his self-proclaimed status as the "final prophet." When that failed, his heart hardened and it's been all downhill ever since. Thus the Koran, the sole dictate of Muhammed (allegedly acting as a conduit of the angel Jibril (Gabriel) mouthing the words of God) in three places calls Jews "apes and pigs" or the "sons of apes and pigs." This is why Middle East "peace talks" are always doomed before they start - Muslims cannot renounce the example of Muhammed and reconcile with "apes and pigs."

As for those "reviews" - the first one is just wrong - pure fiction (you are aware I assume that any book that deals factually with Isalm will automatically be given scathing on-line seminar "reviews" defaming the book - it's part of the propaganda jihad).

In the history of the world, the Koran has never been quoted in context by a non-Muslim, or so Muslims assert. So when I cite Koran 2:065: "And ye know of those of you who broke the Sabbath, how We said unto them: Be ye apes, despised and hated!" it's "out of context."

Same with the Hadith (where most of the violent directives come from BTW, far surpassing the Koran). So when Abdullah bin 'Umar recorded:

"Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight wi the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' " and when that is accepted by all 5 major schools of Islam as a true, valid citation, if I cite it, it's "out of context." This is how the game is played.

Islam does not get caught up in race, but in creed. Non-Muslims are BY DEFINITION inferior, and do not enjoy the same rights as Muslims in a Sharia regime. All women, Muslim and non-Muslim are also inferior, it's just that (Animal Farm in reverse) some are more inferior than others.
September 9, 2008

8:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"Muhaamed defamed Christ, who asserted and whose followers believe that he was the Son of God. Muhammed asserted that Christ was a mere prophet "

You mean, in the same way that Christians defame Muhammed by claiming he is a cult leader or fraud when he is the holiest prophet in Islam? Or is that different. How is it OK for Jews to say that Christ is a mere prophet or common man, but now Muslims? You lose me there.

And no, I am not aware that any book that deals factually with Islam gets scathing reviews. Maybe in your opinion, but not mine.

As far as Islams' treatment of women, in more progressive Islamic countries womens rights movements are gaining ground, some even (and very slowly and with a lot of pushback and danger) in Iran. But then, womens suffrage here in the states wasn't exactly welcomed with open arms...
September 9, 2008

8:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

I mentioned Libya because of their previous history, not their recent history, and perhaps a bad example. So, replace Libya with Saudi Arabia, Iran, or other less progressive Islamic countries.

And I am 100% behind the idea of a melting pot and cringe when I hear people speaking Spanish in public or demanding that government forms be in Spanish. (or see a job posting for central Missouri seeking an Engineer who is fluent in Spanish-WTF?) BUT, when we integrate people into society, in the past as now, religion was off-limites, we have never required that people adopt a certain religion (can you imagine if we had demanded that Irish Catholic immigrants in the 1800's convert to Protestantism or not observe their tenets?)

AND, as I mentioned in my earlier post, the workers REQUESTED AND WERE GRANTED this change in schedule by the Company, so why are we off on a tangent about Islam vs Christianity in the first place?
September 9, 2008

8:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"MarineGrunt writes:

gregu.. agreed, sir!

Nice to meet someone on here able to have a conversation on an adult level."

Agreed 100%. By the way, I am NOT that old (to remember the 1920's)...
:)
September 9, 2008

9:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Ann writes:

Readers should know that the US State Department has brought over 82,000 Somalis to the United States in recent years and I believe that many of the large meatpackers have had some role in encouraging this. It is all about cheap labor and not about what is good for America and American workers.

Controversies have developed recently around Somali workers at meatpacking plants (Tyson's) in Shelbyville, TN and Emporia, KS. We have written extensively on those at Refugee Resettlement Watch.

You should also know, unless someone in the comments has already mentioned it, that protests in the Greeley plant were not peaceful and that apparently Swifts and the Greeley Tribune have chosen not to reveal that to the public.

http://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordp...
September 9, 2008

9:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

gregu - Muhammed was no more a holy prophet than was Jim Jones, David Koresh, Tim McVeigh, or Charlie Manson. Islam's goofy beliefs (Muhammed was the "last Prophet"; he ascended to heaven from Jerusalem on a horse to meet with the other "prophets" and Allah; Allah spoke exclusively to Muhammed through an angel; etc) are no better or worse than those of any other religion. Islam stands alone with its eternal mandate to subdue (if not convert - then subdue) non-believers. Muslims consider Christians to be "polytheists" because of the Trinity. This is not an acknowledgement of diversity, but an accusation of inferiority.

You continue to engage in moral equivalence with this one:
"As far as Islams' treatment of women, in more progressive Islamic countries womens rights movements are gaining ground, some even (and very slowly and with a lot of pushback and danger) in Iran. But then, womens suffrage here in the states wasn't exactly welcomed with open arms..."

Why, just today it is reported that an Iranian court ruled that a husband needs to get his first wife's permission to before taking a second (or third, or fourth) wife. No word on what will happen to the wife who withholds that "permission" but guidance can always be found in the Koran - verse 4:34 is helpful when dealing with a non-compliant, uppity woman. (Do other "religious" texts give guidelines on how/how much/when to beat the wife???)
September 9, 2008

9:06 a.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

SheikYurBooty:

Well said, I've read the Qur'an several times and have found nothing but the promotion of death, destruction, slaughter, murder, and inslavement of all non-islamic nations/peoples. It does include beautiful, and peaceful Sura's in it, however...What most dont understand or accept is that those are NOT directed, IN ANY WAY toward non-Muslims. If you understand The Qur'an at all you must understand that what is said later absorbs or cancels or 'improves' on the Sura before it.

Meaning, what the 'prophet' said initially about "your faith, my faith, lets hold hands and love one another' and what he said after he massed an army to 'hunt down and kill the infidils!' absorbs the first one. So initially when he was in a position of weakness he did say the PC things at the time. When he was not he showed what a mass murdering, child raping, lying coward he was.

As for "peaceful" coexistance? Thats retarded. I've traveled many places and I have seen the mass fear in the eyes of many Minority groups (particularly Jewish) in muslim lands. Co-exist with a heavy price, like living with a gun at your head and a knife at your throat. Being gagged isn't a life I'd live.

Crusades? Every time I hear that I need to ask....The Jihad, the Islamic version of Crusade, has lasted 1400 plus years....Why aren't you pressing that button? Oh yeah, We're Christian, we wont kill you for it.

Nice show of courage on your part, but I wont name you out.

I.
September 9, 2008

9:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

SheikYurBooty:

Another thing that Gregu and his liberal, multicultural fellows would not want to admit....That any current ''modern'' movement inside Islamic nations only have occured with the demands of the western world. Animal rights? gay Rights? Womans Rights? The Qur'an lays that all out nicely in how to govern the human race.

If our cultural and society values were not superior to their's they would not be moving here. Period.

I.
September 9, 2008

9:22 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

Sheik I concede, only because it's pointless to continue. You talk about Muslims viewing other religions as inferior, yet continue to degrade any and all Muslim beliefs as equally inferior for exactly the same reasons that they degrade Christianity, ie based on your beliefs and your opinions of them based upon the actions of extremist views of their religion. I am not a Muslim apologist, do not follow the Muslim faith, nor do I think everything is hunky-dory in the Middle East. I DO think it is time for moderate Muslims to step up to the plate and push their religious leaders toward reconciliation with the other religions, and to renounce strongly and forcefully the actions of extremists. I don't know how much clearer I can make that. Quite frankly, if it weren't for wars fought in the Name of God, the Middle Ages and most of the history of man since the time of the Greeks would probably be pretty quiet. It's much harder to get your fellow citizens to take up arms against another country because you want to plunder their riches, or because he ticked you off, but tell them that the other country is out to destroy your God and your beliefs, and that God told you to do it, and bingo, you're set to go.
September 9, 2008

9:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Marine,

Your right, we have every right to demand they adapt to the host (our!) country. If we moved to Saudi Arabia/Iran or any other 'modern' 'moderate' 'friendly' Middle Eastern nation and made such demands....Well? You'd be taken off the assembly line and killed in some cruel, and public fashion. Wouldn't even make the papers, its to common.

So I agree Marine. Be grateful for what liberties you have here and adjust. Don't demand submission from everyone else and expected it.

I.
September 9, 2008

9:28 a.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Gregu,

I dont degrade or mean to insult, I point out the facts, I believe so is SheikYurBooty. I dont think your able to, in a logical ability, understand what a threat this is to your right to think, speak, and act in such a way if the majority religion in this country was not the Christian one. But thats ok, you can spit in my face. Your American, and a human being, so I'd still fight to the death for your right to spit in my face and insult my beliefs.

I promise.

I.
September 9, 2008

9:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

hikingartist writes:

I should get a religion so i would have an excuse to goof off.
September 9, 2008

9:36 a.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

hiking

LOL@You!

:)

I.
September 9, 2008

9:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

gregu - "It's much harder to get your fellow citizens to take up arms against another country because you want to plunder their riches, or because he ticked you off, but tell them that the other country is out to destroy your God and your beliefs, and that God told you to do it, and bingo, you're set to go."

This was precisely the revelation that Muhammed had when he was 40, and humanity has borne the brunt ever since. The quantity of destruction and human suffering that has resulted is immeasurable and, unfortunately, grows every minute. Unlike other self-proclaimed gods and prophets, Muhammed was a warlord and was ever in search of new and improved ways to conquer. That's what makes him (and his ardent followers) so dangerously unique.
September 9, 2008

9:52 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

NotUrFriend, thank you for that very condescending post, and for resorting to labeling me and my friends liberal. Obviously, you know nothing of me, but feel free to be misguided about what I can logically comprehend what might or might not happen. I am quite aware of the abuses of rights in Islamic countries, and quite able to comprehend all of it. Because a person chooses to believe something and does or does not agree with your OPINION, has nothing to do with their ability to comprehend, or can YOU comprehend that? To some of my friends, I am conservative, to others, liberal, because I do not adhere to one direction or the other, but judge each discussion on it's merits, and try to leave my beliefs and opinions out of it. One thing that I can tell you, is that regardless of which side of the spectrum my friends are on, none of them has ever questioned my ability to comprehend nor to follow logic. And, thank you very much my friend, I do not require nor desire your defense of me or my family like the quivering liberal muffin eater you apparently have me pictured as, I've done my time and can do it again. Nor will I spit in your face, no matter how vehemently we disagree. Good day sir.
September 9, 2008

9:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

miykeed writes:

junglegymco wrote "This is also a FLAGRANT violation of Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964 that says employers must make a reasonable accommodation for religious beliefs"

Perhaps you need to re-read Title VII which states:
"covered employers are allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion, sex or national origin (but not based on color or race) where religion, sex, or national origin is a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise."

But it makes no mention that companies need to make changes to "accommodate" different religious beliefs.

So if the break policy had been in place for some time and the non-Muslims were forced to change their breaks when they didn't want to in order to accommodate the Muslims desires, would that be discrimination based upon religious beliefs
September 9, 2008

9:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

SheikYurBooty,

Dangerously unique and unfortunately, defended directly or indirectly with good intending citizens. The day a nation loses its courage to defend its cultural identity or national charactar is the day that nation has begun the downward spiral to extinction.

I.
September 9, 2008

10:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Mtn__Gator writes:

Wish I was there selling bed sheets, looks like I could have made a fortune!
September 9, 2008

10:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

Sensible writes:

Welcome to the U.S.

We (some of us) like to earn $$.

Sorry.
September 9, 2008

10:10 a.m.

Suggest removal

solar_satellite writes:

SheikYurBooty: Thanks, I am abashed at my error. I have read the Koran, the account of Ibn Battuta of his travels around the Mohameddan world, and 'The Sword of the Prophet'; probably a lot more about the belief-system than most posters here, but to be sure, only three books.

The comments of posters about the supposed coexistence of Mohameddans with other religious groups is somewhat misleading. I think it is safe to say that these periods of coexistence reflect times when Mohameddans were militarily unable to impose their beliefs on these other groups. The communities of other faiths which have persisted in Mohameddan societies have had to accept the status of dhimmitude, i.e. subjugation, and have suffered ongoing discrimination and depredation by their Mohameddan neighbors.

gregu710: I admit that I have not read much of the Hadith, but this is where there are many specific injunctions concerning jihad and the imposition of Mohammedan beliefs on the world. The Koran is full of metaphor and poetic language, but in your several readings you could hardly have failed to miss the description of the proper division of the spoils of jihad (Chapter 8). There are indications there of the nature of the spread of Mohameddanism, but it is important to realize that the Hadith, while it consists of a large number of sayings attributed to the Prophet of varying degrees of reliability, is considered to be just as scriptural as the Koran. The core sayings contain extreme and violent injunctions from Mohammed, and are universally accepted as part of the essential scriptural basis of their beliefs by all four schools of Mohameddan jurisprudence.

I don't want to foment religious intolerance, and I disagree with W's policies part and parcel, but what I have learned about Mohameddanism is frankly alarming. In particular the whole notion of "moderate Islam" seems untenable; the behavior of believers, as indiviuals and groups, can be described as moderate or not, but I do not believe that moderation can be ascribed to their system of beliefs at all. With regard to foreign policy which purports to discourage immoderate belief, even were there not the fundamental differences between the systems of belief, which make Mohameddanism far more uniform in its doctrinal character, this would be somewhat analogous to an outside power trying to attack Southern Baptists while encouraging Episcopalians -- preposterous, and likely to produce the opposite result from that intended. With respect to the irrational and immoderate beliefs of some groups of self-described Christians, I say only: "better the devil you know ...".
September 9, 2008

10:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

gary writes:

Big_D writes:

I see ConAgra is one of those upstanding Republican businesses that are willing to put Muslims from Africa in front of paying US residents a living wage.

Do a little research before you post.....the plant is owned by a Brazilian corporation. Oh, maybe they are Republicans, is that right Big_D?

JBS Swift Company Description
JBS Swift & Company (formerly Swift & Company) has a hoof up on other companies in the meat industry. A subsidiary of Brazilian beef giant JBS since 2007, the company is one of the leading beef processors in the world, with operations in Australia as well as the US. Its products include fresh, further-processed, and value-added meats. Beef is its biggest seller, although it also offers pork and a small amount of lamb. In addition to the US market, JBS Swift's products are available in Australia, Mexico, China, Japan, and other Pacific Rim countries. Its brand names include G.F. Swift 1855, Swift Angus Select, Swift Premium Black Angus, and Miller Blue Ribbon Beef.

View the Comprehensive Company Description for JBS Swift
The Company Description provides a historical perspective of JBS Swift's organization from inception to current status.

Produced by Hoover's in-house editorial team, the Company Description tracks ownership transitions, company progress via mergers and acquisitions, major growth milestones, and strategic initiatives, to provide a holistic view of JBS Swift's evolution in the marketplace.

Nuff Said!
September 9, 2008

10:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

ghoax writes:

is Ramadan an national holiday? Oh yeah, Christmas is...if the muslims don't like our Judeo Christian roots , they are welcome to leave. Why we cater to this crowd that kills and beats their women, kills innocents to make their point, allows marraige between adult males and children is beyond me...wake up America, you're looking at the enemy.
September 9, 2008

10:24 a.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Solar,

Welcome to the Islamaphobia group. YOU KNOW TO MUCH! Meaning, you wont swallow B.S. about it.

:) Glad to have another informed person around, rather than the closet cases we see so often blurting out "Mohammad is love and peace."

I.

www.Jihadwatch.org

www.TheReligionOfPeace.com
September 9, 2008

10:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

cdmdenver writes:

GO TO A MUSLIM COUNTRY AND ASK FOR
YOUR CHRISTIAN RIGHTS...

It won't happen! No Muslim considerations here!!

Swift CO=Hires so many Muslims, why?
3rd world wages comes to Colorado,
BOYCOTT SWIFT!
September 9, 2008

11:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

Solar, thank you for sticking to a reasonable discussion, BUT, I will revert to my previous post, what does the clash between Christianity and Islam have to do with Swift agreeing to a request and then going back on it. So far, I have not see one single post in response to this, to argue this, but instead we run off on a tangent about the future of Christianity? If you would like to debate our current immigration policies, or the fact that our US State Dept. and Dept. of Labor (together with companies like Swift) brought them here to fill jobs, well then, it will be a short argument, because, flaming Commie liberal that I am, I am vehemently opposed to such practices, as well as the outsourcing of American jobs. See, now THAT actually has something to do on some level with the article. But, unfortunately, ever since the Great Amnesty of Ronald Regan, and the subsequent globalization of our economy by George H.W. Bush and Clinton, up to the current administration, our Government and Industry continue taking the easy way out to reach more profits on Wall Street. Rather than investing in educating workers, and investing in technology, as well as revamping trading negotiations to stop making it so easy for countries like China and India, our leaders and companies just take the lazy way and outsource everything to China/India, or bring in illegal labor and or impoverished workers from Africa to do the jobs that "Americans won't do" (although at the same time, I would like to know how many of you "true Americans" here would work your way out to the employment office at Swift to compete with those from Africa rather than holding out for better jobs if you were suddenly unemployed, i'm betting I have a better chance of converting Muqtada al-Sadr to Judaism!!) See, now this argument actually has something to do with the article, unlike the majority of these others....

BUT, even having said that, the article is about Swift agreeing to a request and then going back on it, and the workers reacting in about the only way they have. It wouldn't matter if it were Jews seeking time off for Passover, Catholics for Lent, or Muslims for Ramadan. Swift screwed up, and should have just said "no" to start with, or set a policy of review for all holidays and set policy across the board for all of the major religions being represented there. Someone here posted that you don't see Jews and Muslims complaining about getting time off for Christmas, well, in that same vein, I doubt you'd see most workers complaining about taking an extra 20 minute break, regardless of the reason(as long as they were getting paid for it)...
September 9, 2008

11:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

NotUrFriend - FYI - the definition of "Islamophobe": one who knows the truth about Muhammed and Islam.
September 9, 2008

11:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

oh, NotUrFriend, prepare to submit to the will of peaceful and benevolent Allah! I'm sharpening my scimitar right now!!!!! Mwahhahahaha...
September 9, 2008

11:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

mrwiizrd writes:

"MRWIZARD:

Might want to take a look and see what African's did to Christian/Europeans/non-Muslim's a few hundred years back, and perhaps what Islam, in several countries TODAY, are doing to African's RIGHT NOW (SLAVE TRADE).

Stop pointing to stuff HUNDREDS of years ago and LOOK AT TODAY you moron.

I"

Oh right, because it happened in the past it doesn't matter anymore. Forgive me for being so stupid by being a student of history and pointing out the pot calling the kettle black. Maybe you should spend a little more time studying the United States Constitution or take your racist bigotry elsewhere.
September 9, 2008

11:35 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"ltcolafret writes:

I don't have any problem with them not working.....just don't pay them for the time they're not on the clock. Don't let them take sick leave because they're not sick. If they want to use vacation time, fine."

Or perhaps, have them take that break in lieu of the normally paid break that each worker is normally entitled to during working hours. Perhaps have them agree to a shorter lunch hour (since they are fasting) so that the company does not lose, and so that they are not getting more break time than their non-Muslim co-workers.
September 9, 2008

11:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"SheikYurBooty writes:

NotUrFriend - FYI - the definition of "Islamophobe": one who knows the truth about Muhammed and Islam"

You have a very unique dictionary...

"A phobia (from Greek: φόβος, phobos, "fear"), is an IRRATIONAL, intense, persistent fear of certain situations, activities, things, or people. The main symptom of this disorder is the excessive, unreasonable desire to avoid the feared subject."
September 9, 2008

11:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

peter303 writes:

Swift has set itself you for a massive class action suit - national origin, religion, and possibly race. It was a fairly simple request.
September 9, 2008

12:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

solar_satellite writes:

I do not care for the label "Islamophobe" because it is reactionary. If you've read my other posts, you'd know that I am on the left side (to the extent that this a meaningful characterization) of the political spectrum. I do not believe that Barack Obama was ever a Mohameddan, and I will vote for him.

gregu710, I agree with your points. The whole subject makes me uncomfortable, because I stand for workers' rights and tolerance, yet the spectacle of all these Sudanese Mohameddans cutting our meat in Greeley fills me with unease. I don't believe there's any indication that they represent any threat to us, but I also (for the reasons stated above) do not accept that their beliefs are just another religion, or that they necessarily should have been permitted to immigrate here in the first place. Surely, they are naturally defensive about preserving their beliefs, and must feel that they are in a completely alien place. Most Americans would prefer almost any alternative to employment in the Swift meat-packing plant for $8 per hour, although the Sudanese are probably much better off here than in the hell-hole which is their native land.

I'm going to cross the line and suggest that it may well be in our national interest not to continue to allow Mohameddans to immigrate to the United States, and to support African Christians in their fight against Saudi-financed Mohammedan expansion in Africa. The economic migration of Mohameddans to the nations of Europe potentially threatens their stability and national identity. In Britain, the most popular name for male children will soon be 'Mohammed', surpassing 'Jack'. The pretense that these people are being brought into the modern world and integrated into the societies which coveted their labor is without foundation, because the scriptural basis for their medieval beliefs is clear, and clearly inimical to the Enlightenment values which arose in the Christian societies of the West, and to which I subscribe.
September 9, 2008

12:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

sue27 writes:

I'm famous! My post yesterday is one of the comments in today's paper. I've been published!

The law says a company needs to make accomodations if reasonable and within the companies ability. If the Muslims were told their breaks would be adjusted, then that indicates it was a reasonable request. The group has every right to be upset and call the company on it.

Swift clearly went back on their word and violated the law.

It is only because the group is non-white non-Christian that so many people are so worked up. What a bunch of bigots.
September 9, 2008

12:21 p.m.

Suggest removal

RockyMtnMac writes:

LOL! Big_D is a "Republiphobe"
September 9, 2008

12:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

sue27 - if the company agreed, then it should abide by its agreement. The probelm in these situations is what is known as "Sharia Creep" - the ever widening list of requests, which then become demands, and become ever more burdensome, onerous, and intrusive. Examples: footbaths, MN taxi drivers refusing to take passengers who are carrying alcohol; check out clerks who refuse to touch packaged items that contain pork or alcohol; etc. It's a "camel's nose under the tent deal" and, while not unique to Muslim practitioners, tends to become more contentious and disagreeable where they are concerned. E.G. - a Paris soup kitchen that gave free soup to any and all was sued because their soup contained pork. Sued by Jews??? No. Guess who....

As for the definition of Islamophobe given above, that is its apparent meaning as used by the likes of Ibrahim Hooper and his cohorts at CAIR for example.
September 9, 2008

12:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

solar_satellite writes:

sue27: That is an over-simplification, although a not unreasonable response to most of the effusions here.

RockyMtnMac: I AM a Rethugliphobe.
September 9, 2008

12:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

concerned_individual writes:

These people are making a mockery of Ramadan. I was posted in Saudi Arabia for 3 years on an assignment and during this time I have seen 3 Ramadan's come and go. I was told that it was against islam if people did not go about during what they do normally during Ramadan.

People still went to work everyday during this fast. The only thing I found was that the restaurants did not open until sundown because nobody eats (in public). Fasting during Ramadan is also not mandatory.

These people who are protesting should be fired from their job for not showing up.
September 9, 2008

12:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

RockyMtnMac writes:

Republiphobes= Unreasonable fear of people who work.
September 9, 2008

12:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

sue27 writes:

I fully agree that people will make requests that a company needs to turn down, like the example of not touching alcohol or pork products if your job is to ring things up. That obviously interferes with the job.

It is fully possible that the request was looked at again and found to be too much. What are some of the other Ramadan practices? Did the group only ask for the time change, or was there more? Aside from a different break time, does it interfere with the job? Without more information, I have to go with the story above. I read the article through the link to the Greeley paper and it was the exact same article.

So my views may turn out to be an over-simplification. I hope more details come out about the negotiations.
September 9, 2008

12:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

ColdShot writes:

FIRE THEM!!
September 9, 2008

12:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

gary writes:

don't care where they are from their Greeley management is dominated by Republicans trying to squeeze every penny out of Greeley. Unlike you I live in town and know the people behind the corporations.

So you have gone to Brazil and know them....what city in Brazil do they live in? They come all the way up to Greeley for the Stampede. Wow, those Brazilian Republicans really like to mingle with us Mexicans.

Nuff Said!
September 9, 2008

12:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

solar_satellite writes:

sue27: I was referring only to: "It is only because the group is non-white non-Christian that so many people are so worked up. What a bunch of bigots."

concerned_individual: "These people are making a mockery of Ramadan." -- how so? I believe that observance is a religious obligation for all Mohameddans physically able to comply. Looking back at the article, I see that it fails to describe the substance of the dispute adequately (of course). Probably, the workers want to take a break immediately after sundown, when eating is permitted (and necessary after a hard day at work without having eaten since daybreak).
September 9, 2008

1 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"MN taxi drivers refusing to take passengers who are carrying alcohol; check out clerks who refuse to touch packaged items that contain pork or alcohol; etc."

Oh, you must've lived in South Carolina too Sheik!! I can't remember the number of times that I had checkout clerks at mainstream grocery stores who would call over a manager to scan the beer I was buying. Hardly Muslims though, rather born-again, born in South Carolina, American as Johnny Cash Soutern Baptists who neither consumed it, and refused to sell it (although they would still take the money when all was said and done so it was really a technicality) because they believed it to be a sin. Perhaps Baptists also suffer from Sharia creep...
September 9, 2008

1:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

TheDenverB writes:

"GO TO A MUSLIM COUNTRY AND ASK FOR
YOUR CHRISTIAN RIGHTS...

It won't happen! No Muslim considerations here!!"

what is your point? this country isn't a christian country, it's a country of freedom of choice of religion.

the bigotry on this discussion board is amazing.
September 9, 2008

1:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

Dumbest comment on the issue....

"It is only because the group is non-white non-Christian that so many people are so worked up. What a bunch of bigots."

The twit who made that deranged statement obviously did NOT read the article.

The key points the twit didn't read or know about....

1. Workers at the plant who are Catholic (hint to dimwit... that means they are Christians) DO NOT RECEIVE any work concessions like the Muslims are demanding.

And yet the dimwit demands that Muslims be given extra work concessions that Christians are denied, and then has the hypocrisy to claim that denying the Muslims EXTRA rights shows bigotry by Christians. What an idiot.

Key statements in the article....."Joe Rios, a day-shifter for nine months at Swift, said he felt that the Somalis were asking for special treatment and "taking advantage of our kindness" in America, according to the Tribune, He said "most of us" at Swift are Catholic and observe a month of Lent each year without seeking work concessions based on religion."

2. Workers at the plant have to work EXTRA so the Muslims can take MORE breaks.

Make the idiots that are supporting the Muslims go to the Swift plant and work in the place, so the Muslims can get their EXTRA rights that others do not receive. Of course, the idiots that support them on this board will suddenly find reasons for why they don't want to do it. Instead they'll demand that Catholics and people of other religions cover for the Muslims...... and then act like bigots and trash the Catholics and others for not being cheerful in working extra so the Muslims can get EXTRA rights.

"They have no respect for the Spanish or white people," Brianna Castillo, a Swift employee of four years, told the Tribune. "Many times we are forced to pull extra count ... I don't feel that is right."

Guess all that "fame" at being "published" caused some small minded people to forget to read the entire article..... and they ended up ignorant because they spent too much time celebrating their childish "accomplishment" instead of actually reading the facts about the issue.
September 9, 2008

1:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

sue27 writes:

My bigot commet was worse than "Is it really smart to have recent African Muslim immigrants handling our food supply?" ?

Or what about "Islam isn't a joke, and it needs to leave American shores and stay in its historical boundries of the Middle East; where it can do less harm." ?

Maybe "Wish I was there selling bed sheets, looks like I could have made a fortune!" ?

I should have specified that comment was directed to many of the people leaving comments. Guess I was too much of a twit and missed that. My mistake.
September 9, 2008

1:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

solar_satellite writes:

Fire the Mohammedan taxi drivers in MN who have the temerity to object to their passengers' purchases, and fire the Baptists in SC who won't sell alcohol too.
September 9, 2008

1:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

gregu710 - as for beer in SC, if ever 2 wrongs make a right, that will be a good rebuttal.
September 9, 2008

1:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

SanctuaryCity writes:

wHAT COUNTRY AM i IN.

tOTALLY DISGUSTING
September 9, 2008

1:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Solar,

They also are refusing seeing eye dogs for the blind. They object on religious grounds that dogs are "filthy" beasts. If only they worked as hard as our k9 allies.

I.
September 9, 2008

1:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

fiesty writes:

With all this great [sarcasm] discussion of religion, has anyone remembered that Swift agreed to the break time change, but then reneged at the last minute??
September 9, 2008

1:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"SheikYurBooty writes:

gregu710 - as for beer in SC, if ever 2 wrongs make a right, that will be a good rebuttal."

well, actually, it is accepted in many places in the South as perfectly normal, and moral, and nobody utters a word in contempt of it there, so I don't see where someone from another faith who also feels this way is a problem. That's the rebuttal. Do I think it's dumb, of course I do. Just saying that you will always have a couple people in a crowd who have to try and push further than others or make more ridiculous demands, the problem is when you generalize and say that all Muslims are like this (or Baptists or whatever).
September 9, 2008

1:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"fiesty writes:

With all this great [sarcasm] discussion of religion, has anyone remembered that Swift agreed to the break time change, but then reneged at the last minute??"

Actually, I mentioned it about 3 or 4 times to try and steer the discussion back on topic instead of the "impending Apocalypse", but no one from the far right side of the argument will even address that.
September 9, 2008

1:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Fiesty,

They agreed to 'reasonable' accomadate regarding business needs. This is biblical business practice. "Business needs." its why its called a business.

If the job description says your not the authority figure of a business you can not dictate others workschedules, breaks, etc. Imagine me ordering you to work additional shifts and carry extra weight so someone else gets an easier ride for being part of a specific religious group. Islam is a religion people, not a race. So its not "racist" bigotry.

I.
September 9, 2008

1:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

sue27 writes:

fiesty-
The exact point I keep trying to make. Too much unnecessary arguement.
September 9, 2008

1:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

"I should have specified that comment was directed to many of the people leaving comments."

You mean like the scumbags who use a story about the actions of Muslims as an excuse to attack Christians, Buddhists, Hindu's, Jews, or any other group that is NOT demanding extra rights.

Try reading your own posts.... where you ignore the fact that Muslims are demanding EXTRA rights that others do not receive.

And where you ignore their demands that other people work EXTRA to cover for their special concessions that no one else receives.

And where you defend such special treatment....and make it worse by attacking other religious groups by calling THEM the bigots.
September 9, 2008

2 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

"has anyone remembered that Swift agreed to the break time change, but then reneged at the last minute??"

Nice fantasy. No where in the article does it say Swift agreed to it.

The closest the article comes to such a claim is that the workers "believed" that Swift had agreed to it. "More recently, Muslim workers have negotiated with the company and believed they reached a deal to allow food and drink breaks after the daily fasting during Ramadan, he added."

Yeah.... sort of like saying "well I believe I won the lottery, so the state should give me the money!"

I'm sure the same posters on here will LEAP to the conclusion that the state agreed to pay me several million dollars, simply because I BELIEVED they agreed that I won the lottery.

Looking forward to your support.... I'm sure you won't be HYPOCRITICAL in supporting Muslims "believing" they get EXTRA rights that no one else gets.... and then NOT supporting my "believing" the state should send me some lottery money.
September 9, 2008

2:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

well, actually rickg19611, I'm pretty sure no one here has "attacked" other religions, only pointed out that no religion is free of guilt for excesses, but if having the truth pointed out is an attack, then so be it. As for them "demanding", well gee, how many times does it have to be pointed out that they ASKED FOR AND WERE GRANTED this break time? How many? As for the other workers, well, they DO have a Union, do they not, and would be entitled (one would think) to equal time just so that one group was not favored over another (and that may have been thre reason for the reversal of the decision, but that is not covered in the story, and none of us here are involved in the negotiations). But I guess it's just better to flame other people and make inflammatory statements and call people dimwits than to have a reasonable discussion, right?
September 9, 2008

2:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Scott writes:

gregu710:

I hate to break the news to you, but rickg19611 is correct about the assumption by the Muhammadan worker that they had the break moved. Here is the quote from the seventh paragraph from the article:

"More recently, Muslim workers have negotiated with the company and believed they reached a deal to allow food and drink breaks after the daily fasting during Ramadan, he added"

The "he" is the union goon. So gregu710, what part of the quoted paragraph do you not understand?

Scott
Vote YES on Amendment 47
September 9, 2008

2:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

well greg....

You missed a number of key facts and statements.

Let's review.

1. Some allowed their hate to get the best of them, and used a case of Muslims asking for extra concessions to attack Christians.

Would you support someone attacking Buddhists, if some Christians asked for a school prayer? Anyone attacking Buddhists because some Christians asked for a school prayer, would be justly viewed as using the case as an excuse to attack Buddhists. It's reasonable to assume that an attack on Buddhists coming during a discussion about Christians asking for school prayer, must reveal the posters deep seated hatred and bigotry towards Buddhists.

2. State where in the article it says the group were GRANTED the concessions. Provide it.

Just because you, and others claim they were granted concessions, do not make it true. Post your proof to back up your claim.
September 9, 2008

2:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"rickg19611 writes:

Nice fantasy. No where in the article does it say Swift agreed to it."

Umm, maybe you no read so good? By this quote below, it sounds pretty clear to me.

"Earlier in the week, the workers negotiated with Swift to get an earlier break to allow them food and water after their fast."
September 9, 2008

2:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

Geez..... English 101.

"Earlier in the week, the workers negotiated with Swift to get an earlier break to allow them food and water after their fast."

Where does it say that Swift AGREED to it?

Using your logic.... if I NEGOTIATE with a homeowner, by offering him ten dollars for his million dollar home, then I am entitled to demand he give it to me after he turns me down.

No wonder you read an article about Muslims in Colorado demanding a break that other religious groups do not receive, and get confused and start whining about Baptists in South Carolina.
September 9, 2008

2:15 p.m.

Suggest removal

sue27 writes:

Wow, rickg19611, wow.

It is a waste of time to argue or debate (whatever you want to call it) with some people. You are clearly set in your opinion and no one will change it.

I stand by my opinions and comments but am not going to waste my time defending myself, especially to you. I just hope you are never in a situation where you might need some extra consideration.

I look foward to reading your next comments and will try not to be surprised by the clever insults.
September 9, 2008

2:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

NO Scott, since, as I pointed out to erick19611, that the workers had negotiated with Swift for the break. It doesn't say 'they believed that they had negotiated" it says "they negotiated". Sorry, I must just be stupid.

Calling the Union rep (i am not a fan of Unions for the record) a goon does not validate your argument at all, nor does it negate the veracity of what he says. What's YOUR proof that something wasn't negotiated, the fact that he's Union and couldn't possibly tell the truth?

And rick19611, point 1 of your post makes no sense whatsoever, period! Pointing out historical facts about various religious groups when discussing the actions of another religious group to make a point for the sake of discussion does not reveal "deep seated hatred". So, if I'm talking about Liberals vs. Conservatives and I mention Centrists, it must mean that I have deep-seated hatred of Centrists. NOT!

With regard to point 2, already done.
September 9, 2008

2:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

rick, ditto on what Sue says, it's pointless. To any clear-thinking rational person, that sentence leads one to believe that they negotiated successfully, since it does NOT say that the negotiations failed, but hey, you read into it whatever your little heart desires. I'm done, time to go beat my head against a wall, at least that serves some purpose...
September 9, 2008

2:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

sue27 writes:

This article has been modified as it has been updated. When it was first posted yesterday, the article did say that the Muslims and Swift had an agreement about the breaks but then the company changed its mind. Is there a way to see the original article?
September 9, 2008

2:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Greg:

::

"More recently, Muslim workers have negotiated with the company and believed they reached a deal to allow food and drink breaks after the daily fasting during Ramadan, he added."

::

Thats from the article. "Believed"

Believed.

Believed.

BELIEVED.

NO conceded, agreed, or assured. Merely under the impression that something was perhaps on the working table. Not concrete sounding there?

Nuff said?

I.
September 9, 2008

2:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

greg....

Check a dictionary. Look up the word "negotiate".

And then have someone explain to you that negotiating with someone, does not mean that you get everything you demand.

Either you don't understand the definition of negotiate.... or you just just lack the willingness to admit being wrong.
September 9, 2008

2:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

patchsl writes:

This private company should not be forced to accomodate anyone of any religon that demands a work schedule change. Period.
September 9, 2008

2:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"Either you don't understand the definition of negotiate.... or you just just lack the willingness to admit being wrong."

Hmmm, lets see, to negotiate means that you discuss a point with another interested party to try and achieve certain goals. Nowhere in the definition in any dictionary does the meaning of negotiate include whether the negotiation actually achieves those goals. The negotiation is simply the act of trying to get what you want, it's an action verb there buddy. Thanks for setting me straight!!! WOW! And when they print in the article or say anywhere that they negotiated but DID NOT get agreement from Swift, then I guess you'll actually be right! Till then, I'm not going to admit what isn't clearly wrong.(especially when the sentence is nuanced to lead one to believe they did achieve the goals of their negotiations). You are interpreting "negotiate" to include "and lost" and I am reading it as "negotiate and won". Since the article says neither, guess what. And, again, someone who doesn't know me making assumptions about me. Anyone who actually DOES know me knows that I stand up and take responsibility for my mistakes first and foremost. Why don't you try the same, it feels good!
September 9, 2008

2:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

here ya go rick:

"Negotiation is a dialogue intended to resolve disputes, to produce an agreement upon courses of action, to bargain for individual or collective advantage, or to craft outcomes to satisfy various interests. It is the primary method of alternative dispute resolution."

See, it doesn't mention "win" or "lose" in the entire definition. Now, which dicitonary are you using?
September 9, 2008

2:41 p.m.

Suggest removal

SanctuaryCity writes:

Our country can get jobs for foreigners and set them up & not help our own people.

We need change starting with the politicians
September 9, 2008

2:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

tiero, you are entirely correct! Our politicians (from both sides) stopped working for us a LONG time ago, and I was wrong to vote for George H.W. Bush, AND Bill Clinton, (a nod to rick who doesn't believe I can admit my mistakes!), the two "gentlemen" who brought us NAFTA....
September 9, 2008

2:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

greg....

You're relying on your own assumptions, instead of the facts presented.

Nowhere in the article does it say Swift agreed to Muslim demands. Nowhere.

It is illogical to claim that merely stating that someone is negotiating, means that one side won all of its demands.

And it takes an extra leap of illogic to use the actions of Muslims as a justification to criticize and whine about Catholics, Baptists, Buddhists, Jews, Hindu's or atheists...... but then some can't resist the urges generated by their deep seated hatred and bigotry.
September 9, 2008

2:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Greg,

The wonderful thing about the english language is that you sometimes must look between the lines to understand its meaning. Does not entail anything was set and agreed, nor otherwise rejected. It means that an understand may or may not of been reached. Going off an assumption can get anyone in the working world in trouble when it relates to unauthorized break periods.

Now, I am not privvy to the details but nowhere there do I see a solid 'yes' in any way, shape, or form. If you do and I missed it please provide it to myself and everyone else on the board.

Thank you.

I.
September 9, 2008

2:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

Big_D....

Bingo on the statement.... "I don't hold anything against these people except they have been used to keep people in Greeley from being paid fair wages for dangerous work."

As for the root cause, we may disagree.... but I do agree with you on the end result.
September 9, 2008

2:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

junglegymco writes:

I'm always amazed by the the so-called religious patriots on the RMN who tolerate only their own religious belief and seem to have never read (with understanding) the U.S. Constitution or Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964. To that point, you all need to read (especially you, miykeed) what the law MEANS:

http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html

Look under the part about religious accommodation: "An employer is required to reasonably accommodate the religious belief of an employee or prospective employee, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship."

Swift made a reasonable accommodation and then reneged on it.

Lots of un-America people on here who seem to want to ignore our Constitution and laws. To you bigots, I say, leave the country to us real patriots; those of us who actually think freedom of religion and the absence of religious oppression are more than just words.
September 9, 2008

3:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

geez..... here we go again.... educating another poster who didn't read the article....

"Swift made a reasonable accommodation and then reneged on it."

Of course, NOWHERE in the article or other news organizations does it say Swift reneged on anything.

If the Muslims had demanded that EVERYONE in the plant be given extra breaks and concessions, then they would have the support of the other workers.... and most of the public.

Their mistake was demanding that only THEY be given extra concessions. And as a result, they have the other workers protesting AGAINST them, and the general public opposing them as well.

Lesson for the Somali's and other immigrant workers.... join together with others in the country and you'll get more support for what you want.

Lesson for the posters that keep ignoring the article.... read the darn thing and THEN form an opinion on the issue. Otherwise you just look goofy for claiming that Swift (or the Muslim workers) did something that is inaccurate.
September 9, 2008

3:10 p.m.

Suggest removal

sue27 writes:

Big-D,
Glad you wrote more to clarify your comment from yesterday. I did read it as a generalization. (Still don't agree with it though, but that is fine)

I agree that companies will often hire immigrants, illegal or legal, for some jobs that they would have to pay full citizens more to do. That does not mean that those workers will do a poor job though. Legal or not, citizen or not, there are always people who will knowingly do poor work because they feel they were wronged.

How much are the immigrant Muslims payed compared to an American in the exact same position?
September 9, 2008

3:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Rick,

Your right, I've read this over twice now. I do not see a 'concrete' agreement that both parties commited themselves too here in this article or the other few I've checked. Sounds more like they are furious, and tried to force it down the businesses throat by making it public. I am sure it made them even angrier to find the company, fellow co-workers, and the general population opposing them. I only note that they were in a talking discussing the matter, with nothing showing concrete closure pro/con/or indifferant.

I'd follow his simple advise: Read the article before drawing sides.

I.
September 9, 2008

3:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

junglegymco writes:

rickg19644 -
you are correct - the article must be read - by YOU. "More recently, Muslim workers have negotiated with the company and believed they reached a deal to allow food and drink breaks after the daily fasting during Ramadan, he (Gonzales) added. Swift did not return calls for comment today."

By appearances, there was an agreement in place. Swift then reneged in it.

It's a false argument to say that the other workers HAVE to be included in getting extra breaks - which is even MORE false since NOWHERE in the article does it say they were going to be given EXTRA breaks (Here's a possibiity for ya - they swapped a break so they could eat at the end of Ramadan).

Lesson for you - you need to take your own medicine before you administer it to others.
September 9, 2008

3:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

rickg,

I'm with you. You must be getting very frustrated. Swift cannot reasonably accommodate the Muslims without putting an undue hardship on the rest of the workers. So they are not bound by the Civil Rights Act in that respect. And I am not automatically assuming that the Muslims were granted what they were negotiating. Even if it stated that in this article, doesn't make it positively true!
September 9, 2008

3:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

junglegymco writes:

Noturf -
You need to read as well. See my above post. In fact, here's more information from the article that indicates they were SWAPPING their break time and NOT getting additional time as you seem to want to lie about and have people believe.

"About 150 workers were told by Swift management Friday not to report to work Monday until the matter of changing break times to accommodate their Ramadan fasts . . ."

You and rick need to recognize that just because someone doesn't hold your religious beliefs doesn't mean you get to dictate to them how to observe theirs by using some facetious argument that has no basis in fact or law.
September 9, 2008

3:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Jungle,

How on god's green earth do you cut and paste, and not read what your pasting?

"Believed they reached" Believed being a 'good faith' statement does not entail an agreement.

It means they made demands and expected them, rather or not it was agreed upon by THEIR employer.

Pretty cocky of them, to be honest.

I.
September 9, 2008

3:26 p.m.

Suggest removal

junglegymco writes:

Heidi -
Are you serious?! CHANGING a break time ONCE A YEAR is an undue hardship?

Wow - Are you guys actually sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "lalala I can't hear you"?
September 9, 2008

3:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Jungle,

Read the article. It sounds like, due to the fact that the employees refused to perform they're basic job function (following the bosses directions) that they were "forcefully" relieved of work the day of, in order to work out something. We're talking after the fact here buddy.

I.
September 9, 2008

3:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

Changing break times does not necessarily mean they swapped times. It could also mean changing the beginning or ending time, thus extending the break.
September 9, 2008

3:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Jungle,

Im sure the majority here are thinking the same thing buddy.

I.
September 9, 2008

3:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Heidi,

I've read posts by you before. Your to smart, and entertaining, to deal with a dimwhit like this guy. Ignore him.

I.
September 9, 2008

3:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

junglegymco,

I am familiar with what goes on in meat processing plants.

"They have no respect for the Spanish or white people," Brianna Castillo, a Swift employee of four years, told the Tribune. "Many times we are forced to pull extra count ... I don't feel that is right."

If they have meat coming down a conveyor belt and someone is not in their place holding a knife, someone else has to pick up the slack and work twice as hard and fast. An accident waiting to happen.
September 9, 2008

3:36 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

Thanks, MyFriend!
September 9, 2008

3:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

junglegymco writes:

NotUr -
Do you not understand the words that are appearing on the page in front of you?

"Believed being a 'good faith' statement ".

Exactly.

The workers "BELIEVED" they had an agreement - do you think they made this up?!

It's complete SLANDER (well, libel, actually) to suggest that they made demands, expected them and they weren't agreed upon by their employer when the article states they belived they had an agreement (which any person with an IQ over 5 would tell you means that they talk with the employer and came to a consensus). You're saying there was no agreement at all - Are you calling the workers of the plant liars?!

A LOGICAL conclusion is that the worker's acted "in good faith" that they had an agreement in place because of conversations that had previously occurred.

Jeez . . .
September 9, 2008

3:44 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Jungle,

Your such a F* idiot? Or are you faking it? I honestly dont believe someone's this dumb on this site? Look. Good faith, yes. The company has shown otherwise, in actions, and Im sure verbally during this negiotation process that it was opposing (against) the breaks. 300 off the belt line? THATS HUGE! The company would be retarded to allow it!

Your wrong. You can debate me all you want on this and it doesnt change that.

I'm done wasting time on you.

I.

PS Heidi, you welcome hon :)
September 9, 2008

3:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

Arioch writes:

Somebody way up near the top of the discussion said:
"why do you spend so much time being bigots? is it really that rewarding?"

It can be, but only if you save up enough points. It got me this really swell bicycle, and next I'm hoping to be bigoted enough to get that keen tent on page 37 of the catalog.
September 9, 2008

3:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Jungle,

Saying 'slander' with this group is suggesting you truly know nothing about this particular groups views of the 'infidal' world around them.

I.
September 9, 2008

3:58 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

Amazing. Or sad may be a more appropriate description.

It's sad that the Muslims mishandled this issue from the start, and appear are being led by some "organizers" that are using them to promote their own "community organizing" grandstanding.

The reality is that if the Muslim workers had talked with the other workers at the plant.... i.e. the article shows that Catholics are the predominant group working there.... and said "let's band together and ask the company to agree to give us more flexibility in our breaks. And we'll work extra to help you during Lent, and you work extra to help us during Ramadan, and the company won't lose anything by agreeing with us....." then they likely would have gotten exactly what they want. Everyone directly involved would be happy. Workers and company both win.

Instead, workers are protesting workers. Bigots jumping into the fray for the opportunity to trash religious groups that have nothing to do with the issue. Political fanatics using this to trash the company by making up fantasies about what they think the company did or didn't do.

Everyone involved in the issue.... Muslim workers, other workers, company, etc.... everyone is hurt in the process. The only people benefitting from this issue are the parasites that show up for the media cameras.... some "community organizers" searching for a camera to appear in front of for their news shot of the "protests". Some union bosses hoping the strife continues so they can divide and conquer.

Add in the bizarre lack of reading of the articles about the story.... with some so insistent that the company must be wrong, that they didn't even bother to notice that nowhere did the company agree to the Muslim's demands.

On top of that, some opportunists on this board using a Muslim group demanding concessions as an opportunity to attack Christians, shows how low some will go just to sow their hatred and bigotry.

In the end.... the company and the workers will work out some compromise, the union bosses and community organizers will pat themselves on the back and say all the chaos, damage to workers paychecks, and media attention was worth it..... and something that could have been a positive outcome for the Muslim workers, their coworkers, and the company was squandered by parasites feasting on the turmoil.
September 9, 2008

4:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

junglegymco writes:

Heidi and Notur -

Seriously - You need to grasp the English language before you make wild assumptions. Most people with a basic understanding of he English language would tell you that changing a break time most likely means just that. Changing. Not extending it or modifying it. Simplying changing it.

Further - READ THE ARTICLE: . . ."About 100 employees, some of whom were supposed to be working, protested Friday about company officials accommodating Muslims by moving their break time to accommodate the Ramadan fast, the Tribune reported." The company MOVED their breaks.

There's obviously a lot of racial (well, religious) tension at the plant. To your post Heaid, One person making racially inflammatory remarks about allegedly picking up the work, doesn't make it true.

Notur - I'm talking about the initial agreement. The article is pretty clear that there was a good faith belief that they could move their break to eat at the end of Ramadan.
September 9, 2008

4:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

"The article is pretty clear that there was a good faith belief"

Add all the "good faith beliefs" in the world together and you get..... nothing more than a belief. Not an agreement. Not two opposing groups agreeing.

You may have a good faith belief that you won the lottery, but that belief isn't worth squat when you show up at the lottery office with nothing more than your own "belief".
September 9, 2008

4:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

junglegym,

You get to pick and choose which parts of the article are the truth? I am not assuming anything. You say that changing a break time "most likely" means not extending or modifying it. That is an assumption. I, along with others, am trying to make a point that we don't "know" the real truth.
The quote I used above at 3:35 was just used to help support my statement about how people absent from a belt line can affect the work of others and put undue hardship upon them. Anyone interviewed can tell whatever story they want and the media can report it however they want. There is never 100% truth.
September 9, 2008

4:23 p.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

Maybe if one of us won a huge lottery and split it with everyone here, we could all shake hands and be happy!
September 9, 2008

4:29 p.m.

Suggest removal

junglegymco writes:

rickg19611 -

Some good points, but your demagoguery is showing.

That there is religious tension is not in question. But to suggest somehow that "Community Organizers" are somehow parasites is a huge insult to the "Community Organizers" that I know who work to give At-Risk youth an opportunity for a mentor and to see that there might be a better life for them. Or those "Community Organizers" who work to get clothing for the poor. Or those "Community Organizers" who work to get food for the hungry. Or those "Community Organizers" who fight to get heat for those in the cold.

I would say that those 'parasitic' "Community Organizers" do a lot more for the disadvantaged than many small town Mayors from obscure Alaskan towns.

But let's put the politics aside.

It's also a false statement to say that " . . . that nowhere did the company agree to the Muslim's demands." According to Gonzales, they believed that the company and the workers had reached an agreement. The company has simply not responded to the media when the media asked if that was true; that does NOT mean that the company HADN'T already agreed to accommodations. And unless you're calling Gonzales a liar, the only thing I've read in the article is that the workers believed (in apparently good faith) that they had an agreement.

Finally, to suggest somehow that the predominant religious group (Christians) is being attacked by using the specious logic that, "some opportunists on this board using a Muslim group demanding concessions as an opportunity to attack Christians", would be laughable, if it weren't for the fact that you and many others seem to actually believe this. The "opportunists" that you so insultingly refer to are simply pointing out the obvious. That there ARE bigots on this board who think that unless the religion is Christian, that it isn't valid and doesn't deserve the protections guaranteed under the U.S. Constution and federal law. A sad and very un-American way to see the world, but true. Christian bigots do exist.

You miss the point entirely that the "Muslim group demanding concessions" isn't that at all. It's a Religious group asking for their CONSTITUTIONAL and LEGAL rights (see my previous posts regarding The Civil Rights Act of 1964) - they are NOT "demanding concessions" but rather simply asking to be treated as they are LEGALLY entitled to be.

I agree that it would be a tremendous thing if all of the various parties could have gotten together and worked this out. However, as stated by someone at sometime ,"you are entitled to your own opinion, but not to your own facts."
September 9, 2008

4:45 p.m.

Suggest removal

redwhiteandBLUE writes:

NOW WE HAVE MUSLIMS..COMPLAINING AND ..DEMANDING !!! CAN'T ANYONE APPRECIATE AND LOVE OUR BEAUTIFUL, WONDERFUL AMERICA ?

LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT !!!!
September 9, 2008

4:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

solar_satellite writes:

sue27 and everyone else: Call the Managing Editor (whoever that may be; I can't discover it from the so-called "staff directory" provided online) at 303-954-5000 and demand that they end the practice of altering stories in place, or stop providing this forum to discuss articles. There is no point to having an extended discussion in which the participants are discussing different versions of the article. If a story needs to be changed, a new version should be posted with a link provided to previous version(s). The present practice of the RMN makes a nonsense of people's comments and demonstrates a contempt for its readership.
September 9, 2008

5:04 p.m.

Suggest removal

redwhiteandBLUE writes:

Do these people work in those clothes ? Is there a dress code to work at Swift ? What about Doc Marten shoes of some kind ?
How about health cards.? Years ago a person had to go to the Dept of Health to get an X-Ray to be free of T-B in order to work around food....No wonder TB is on the rise again. Cheap labor ..hire them straight from a foreign country. Disgusting!
September 9, 2008

5:34 p.m.

Suggest removal

fiesty writes:

I'd be curious to know when the normally scheduled morning break was, to see how much of a difference we are talking about (the move to 0730). That would definitely weigh in on the "reasonable accomodation" argument. Geez, not like they were asking for an additional break!
September 9, 2008

5:39 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"greg....

Nowhere in the article does it say Swift agreed to Muslim demands. Nowhere.

It is illogical to claim that merely stating that someone is negotiating, means that one side won all of its demands"

SO, when the article mentions NOWHERE that the negotiations resulted in them winning or losing, it's ILLOGICAL of me to assume one result and LOGICAL of you to assume another. Now, this either means you are just goading me, are a troll, or just really are unable to understand what "negotiate" means.

"NotUrFriend writes:

Greg,

The wonderful thing about the english language is that you sometimes must look between the lines to understand its meaning. Does not entail anything was set and agreed, nor otherwise rejected."

NotUrFriend, would you PLEASE explain what you just said to rick, since we seem to be in a roundy-bout argument in which he fails to grasp that the article (AGAIN) states nowhere that their terms were met, or not met, so it is just as illogical (ricks words) to assume they were not met as it is to assume they were, despite the nuances of the later statement that they had negotiated the break, which leaves MOST readers to come to the conclusion that they had.
September 9, 2008

5:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

sue27 writes:

I sent an email to the guy who wrote the article asking him to clarify whether or not the original article said that Swift had agreed in the first place to change break times. Haven't heard back yet.
September 9, 2008

5:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"redwhiteandBLUE writes:

NOW WE HAVE MUSLIMS..COMPLAINING AND ..DEMANDING !!! CAN'T ANYONE APPRECIATE AND LOVE OUR BEAUTIFUL, WONDERFUL AMERICA ?

LOVE IT OR LEAVE IT !!!!"

Actually RWB, I LOVE our Country as much as my life and would lie down my life for it. But, being the perpetual perfectionist, I am always looking to make everything better. It's in my nature, as it is with others. Just because you love something doesn't mean you can't improve on it, but you'll still defend it to the death. I love the principals upon which our country was founded, the variety of people I meet, and the wonderful variety of landscapes I can see all within one country. Our government however, while great in theory, is definitely in need of improving....
September 9, 2008

5:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

fiesty writes:

Let's look at some of the article comments:
- "More recently, Muslim workers have negotiated with the company and believed they reached a deal to allow food and drink breaks after the daily fasting during Ramadan"
- "They accused the company of violating agreements to allow them to have an evening meal break after sunrise-to-sunset fasts during the month of Ramdan"
- "Gonzales said in a 2004 labor contract the company agreed to generally respect workers' 'time for religious observances'"
- "Swift did not return calls for comment today"
- "Workers at 7:30 p.m. Friday were told not to leave their work lines. He said the company then locked bathrooms to stop workers from going to them"

Hmm, let me get this right. Swift agreed in a labor contract in '04 to respect time for religious reasons. We have workers stating that they believed Swift had agreed to the breaks; a reasonable assumption given the labor contract. But then we have reports that Swift reneged on this agreement, and violated all sorts of labor/safety/health rights by locking bathroom doors. Not surprising, Swift hasn't been able to be reached for comment.

So, who should we believe? Hmm. Does anyone remember that this is the same company that got busted a few months back for employing vast numbers of illegal immigrants, and several managers got busted because they knew? I'm on the side of the workers; I'm not surprised whatsoever that this company seems to have acted in an unethical (and possibly illegal) manner.

As much as I believe Islam is one of the most insidious threats today, I don't believe the fact the workers are Muslim should be the bone of contention on this blog. The question is about religious accommodation of workers (NOT the specific religion involved), and whether or not Swift has committed the alleged acts.
September 9, 2008

6:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

solar_satellite writes:

sue27: You've missed the point: the confusion is being caused by the standard operating procedure of the RMN. I have seen this time and again. Both the RMN and DP (and many other newspapers I'm sure) alter online stories in place, changing their contents. This leads to confused arguments between posters who are responding in a single forum to comments about different versions of a given story. Most posters are too busy grinding their own private axes to pay the slightest attention to this fact, and just go on fulminating about whatever (I'll be interested to see if anyone else bothers to respond to my posts about this). If all the people who just made the 200+ comments about this story were concerned enough about the discussion to act to maintain its integrity by communicating with the editors of the RMN, they might correct the problem. The writer of this story may or may not know or care about the problem, but he does not represent the readership, and is most unlikely to stick his head up to voice the complaint of the very few of us who are even aware that the RMN routinely makes a nonsense of the comments of readers.
September 9, 2008

6:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

solar_satellite writes:

P.S. "fiesty": Your screen name is annoying -- "fiesty" is not a word (although "fie" and "sty" are, so I read it as a concatenation of the two). Do you mean "feisty"?

P.P.S. Many Posters (recognize yourselves): "To" does NOT mean "too", an adverb meaning: 1 to a higher degree than is desirable, permissible, or possible. 2 in addition. 3 informal very.
"Your" means "belonging to you", and is not an acceptable substitute for "you're" meaning "you are".
September 9, 2008

6:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

greg...

Sorry to hear that you're still struggling to understand the basic concept that conducting a negotiation does NOT mean that an agreement has been reached.

I bet when you read that the UAW has launched negotiations with automakers, that you immediately assume that the union got everything they demanded before the negotiations are even finished.

Please let me know if you ever decide to sell your home. We'll start the negotiation with me offering you $1 dollar for it, and using your understanding of negotiations, I can then claim that you agreed to give it to me for a buck. And considering how you mistakenly believe that merely saying that a negotiation occuring is proof of agreement, you'll be happy to turn it over.

And we'll all have a good laugh at the outcome.
September 9, 2008

6:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

rickg19611 writes:

Sue and Solar....

You miss a few points. It's highly likely that the writer learned MORE information and so the article was updated.

Surely, you don't want errant information to continue to be distributed, just so some whiners on a board won't get their meaningless arguments confused.

Everyone reporting on the story are consistent. No agreement was made with the workers. And the fact that other workers are even siding with the company and protesting the Muslim workers is convincing evidence that they are far more likely to be correct.... rather than some outsiders who read an error filled article and launched into a tirade for no sound reason.
September 9, 2008

7 p.m.

Suggest removal

hoopoe36 writes:

maybe it was supposed to be 'fisty'
September 9, 2008

7:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

fiesty writes:

solar_satellite - To answer your question/insult, it is a concatenation between "fie!" and "feisty"- what I consider a rather appropriate combo for blogs. Whether or not YOU like it is irrelevant!

Now, do you (or hoopoe36) actually have anything to add on the SUBJECT? I find that folks who start slamming on others (whether personality, affiliation, or handle), nitpicking semantics, etc, are usually doing so because they have nothing of value to add or are losing an argument.
September 9, 2008

8:05 p.m.

Suggest removal

blulitespecial writes:

I doubt any muslims there will work Oct 1st.This will be next on the list of demands.,and Labor Day will be traded for this day.A good place to see how this will progress is here-
http://www.t-g.com/story/1449487.html
Currently the refugee family reunification program for the Somali has been halted due to an 80-90% fraud rate-DNA testing proves this.It is entirely possible that many ( a guess of 40-80%?)recent arrivals over the last few years are illegally here,and it's anyone's guess who they really are,and why they're here.
This is a money making deal for the church agencies-They get payed by the head to bring in all the refugees they can,to the tune of 900 million dollars of our tax money a year.You can get a good overview of the Office of Refugee Resettlement here-
http://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordp...
September 9, 2008

8:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

denverrma writes:

If I wanted a break at work to pray, or eat, or smoke or whatever, Id have to take it at the time the company say its ok. What is going to happen to the plant in Greeley when hundreds of workers go on a break at the same time? Go to church to pray or do it in your head....like the rest of us! This is America, not Somolia! Im tired of Americans and American companies bending over backward to attempt to keep everyone happy and keep an uber-PC image. Im sure some of you here will run this post into the ground...but I dont care!
September 9, 2008

9:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

redwhiteandBLUE writes:

Roger44
You are so right!!
September 9, 2008

9:57 p.m.

Suggest removal

hockeyfan08 writes:

Nobody is promised anything at all.Your not gauranteed a job,insurance,benifits or a home.These people need to leave and go home plus we need the borders closed.The real ignorant people need to wake up and see whats really going on in this
country before its to late.
September 9, 2008

10:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

Sundog writes:

You're right, feisty. That's why I'm voting for McCain. Pig with lipstick indeed. And hey, we do need to modify our freedom of religion ideas somewhat. People shouldn't have the freedom to relegate us to a secondary social status as they do to non-muslims in Islam-land. We need to do it first, before they get here, or they will surely do it to us. Sharia, anyone? No thanks, I just had a bar of soap.
September 9, 2008

10:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

SteveM writes:

There is no place in the USA for the venom, racism, and religious prejudice being expressed in this thread. It is utterly sickening and anti-American. This once great nation was founded on the freedom of religion, and our once great Constitution protects people's right to practice their religion and to be free from discrimination.

The hatred, intolerance, and lack of religious literacy being expressed here is horrendous and shameful. The media is partially to blame for allowing it to become 'okay' to be prejudice against Muslims and by associating a religion founded in peace to blamed for violence and terrorism. Radical Christians known as the IRA bombed London and committed acts of terror for over 75 years, and not once did the media in the USA label them Catholic terrorist, but that's exactly what they were by today's standards. We must never allow an entire religious faith to bear the weight of the crimes committed by a few. Timothy McVeigh was an Irish Catholic and his act of terrorism killed 168 people! Do we vilify all Irish Catholics? Dozens and dozens of Catholic priests the world over have been convicted of molesting hundreds of children, do we vilify all Catholics? Baptists made up much of the KKK membership which committed acts of terror against blacks, Catholics, and Jews for decades in the USA, do we vilify all Baptists? NO! NO! and triple NO! There are horrible, bad, and evil people of every faith or nationality on the globe. We do not hold all of humanity responsible for the evil actions of a few.

Just stop with all of the hate and prejudice. It is shameful and embarrassing. There is no excuse for it.
September 9, 2008

11:02 p.m.

Suggest removal

Sundog writes:

It is a fact that the Islamic religion relegates non-muslims to a status that exists well-below a second-grade status relative to muslims. They have no rights in Sharia courts, they are trumped in any social attempts to reconcile their differences. If I show some offense to this, it is justified in fact, and is not a blind hatred. There are people who do not represent their religions in whatever religion one might offer, as you mention above, **But their incorrect actions are not a basic tenet of their religion, as is the above example** . Just start realizing that this is a threat to all non-muslim religions all over the planet, and quit taking the pseudo moral high ground. Open your eyes. If you are not a muslim yourself, this will affect you directly if the muslims are allowed a foothold in this country. If Sharia law becomes the law of the land * as is happening in England right now *, then we all will have some enormous problems to deal with. The Dutch congratulated themselves as being a tolerant society, and they are suffering in a thousand different ways by allowing the importation of this scourge, not the least of which is the open insults of Dutch women by young muslim men on the streets who do not feel obligated to respect them and call them whores, since they are Dhimmis (non-muslim). Then, of course, there is the case of poor Mr. Van Gogh, who spoke out and wrote against them and whose throat was slit in the middle of a Dutch street in broad daylight. I will continue to speak out against this until my dying day, so don't bother to advise me otherwise.
September 9, 2008

11:35 p.m.

Suggest removal

NEHoss writes:

Wow #1 - I have to investigate who buys from Swift and make sure I don't eat there. No more. Swift has gone from hiring illegals and now is exploiting muslims. Wow #2 - I can't believe the size of the muslim population in little Greely. Yes, it's concerning to me considering the primary mantra of Islam which is to treat people from 'other' religions as second class and subordninate.

As far as Ramadan, it's just another example of our political left's effort in educating others in the use of the ignorant white people's legal system to incrementally take over the culture, just like sharia law creeping up in western European countries, Minneapolis muslim taxi drivers rejecting riders with dogs or booze, Kansas City Airport installing feet bathing basins for muslim workers (at taxpayers expense), and the US's first congressman taking the oath of office on the koran instead of the bible.

Ramadan is indeed an important holiday for Islam but the one to watch for (and it's coming if we sit idle) will be the celebration of Sept. 11....

Wake up America before it's too late. Europe is learning this lesson but far too slowly. We still have a chance.
September 10, 2008

2:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

blulitespecial writes:

Well put,Sundog and NEHoss-The UK,Spain and France have kind of seen the light,and are talking about lowering immigration numbers.But they still have no-go zones for non-muslims.Britain is considering cutting ALL immigration to zero.Period.We can't afford it here,either.Or the extra energy usage,or the extra waste treatment and landfills a higher population will demand.Not to mention our water supplies are dwindling.I'm for zero immigration to the US.
September 10, 2008

4:18 a.m.

Suggest removal

roger44 writes:

As one of the workers said on the news, this workplace is not a church or place of worship. Come to work and go home and pray. we need to take the Australian attitude, if you don't like how we do things go back where you came from. As stated earlier, these plants used to pay a decent wage and had workers, until the companies started using illegals and lowered wages. Now they are importing Muslims and have a problem there. This country may have been founded on christian ideals, but the idea that we have to cater to religions is not a right. some areas of the country have real estate developments that cater to their religion, baptists here, catholics there, we are promoting too much diversity and should be promoting assimilation. England is having major problems with the Muslims and if we continue it will happen here.
September 10, 2008

6:41 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"rickg19611 writes:

greg...

Sorry to hear that you're still struggling to understand the basic concept that conducting a negotiation does NOT mean that an agreement has been reached"

Keep dreaming rick. Since I'm the seller, I'll start the negotiations at $300,000 and since negotiating OBVIOUSLY means we've agreed to the price at the start of negotiations, you'll then owe me that amount.(when can i get that check?) Since you can't seem to grasp that the negotiation itself does not indicate success OR failure, and therefore you cannot logically claim that they didn't lose the negotiation any more than I can claim they did, this discussion will never end.
September 10, 2008

6:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

LOUIE writes:

Swift can resolve it by hiring Americans who believe in separation of church and state, maintaining the workplace free of religion. Maybe instead of constantly looking to illegals and immigrats to take financial advantage of, they should consider paying a decent wage and benifits. Start hiring Americans to replace them, they walked out, Swift didn't fire them, and Swift is non-union, shouldn't be a problem. I don't believe any public institution nor private company has to honor anyones religious beliefs. but I could be wrong. All Swifts troubles stem from wanting cheap immigrant labor, as Americans think about that when you spend your money with them next time. Are these the kind of jobs you want to create and leave to your children? A severe backlash is coming in America, people are tired of corporations abusing people for the sake of profits.
September 10, 2008

7:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"Sundog writes:

You're right, feisty. That's why I'm voting for McCain. Pig with lipstick indeed"

I WAS considering McCain, because I like him personally, and love Palins story, BUT when I hear McCain say that he likes NAFTA and personally wishes we have more NAFTA-type agreements, I cannot in good conscience vote for him. Free trade is fine in theory, but stinks in practice (as most theories do!!) I have personally seen over 4500 people lose jobs at high-tech plants to Mexico, and am defending my new job AGAIN, trying to compete against $5 an hour labor and $9000/year Engineers! So far, I've seen no real plans for creating "high value non-exportable" jobs by McCain. There is NO SUCH THING. My former employer launched a new VERY high tech manufacturing/development center in China for ABS/Vehicle Dynamic Control systems, we were told China was too technologically inferior for those parts. Now, I'm making extremely complex, super-high precision bearings for the aerospace/satellite/defense industries, products which are currently required to be made in the USA, but the Government is pushing to change that to "North America"(which includes Mexico), and the chances are most likely that this entire plant will go to Mexico within a couple years. You would think we would have learned what happens when you let ethno-centric views blind you to reality (when we used to say that the Japanese could never compete with us in the car market), but it seems we continue to make the same mistake over and over. The Mexican engineers I've worked with during product transfers are not the same guys you have pruning your shrubs, they are very savvy, many have gone to school here in the states, and they can figure out how to do it cheaper/faster just as well as I can, but at 1/7th the cost for labor. While NAFTA is just dandy for Wall St., it, (which McCain FAVORS!) is going to gut the middle class, and either reduce our living wage to a level where we can compete with Mexico/India/China, or we are going to become a nation of service industry providers (except, who will we provide services for, if our living wage drops to $8 an hour?) This whole NAFTA thing is VERY short sighted. IF we hold other countries to our working/living standards on products that they import to our country, and demand transparent accounting for the subisidies/tariffs/etc..., then we might have a fighting chance, but right now, we are giving away the farm thanks to the current situation. I will not be able to put my vote with McCain, and against America, unless he starts talking viable plans!(and stops hiding Palin from the same tough interviews and questions that the other three have had to endure) If she can't stand up to Wolf Blitzer or make it through Face the Nation, then how is she going to face off with adversarial world leaders?
September 10, 2008

7:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

No, Marine, this is the fault of our government and American companies. We took these people in from the UN Refugee Relief Council, and now companies like Swift are using the cheap labor to lower operating costs at the same time saying that they couldn't find American workers. Maybe they couldn't find American workers at $8 an hour, but who anymore can afford $8 an hour as their primary living wage?(withouth reducing their living standard to that of central Mexico) Manufacturing jobs continue to shrink, yet our government continues pushing NAFTA and bringing in low-skilled foreign workers to fill jobs. I realize that companies are required to look out for stockholder interest, but there is a problem when the stockholders become more important than the welfare of the average American workers. I am NOT a unionist or protectionist, but we are NOT competing on a level playing field with China or Mexico, so Free Trade is a sham until we are.
September 10, 2008

7:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"Here Here!! I am Voting Gregu710 in 2008."

Funny thing, a friend of mine in Illinois keeps telling me I need to run for office when I drone on about the state of affairs in Washington! And who knows, if I don't see a drastic turn of events from either of these parties (and the continued lack of a viable 3rd party candidate), I may be forced to write myself in AGAIN, like I have for the last 3 elections! Geez, I know I'm not perfect and well versed in international trade and law, but I'm pretty certain that I can't screw things up any more than the last 2 guys...
:)
September 10, 2008

8:27 a.m.

Suggest removal

Sundog writes:

gregu710- I don't disagree at all with what you are saying re: NAFTA. Moreover, the idea of Mexican trucks picking up goods at Mexican ports so that American wages don't have to be paid at U.S. ports, then trucked across the border, is another globalist scam on Americans that could have some real al-Qaida-esque consequences. Who dreams this stuff up? It's nutzoid. But there are many unanswered questions about B. Hussein that are chilling in their implications. Some things are being held under wraps with that guy that scares the p-waddin' out of me: Ayers, Wright, etc. Finally, the choice is between Frick and Frack, and it is a lousy one, I know, but I'm going with Frack on this one.
September 10, 2008

8:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"MarineGrunt writes:

Well, if you make it can I be SecDef?"

You got it bud!(if you don't mind working for a former Bubblejockey!) Now, what shall we call the Party, the Party of (the) Old Republic, or P.o.O.R. for short...
September 10, 2008

8:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

Heidi writes:

gregu,

I'll join your party!
September 10, 2008

8:48 a.m.

Suggest removal

1968camaro writes:

Fire them all, who the hell do these people think they are? Use your breaks for whatever you want to or celebrate/pray on your own time. What right do you think you have to request time of to pray in an American Company, when this country was built on Christianity anyway. Look at your American money you carry around with you! Swift should hire more Americans anyway, there are many Americans that would want a job there. Swift needs to fire and rehire Americans! Go back to where you all came from!
September 10, 2008

9:08 a.m.

Suggest removal

fiesty writes:

question guys- I don't like McCain (wants Patriot Act strengthened and has voted for unconstitutional legislation) or Obama (wants a path to citizenship for illegals). Anyone got a list of independents I can check out? All I've heard about is Ron Paul.
September 10, 2008

9:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

Marine, we were fast attack, so only a couple weeks out, a few days in, back out and so on, not the Boomer queens! Besides, I saved a heck of a lot of money on sunscreen....
:)
September 10, 2008

9:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

gregu710 writes:

"Heidi writes:

gregu,

I'll join your party!"

COOOL, only 37,999,998 voters and 270 electoral votes to go!!!
:-)
September 10, 2008

9:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

gs writes:

Who let Somalies in this country? How do they go a day with mutilating little girls and murdering someone? Just look at their country. There isn't even a civilization there let alone a working government.
September 10, 2008

9:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

gs writes:

How do the poor public school teachers in Greeley cope? "I'm sorry Ms Jones but I left blood on my chair in the 5th grade because my bad parts were cut out with a rusty knife". My heart goes out to them.
September 10, 2008

10:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Sundog writes:

The only way to get the clowns out is to hire new replacements. They will never vote themselves out or approve term limits. That's political suicide; it would have prevented dowdy ol' fa*ts like Chappaquiddick Ted and Byrd from super-gluing their cheeks to those plush leather senate seats. The American Party: with liberty, justice and tax money for Americans first, and when we have taken care of the veterans and those who put their butts on the line, and ordinary Americans who really need it, and infrastructure, then we'll see about spewing money we don't have out to the rest of the world. Money that we earned, by the way.
September 10, 2008

12:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Masnatas writes:

Get These People Out! Liberals, open your eyes and look at what muslims are doing in Europe. Just read about it. They have a big problem over there because they are too tolerant.
Feminists, what about the way they treat women? They are not mistreated underdogs, they hate this culture but look to benefit from it. They love the fruit but hate the Tree.
Trust me, you don't want these people working with our food. They are fanatics that believe that non-muslims should be made 2nd class citizens. Make no mistake, they aim to take over the world with their culture/religion of death and violence. muhommed? Hah! Be vigilant and aware of what these cretins want to do!
September 10, 2008

1:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

SheikYurBooty writes:

Here's the future on things like this:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/02...
September 10, 2008

1:46 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Heidi:

Marine:

Gregu:

Why not something a bit more old fashion, and patriotic sounding?

American National Party (A.N.P.) Or the Union of American Patriats Party (UAPP)?

or Dogs of God (D.o.G.) ?

I.
September 10, 2008

1:50 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

Masnatas:

SheikYurBooty:

Europe is a prime example. Next war they fight will be against the Islamists....After they lose that fight the next war Europe (controlled by Allah) will be fight will be against us and any other non-Sharia compliant nation/culture/people.

I.
September 10, 2008

2:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

JSeifert writes:

If you put add another country in front of American you are not a American. I have 5 countries I could put in front but why don't I because I am a AMERICAN period. I speak American not proper english only collage snobs speak that until they go for their first job interview. I do not care what religon you are, I do not care if you have a accent so do I every AMERICAN does. I work hard I even worked 8 Christmas's in a row in the Military so if you want to work then work do not conplain about how you are force to work because of who you are and what religon you are you should just be happy to live in America, Be a citizen and have a job. Otherwise go back and good luck.
September 10, 2008

2:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Scott writes:

JSeifert,

Beautifully stated, just plain beautiful!

Scott
An American-American ;-)
September 10, 2008

2:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

NotUrFriend writes:

JSeifert,

Thank you for your service to the country, its a tough sacrifice and a large chunk of time of your life. Your right. America must come before your native country or your not truly American. At least in my view. Islam requires and commands NOTHING to come before the Ummah.

I.
September 10, 2008

3:07 p.m.

Suggest removal

GILPINMAN writes:

fire them all! hire an american and you wont have this problem.
September 10, 2008

5:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

redwhiteandBLUE writes:

1968camaro

Well said and to the point!
October 31, 2008

11:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

Carm writes:

The employees from Somalia who came to this country for a better life now want us to live by rules of their "former" country.

When refugees come to America...they need to abide by the rules of this country and not expect us to bend to theirs.

They should not be given special consideration in regard to Ramadan. Fasting and praying can be done without interruption to their job.

If Swift caves in...........what next?????

Home › News › Local News

Muslim workers, Swift can't resolve Ramadan issue

Chris Casey, The (Greeley) Tribune

Published September 8, 2008 at 1:19 p.m.

More Local News

Share

Comments

Featured

Columns & Blogs