Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 260
  1. #61
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Syracuse , NY
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Nail wrote
    Maybe there should have been some discussion in the union halls before FIREFIGHTERS GOT UP THERE WITH YELLOW SIGNS showing their support for Kerry in my name.
    They are using my money to desecrate the value of my vote. They are using my money to lobby 20 votes against my one.
    I quite the union
    The IAFF is not doing ANYTHING in your name. You "quite" the Union.Instead of taking your arguement to the Union hall and the members,you "quite".

    Change comes from within "Brother?".


  2. #62
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    depends
    Posts
    152

    Default

    Parrothead, you beat me to it.....Nail, how do you change the union leadership, which is your stated goal, if you're NOT IN IT!!!!It is so much easier to "quite". Maybe you can "from" your own......

  3. #63
    Forum Member MIKEYLIKESIT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Division 24
    Posts
    4,360

    Default

    Well I am glad to hear that Austin now has collective bargaining. Why didnt Governor Bush support it for ALL Texas firefighters? Collective bargaining should be a right for all firefighters. If it means passing a federal act, so be it. I dont understand what these politicians are so afraid of. Did the local you quit have anything to do with securing your collective bargaining rights? Can I come down and volunteer on YOUR shift in Austin?
    IAFF-IACOJ PROUD

  4. #64
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    608

    Default The AFL CIO president isn't a Democrat!

    Did you guys know the AFL CIO president is not a Democrat. He's belongs to the Democratic Socialist Party of America.

    Are you aware that Schaeitberger was the VP for political action in the AFL CIO.

    This union is attempting to take you and our country to a place that you have no clue about.

    That's why it's so hypocritical or maybe ignorant to think that you are not a liberal and don't perscribe to a socialist agenda and yet you still support the National.

    This is the direction the National seeks to take our country and they're doing it with our money.

    NO THANKS!!
    Last edited by Nail200; 06-27-2004 at 10:27 PM.

  5. #65
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    608

    Default Changing the Union from within!

    Changing the union from within. Well, maybe someday. We're sending our message now. Money talks and BS walks.

    The union shows who they support with my conservative money.

    I'll not be contributing to a national anytime in the near future.

    It would be nice to get legislation passed to mandate that a local not be able to require membership to a state or national organization.

  6. #66
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    608

    Default Rights!

    That's the problem with you guys. You have a scewed vision of what rights you should have under federal law.

    What you don't understand are the rights and freedoms you will sacrifice in attaining the very rights you seek.

    The Socialist Union leadership leading the ignorant and the blind.

    You'd better watch out for what you ask for. You might get it!!!!

  7. #67
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Syracuse , NY
    Posts
    138

    Default

    Nail wrote
    Money talks and BS walks.
    You walked away from your Union.I think you can make the connection I'm getting at.

  8. #68
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,126

    Default Re: Rights!

    Originally posted by Nail200

    The Socialist Union leadership leading the ignorant and the blind.

    You'd better watch out for what you ask for. You might get it!!!!
    Yes....better working conditions and protections for employees. How dastardly. The end is near.

  9. #69
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,126

    Default Re: Changing the Union from within!

    Originally posted by Nail200
    It would be nice to get legislation passed to mandate that a local not be able to require membership to a state or national organization.
    Quite an interesting statement for someone who rails about the excesses of government interference.

    I belong proudly to an open shop. And I can walk away any time I want. Same as any other member regardless of political stance.

    Freedom is something you apparently don't understand.

  10. #70
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,126

    Default

    Originally posted by Nail200
    I don't think we should ever support a President blindly.

    And I don't.


    Afghanistan was but a battle. We want to win the war. It's bold and outcome unclear. We feel that this is our fight not our childrens. If we don't fix the problem or at least show that we are bold and serious in our fight against it, we will suffer dearly for years to come.

    And what else does your crystal ball tell you? And who is ‘WE’? Have you enlisted for a tour in Iraq?


    Democrats nit pic this thing to death. They talk of the lack of success but avoid the positive things we've brought to the region and the monuments being built by Iraqies to honor our sodiers.

    As I pointed out. Republicans did the same when we had troops in the Balkans. A dictator was removed despite the carpings of conservatives with a whole lot fewer American casualties. Something conservatives forget to mention.


    They point to the deaths of our soldiers with no regard for perspective. How would they have reviewed the Normandy invasion where we lost 10,000 in a day attacking a country that hadn't attacked us and not having an exit strategy. Isn't the loss of three thousand inocent Americans worth a fight. Do we just want to put a bandade on this problem, go tit for tat, or rather do we want to destroy it.

    Comparing the war in Iraq to WW II only convinces me that conservative have lost touch with reality. Germany was allied with Japan who had attacked us. And if you don’t believe there was an exit strategy, I believe you need to retake US History 101. And stay awake this time when they get to the part about WW II. But keep up the good work. You need to visit Switzerland. They are famous for producing a household item that goes off every hour. You need several.


    Is this a time to put our future in the hands of France who's only time of true support for us was when we opposed their enemy, Britain.
    Maybe we should listen to Ex Nazi Socialist Germany, or our Ex cold war buddies from Russia. Maybe we should have them determine our future. It is strange that all these countries along with the UN president had strong economic ties and interests in Iraq, who by the way was shooting at our pilots who were doing routine patrols.

    To quote the immortal Olson Johnson, "Who can argue with that?"


    You can look at the big picture and vote for a president that will see us threw this trying time or you can listen to the AFL CIO / Democratic garbage and vote for an anti war activist such as Senator Kerry.

    As opposed to someone who went out of his way to not only make sure he didn't go to Vietnam, he never attended his obligations in the Nat'l Guard. A very honorable military record if there never was one. Kerry gets up in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee at the age of 28. He is now viewed as a traitor. At this time in his life, Bush is getting drunk and coked up and he is now viewed as a hero. Nice role model you got there.


    If you'd like to see how your pick for president has been idolized in the past you can visit meseums in Communist North Vietnam where he's pictured shaking hands with their leadership shortly after the war. Maybe I'm wrong! Kerry does know how to win a war. He just picks the sides of the Enemy rather than America. Maybe he'll make friends with Bin Laden and we can all get along. They can put that picture up in the Smithsonian.

    Right next to the pictures of Nixon shaking hands with Mao, Brezhnev, and Rumsfeld shaking hands with Hussein.
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-27-2004 at 03:48 PM.

  11. #71
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    30

    Default OMG, where to start....

    Local 1260 26 yr veteran
    Might as well do it from the beginning...

    “The IAFF has just announced its support for a political candidate who proposed to eliminate funding for grants to local fire departments, who refused to provide federal funds to hire fire fighters in our most needy communities, whose policies were resulting in the closing of fire houses across America — and who was doing this while opening fire houses in Iraq.” George W. Bush is the political candidate described above. It’s because President Bush has not supported us on our issues that the IAFF is not supporting him for president.
    This is confusing because Kerry didn't vote for these things either. I would think opening firehouses anywhere would be a good thing. I'm surprised there aren't IAFF heads on the way there now trying to unionize them.

    In making the tough decisions about who to support in political elections, the IAFF Executive Board focuses solely on a candidate’s record of support on fire service and employment issues.
    This is a total lie. If this is the case, then why did they choose Kerry? He's voted for very little items of firefighters concern. (record provided below)

    On Fire Act, it was never meant to be a "Social Security" program for fire departments. Do you really want to have a federal fire service? But like everything else, you fund it once and all of the sudden your obligated to fund it forever. As far as the Safer Act, who is suppose to pay for those 75,000 firefighters when the funding ends? Why is the Federal Government the answer to everything? If it is, then the most likely place is for the rural and small town fire departments across the nation which are non-union that have 1 or 2 on a rig unlike the 5-7 some have. In fact, there's an idea. Federalize the fire service across the country and move firefighters from where they are now to equalize the manpower, lol. Oh, and btw, how much money did Clinton propose for firefighters?

    Second. I do remember the previous administration going after both Bin Laden and Hussein. And when he did what was the response from conservatives? Was it....let's got get them!! Let's pile on!! We're behind you Mr. President. NOOOOO!!!
    SC, your dreaming. It never happened. Ya, he threw a dry chem into a warehouse fire, really helped.

    More right wing blathering. Do you ever give up on this? Where do you have proof of the chances Clinton had to go after Bin Laden? Other than dittohead chat rooms?
    Here's a book for you to buy
    Al Qaeda absent from final Clinton report
    SUDAN TRIED TO GIVE CLINTON ADMIN FILES ON BIN LADEN
    Clinton Let Bin Laden Slip Away and Metastasize

    This is just a few out of hundreds. And I'd rather be a dittohead than a knucklehead.

    Memory being the first thing to go I guess. Dems and Pubs were standing side by side on the steps of the US Senate singing "God Bless America"
    Ya it lasted how long before the Dems were attacking Bush?

    “Bush, in Austin, criticized President Clinton’s administration for not doing enough to enunciate a goal for the Kosovo military action and indicated the bombing campaign might not be a tough enough
    Exactly right, anyone announce an exit strategy for there yet? hmmmmm? Meanwhile we are handing things over to Iraqis on June 30 with a timetable to complete in 2005. Let's see how long were we in Japan, Germany and North Korea? Oh, yea, we're still there.

    No one is "forced" to join the IAFF in the U.S.. In fact I would rather not have you in then have you dragging the rest of us down
    This is humorous. How many times would someone be called a scab? We are trying to keep firefighters union from getting into the gutter with other unions of the past.

    It would be good to have healthy discussion within the IAFF. Not on the internet, but where it REALLY counts,local union halls and meetings, State conventions amd the International convention. I would welcome some good old fashioned hard ball debate.
    Ya, just try a "healthy discussion" and see what happens.

    I and others brought up the topic on FirePac. A new deal came down from the IAFF that said if you voluntarily sign a form, you will have the money that you send to the state for legislation sent to the IAFF and then they will in turn send that money back to the state. It seems there is all kinds of "soft money" that can't be used but by doing this it shows up in their books as a "hard money" donation which can be used. We brought up the fact that this has the appearence of money laundering and that the money could (and most likely would) go to Kerry. Well, it wasn't a healthy discussion after that, for sure. I was told that I would probably be the only one out of 90 not to sign. That changed after the meeting.

  12. #72
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,126

    Default Re: OMG, where to start....

    Viking. You've been plugged into too much dittoness.

    Maybe if there hadn't been a blind obsession from conservatives who were staring at his crotch, the dry chem into the warehouse might have been more substantial. What part am I dreaming about? The part where Clinton never went after OBL? Or the part where conservatives had over 500 FBI agents scowering the Arkansas countryside for ex's of Bills while the deadliest terrorist attack on US soil was being planned a couple of states away. Great set of priorities for scarce law enforcement resources and those who prioritzed them.

    The Drudge Report as a reliable source? Gimme a break? Swiss cheese has fewer holes than his record of accuracy.

    The Moonie Times is at least open about their conservative stance. I'll give them just as much credibility as you do any of the other so called 'liberal' media. Deal?

    And as far as Mr. Ijaz is concerned. Here is the rebuttal from those in the State Dept at that time when they were asked about Mr. Ijaz's (now a commentator on Faux News) assertions.

    ---------
    Clinton aides rejected al Qaeda info, story says

    WASHINGTON (CNN) --Clinton administration officials repeatedly rejected offers by Sudan's intelligence service to share information it had compiled about Osama bin Laden and the al Qaeda network during the organization's formative years in the 1990s, according to a report in the latest edition of Vanity Fair.

    The top Clinton administration official in charge of African affairs, former Assistant Secretary of State Susan Rice, told CNN Sunday the allegations were "erroneous and irresponsible."

    The article said the overtures were made to the State Department, FBI and other administration officials directly by Sudanese diplomats and through Americans with connections in Sudan.

    One of those with connections was a Pakistani-American businessman who was a donor to the Democratic Party and an acquaintance of President Clinton's, the article said.

    Senior FBI officials who wanted to see the information were overruled, the article said.

    Vanity Fair quoted Tim Carney, the last U.S. ambassador to Sudan, as saying U.S. officials "lost access to a mine of material on bin Laden and his organization."

    In an interview on "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer," Rice said Clinton administration officials up to the Cabinet level met on "countless occasions" with officials of the Sudanese government to discuss terrorism.

    "Never, during those many, many meetings, was there ever an offer of such documents, were those documents ever provided," Rice said.

    "And in fact, out of those meetings didn't even come any detailed, significant information that our law enforcement or CIA operatives found to be of any operational significance."

    Rice said she was "puzzled" by Carney's comments because he was in some of those same meetings.

    She said he was angered by the decision to close the embassy in Khartoum shortly after his arrival and "perhaps that anger has colored his recollections."

    Rice said the United States had a counterterrorism team in Khartoum during much of the period in question and that it sought information from the Sudanese government and "got nothing of great value."

    She noted the allegations in the article, written by David Rose, were based on information from Sudanese government officials and people with business ties to Sudan.

    According to the article, the Mukhabarat, Sudan's intelligence service, compiled information on bin Laden from his arrival in the country in 1991 until he was expelled in 1996.

    It also had detailed information about other members of al Qaeda and Egyptian Islamic Jihad, which eventually merged into al Qaeda and now provides some of its top leadership, the article said.

    From the autumn of 1996 until weeks before the September 11 terrorist attacks, Sudanese officials made repeated attempts to get the material to U.S. officials, but they were spurned because the Clinton administration was hostile to the Islamic regime in Khartoum, which it branded as a sponsor of terrorism, and was sympathetic to rebel groups, the article said.

    "That information included detailed biographies, photographs, the place within the organization of some of those who played a very direct role in the [1998 U.S.] embassy bombings [in East Africa], who went on to play a planning role in the 2001 atrocities," Rose said in an interview on "Late Edition."

    "It seems reasonable that if these offers had been taken up when they were first made, then, in any event, the [1998] bombings may not have taken place, the organization would not have had that first stunning success and perhaps it wouldn't have gone on to do what it's done this year," he said.

    The article said U.S. officials may have been skeptical of the information because the CIA had received other intelligence reports from Sudan about purported terrorist attacks that turned out to be untrue, according to the article, and because they may not have appreciated the danger presented by al Qaeda before the 1998 embassy attacks, according to the article.

    The article said that after the embassy bombings the Mukhabarat cabled the FBI in Washington, offering to turn over two Pakistani men who it believed played a role in the attack.

    Before the exchange could be made, however, U.S. military forces bombed a Sudanese factory, at which point the Khartoum regime sent the men to Pakistan instead.

    Rice said it is "completely implausible" that FBI officials, who were on the ground in the region immediately after the embassy bombings, would not have quickly seized upon such an offer if it had been made.

    According to the article, among the people involved in the effort to pass along Mukhabarat's information was Mansoor Ijaz, a Pakistani-American businessman who it said was a major donor to the Democratic Party and was on personal terms with Clinton, Vice President Al Gore and National Security Adviser Sandy Berger.

    In an effort to improve the relationship between Sudan and the United States, Ijaz told the magazine that in April 1997 he brought a letter from Sudan's president to Rep. Lee Hamilton, then the ranking Democrat on the House International Relations Committee.

    The letter offered to allow U.S. counterterrorism officials to come to Sudan "to assess the data in our possession and help us counter the forces your government, and ours, seek to contain."

    Ijaz claimed Hamilton took the letter to Berger and to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, neither of whom replied.

    Rice told CNN "we didn't need back channels like Mansoor Ijaz because we had front channels -- we had numerous direct, repeated exchanges with the government of Sudan."

    "If the government in Khartoum wanted to share this information, if they wanted to give it to us, they had countless opportunities to do so directly," she said.

    "If they didn't want to do so directly, they could have come up with any number of ways. They could have dropped the box in front of the State Department."

    "They didn't do that, and I believe they didn't do it under the Clinton administration or under the Bush administration until after [September 11], because they weren't interested in doing so."
    ---------
    Last edited by scfire86; 06-27-2004 at 04:01 PM.

  13. #73
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    30

    Default I'll put this up again...

    All of you Kerry supporters...have you ever looked at the voting records to see if Kerry actually voted for firefighter legislation? Go to www.loc.gov and do a search or easier yet go to www.vote-smart.org. You will see that Kerry didn't bother to even vote "YEA" on firefighter legislation. In the mean time, you'll see several legislative issues signed into law by Bush. He even told the Democrats in Congress to not put anything into any firefighter legislation coming to him. He just wants to sign our stuff. But of course the Democrats care more about their special pet projects and issues so they continue to USE firefighters.

    Firefighter related issues (partial list)

    Not Voting 65% 292 for 2003/2004

    2: FY 2003 Approp.s - Homeland Security
    3: FY 2003 Approp.s - Homeland Security
    7: FY 2003 Approp.s - Spending Reinstatement
    14: FY 2003 Approp.s - Unemployment Ins.
    15: FY 2003 Approp.s - Drought Relief
    16: FY 2003 Approp.s - Drought Relief
    26: FY 2003 Approp.s - Prohibit Quotas for Job Priv.
    110: Military Tax Breaks - Passage
    115: FY 2003 War Supplemental - Port Security
    116: FY ‘03 War Supp. - Nat'l. Guard & Reserves
    119: FY ‘03 War Suppl. - Counterterror Funding
    120: FY ‘03 War Suppl. - Homeland Security
    122: FY ‘03 War Suppl. - First Resp’r. Funding
    123: FY ‘03 War Suppl. - First Resp’r. Funding
    125: FY 2003 War Supplemental - Passage
    185: FY ’04 Def. Auth. - Reservist Health Care
    194: FY 2004 Defense Authorization - Passage
    205: FY 2004 Defense Authoriz. - Base Closures
    269: FY 2004 State Dept. Reauth. - Unemployment Insurance
    277: FY 2004 Defense Appropriations - Troop Deployments
    278: FY 2004 Defense Approp.s - Cost of Iraq Operations
    281: FY 2004 Defense Appropriations - Iraq War Costs
    282: FY 2004 Defense Appropriations - Military Health Care
    286: FY 2004 Defense Approp.s - Overseas Military Funding
    290: FY 2004 Defense Appropriations - Passage
    291: FY 2004 Homeland Sec. Approp.s - Approp.s Increase
    292: FY 2004 Homeland Sec. Appr. - Law Enforcement Costs
    293: FY ‘04 Hom. Sec. Appr. - Emer. Mgmt. Planning Grants
    294: FY 2004 Homeland Security Approp.s - Port Security
    295: FY 2004 Homeland Security Approp.s - Explosive Device
    296: FY 2004 Homeland Sec. Approp.s - Firefighter Grants
    297: FY 2004 Homeland Sec. Approp.s - Chemical Plant Sec.
    298: FY 2004 Homeland Sec. Approp.s - Canadian Border Sec.
    299: FY 2004 Homeland Sec. Appr - First Responder Funding
    300: FY 2004 Homeland Security Approp.s - Maritime Security
    301: FY ‘04 Homeland Sec. Appr. - High-Threat Urban Areas
    302: FY ‘04 Homeland Sec. Appr. - High-Threat Urban Areas
    303: FY 2004 Homeland Sec. Appr. - Federal Advisory Boards
    304: FY 2004 Homeland Security Approp.s - Transit Security
    305: FY 2004 Homeland Sec. Appr.s - Lobbying Restrictions
    306: FY 2004 Homeland Security Appropriations - Passage
    328: FY 2004 Labor-HHS-Edu. Appr..s - Bioterr. Workforce
    364: FY 2004 Defense Appropriations - Conference Report
    376: FY 2004 Suppl. for Iraq/Afghanistan - Safety Equipment
    417: Forest Thinning - Medical Monitoring Program
    418: Forest Thinning - Air Monitoring
    421: Forest Thinning - Fire Fighting Funds
    422: Forest Thinning - Fuel Management
    424: Forest Thinning - Fire Reduction Project Funds
    428: Forest Thinning – Passage

    • S 2329 Vote to pass a bill that would protect crime victims' rights.

    • (and ANNOUNCED AGAINST the vote) ---to adopt the conference report on the bill that would provide a total of $820 billion in fiscal 2004 of which $139.8 billion for the Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education departments; and $91 billion for the Veterans Affairs and Housing and Urban Development departments.

    • S Con Res 95 Budget Appropriations, FY2005 resolution

    • 2005 Defense Appropriation Act which includes the Firefighter Act of 2004. Of course he says the schedule was changed and he couldn't stay. Really cares. Of course if it wasn't "Picture Day" and all Senators including the President of the Senate, Vice-President Cheney had to be there Kerry wouldn't have been anywhere near.

    Kerry’s missed votes do not include the 2 votes during his 2/12-25/03 surgery and recovery.


    No Votes

    • HR 5132 (Fiscal 1992 Disaster Relief Supplemental Appropriations);
    Amendment;5/20/92 --Prohibit disaster relief from going to any person associated with crimes related to the riots in L.A.
    • S 343: Comprehensive Regulatory Reform Act 1995 -- Table amendment to delete provisions in bill making it harder to list toxic chemicals.
    • S 735: The Terrorism Prevention Act of 1996-- add provisions to prohibit the distribution of information on how to make explosives for criminal use.
    • S 295: The Teamwork for Employees and Management Act of 1996 --a substitute amendment that adds health and safety issues to the issues that could be discussed by worker-management teams
    • HR 743: The Teamwork for Employees and Management Act of 1996-- a bill to amend the National Labor Relations Act to allow employers in non-unionized workplaces to establish worker-management groups to deal with workplace issues including health, safety, productivity and quality. The bill does not allow such workplace groups to negotiate, enter into or amend collective bargaining agreements.
    • allowing workers to choose between overtime & comp-time. (May 1997)
    • S 1061: FY 1998 Labor, HHS and Education Appropriations-- an amendment to limit the use of taxpayer funds for any future International Brotherhood of Teamsters leadership election.

    • S 1981: Truth in Employment Act 1998 -- a cloture motion, to limit further debate on a bill to allow employers to refuse to hire people whose primary purpose in applying for a job is not to work for that company, but to further another organization's standing or other employment.

    • more funding for forest roads and fish habitat. (Sep 1999)

    • H.R. 2, As Amended; Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 of which States and localities would receive $20 billion for fiscal relief. The child tax credit would be raised to $1,000.

    • HJRes2 Fiscal 2003 Omnibus Appropriations - Passage (resolution would make changes to the law that establishes the Homeland Security department by: doing away with a provision that shields vaccine makers from lawsuits, by expanding the number of colleges and universities that could take part in homeland security research, and by limiting the department's ability to grant contracts to companies that reincorporate overseas to prevent paying U.S. taxes.)

    Yes Votes

    • HR 2107: FY 1998 Interior Appropriations --Vote on an amendment to reduce funding for Forest Service road construction by $10 million.
    • S 4: Soldiers', Sailors', Airmen's, and Marines' Bill of Rights Act of 1999 --to authorize a military pay raise of 4.8 percent in 2000 and annual pay increases through 2006.

  14. #74
    Forum Member MIKEYLIKESIT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Division 24
    Posts
    4,360

    Default Viking

    I am about 100 miles up 57 from you. You enjoy your collective bargaining rights thanks to the AFFI and a REPUBLICAN governor who had the balls to sign the act. I find it interesting that you dismiss my idea of not being in the union because you are afraid of being called a "scab". Is that why people pay their dues? Is that why you stayed a member for 26 years? I would hope not. Did anyone challenge the State leadership this last convention? Nope. How about 2002? No again. It seems like you want to underplay the very things you should be doing at your union meetings. Questioning your leadership is your right as a member. If you were able to change peoples opinions then more power to you. Our Local has some serious questions about the plan set forth by the AFFI PAC. I am not entirely comfortable with that myself. We DO have a democracy in the IAFF not enjoyed by many other unions. You also have a right to NOT be a member and if someone feels that strongly, they should wear their "scab label" proudly".
    IAFF-IACOJ PROUD

  15. #75
    the 4-1-4 Jasper 45's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    ...A great place, on a Great Lake
    Posts
    2,783

    Default

    Iraq was our first war of aggression? What about Germany in 1941, Japan attacked us prior to their forming an alliance with Germany. What about Korea, they never attacked us. 55,000 members of our armed forces died there. That is around 18,000 per year. How about Vietnam? That's right, that was never a "war". That "coflict" killed around 58,000 service men and women.I do forget though; the day in which north vietnam attacked us. That's right, they never did.I have seen mentioned a number of times the Bosnian deal. Just FYI, mr. clinton did that without french or un support/consent. What's my point? There is alot of finger pointing going in both directions here. Partisan politics need to be cast aside, and we need to deal with the crisis at hand.By the way, I am an 11 year IAFF member, and the department I work for is a "closed" shop. That means I don't have a choice on whether or not I can be a member of the union; because of that fact I choose to be active in it's political process. That is the only option I have. It is also the only way I can change what I don't like. I understand why the IAFF supports the candidate they do, but I still get to vote my ideology.

  16. #76
    Forum Member scfire86's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    HB
    Posts
    10,126

    Default

    Originally posted by jasper45
    By the way, I am an 11 year IAFF member, and the department I work for is a "closed" shop. That means I don't have a choice on whether or not I can be a member of the union; because of that fact I choose to be active in it's political process. That is the only option I have. It is also the only way I can change what I don't like. I understand why the IAFF supports the candidate they do, but I still get to vote my ideology.
    While I believe you and I would have different perspectives on all those you mention, I respect your opinions, and your actions.

    I am a 12 yr IAFF member. And I have the same belief you do as well. I vote my ideology and not necessarily the party line.

    I also admire your sense of committment because I do not believe in 'closed' shops.

  17. #77
    FIREMAN 1st GRADE E40FDNYL35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    Malingering
    Posts
    3,640

    Default

    Nail200 you never answered my questions ...

    Are you a IAFF member and how long?
    Are you active in your local?
    Do you pay into a PAC?
    ALL GAVE SOME BUT SOME GAVE ALL
    NEVER FORGET 9-11-01
    343
    CAPT. Frank Callahan Ladder 35 *
    LT. John Ginley Engine 40
    FF. Bruce Gary Engine 40
    FF. Jimmy Giberson Ladder 35
    FF. Michael Otten Ladder 35 *
    FF. Steve Mercado Engine 40 *
    FF. Kevin Bracken Engine 40 *
    FF. Vincent Morello Ladder 35
    FF. Michael Roberts Ladder 35 *
    FF. Michael Lynch Engine 40
    FF. Michael Dauria Engine 40

    Charleston 9
    "If my job was easy a cop would be doing it."
    *******************CLICK HERE*****************

  18. #78
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    608

    Default Socialist leadership

    It doesn't take long to wrack up some replies to a post around here. I'm glad we're having such a good conversation about all this.
    I don't have time to reply to all the points but I'll hit a couple.

    Yes I did serve from 85-93. Infantry and Mil. Intel. I served during the first Gulf War. I did go to the recruiters office shortly after we kicked this thing off. They say I'm too old.
    I'll do my part here at home. WHEN I REFER TO WE, I'm refering to us as Americans. I know it's nuieve but I kinda feel we're in this thing together. I understand there are Americans that would rather see the troops come home as falures rather than dead. Speaking as an old soldier I'd rather die and have victory. You guys are mimicking the hollywood crowd of the sixties. Bob Hope was denegrated and frowned upon for supporting the troops. When asked why he supported them he'd say, "Because I want them to Win." IF YOU DON'T SUPPORT THE MISSION YOU DON'T SUPPORT THE TROOPS!!!!!!!!!!

    This would be a good place for you to learn the end game of your leadership. He's held in high regard in this article along with some of your buddies in government.

    "Many Democratic Socialists are also members of the Democratic Party. Until recent years, the main aim of DSA was to convert the Democratic Party into a social democratic organization. However, since the Democratic Party has been dominated by more centrist individuals such as Bill Clinton and Al Gore, many DSA members are trying to move the party away from this goal. Three DSA members are currently in the United States Congress: Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Danny Davis (D-IL), and Major Owens (D-NY). Ron Dellums (D-CA), who retired from the Congress in 1997, and the current president of the AFL-CIO, John Sweeney are also DSA members." Taken from the site below.

    http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/en...f_america.html

    Here you can read about your leader talking about starting the Socialist Labor Party. This article is in the Militant, a radical socialist group. Look towards the bottom of the page Sweeny. You do know that John Sweeny is the president of the AFL CIO and that Harold Schaitberger is right there with him.

    http://www.themilitant.com/1996/6027/6027_21.html
    Last edited by Nail200; 06-27-2004 at 08:22 PM.

  19. #79
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    608

    Default E40 You're not reading!

    I did answer your question

    Local 975
    10 years
    Local PAC contributer

    Quit because I won't support the National.

    I believe we have some of the guys at your firehouse supporting the President.
    Last edited by Nail200; 06-27-2004 at 10:32 PM.

  20. #80
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    10

    Default Union Membership

    I'll answer the question about being an IAFF member.

    I "WAS" an IAFF member for 26 1/2 years up until this past March. I quit because this supposed BROTHERHOOD has become a sham and a shill for the Democratic party, like any of the other AFL-CIO affiliates. Any of you that think the IAFF is a democracy you need to really look closer at the facts.
    Harold Schaitberger admitted in a Seattle Times interview that "we never really considered" endorsing President Bush for re-election. Why Not ??? Why not find out what the MEMBERS want ?? Why dismiss it out of hand without even seeing what the MEMBERS think ?? I'll tell you why.........Schaitberger had already promised to deliver the IAFF to the Democrats for 2004 after the 2000 election, where again, the MEMBERS were never asked whether they supported Gore. The 2002 IAFF convention was a set-up to trash the President.
    The endorsement was left to Schaitberger and his board. His excuse that the membership was "extensively polled" is a LIE, plain and simple.
    After paying dues to this organization for 26 1/2 years I wrote to the IAFF four times early this year. I had a simple request. After seeing Schaitberger at almost every turn with Kerry on the campaign trail, I asked if his salary, travel and expenses were being paid with dues money, Pac money or Kerry campaign money. I think this was a reasonable request. FOUR TIMES I wrote them..........and ZERO answers. I explained that I had been a member since 1977, and thought I was deserving of an answer. NOTHING. I wrote a fifth and sixth time........not being so diplomatic, and explaining that I would be leaving the organization if I could not get at least some kind of answer to my question. Again.....NOTHING.
    THIS, is the BROTHERHOOD of which you speak. They want only one thing from you........your dues money. They could care less what the average firefighter on the street wants or thinks. Would someone explain to me how Harold Schaitberger is worth a 211K plus salary, not including benefits and expenses ?? So I quit to take from them the only thing they wanted in the first place........my money.

    RRK

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts