Changing populations and 'AIMSOG'

We have had three terrible, tragic shootings in the past week. On Friday 13, 21 people were shot in a series of related events following an NBA playoff game where the home team lost to the Boston Celtics. Fortunately, no one was killed, and 11 people have been arrested in connection with what is presumed to be gang violence.

Another shooting took place at a Taiwanese Presbyterian Church in Laguna Woods, California. One person was killed and four were wounded by a Taiwanese man who is believed to be loyal to the People’s Republic of China. That attack was considered to be politically motivated, but the incident we hear the most about is the shooting that took place in Buffalo, New York, where a troubled young man carrying a gun inscribed with a racial epithet shot 13 people, killing ten. The perpetrator was a sad, sick, confused kid who had become engrossed in toxic Internet content and was influenced enough to plan and execute an ambush. Predictably, politicians are exploiting the tragedy for political gain, blaming everyone and everything but the shooter.

The media have described the assailant as having been a follower of “Replacement Theory,” which reporters have explained as a belief that changes taking place in the ethnic makeup of the country will ultimately bring an end to centuries of Caucasian male dominance of western business and government. That’s a theory? I thought we knew that already.

I am now learning that the “replacement theory” describes much more than shifts in demography. I did a bit of digging and discovered that followers of the theory believe changes in the makeup of our population are the result of a deliberate, worldwide conspiracy to undermine white, Christian males. It is further argued that the effort is engineered by either globalist elites or Jewish folks, depending upon one’s preferred bias. It’s a wacky theory that no responsible person would embrace, but I can’t help thinking that our puzzling approach to immigration adds fuel to the misguided fires of xenophobic theories.

Back in the 1980s, when I was beheld by party politics, I had the privilege of attending a two-day seminar presented by GOPAC, which acts as the leadership development arm of the Republican party. The speaker for both days was Newt Gingrich, who as we know went on to become Speaker of the House and remains an authoritative voice of the moderate right today.

During his talks, one topic that I recall him discussing at length was the changing complexion of the country and projections indicating that minorities, Hispanic people in particular, would one day outnumber Caucasians. Rather than decry it as something to be feared, Gingrich, an admitted, out-of-the-closet white Christian Republican, saw immigration as a vital component of the American experience and an opportunity for national growth. Gingrich encouraged all of us to reach out and embrace minority communities and make them welcome in our country, as well as the party.

It’s one of many instances where my first-hand experience simply doesn’t match the narrative being repeated in the press. I am told that there are racists behind every bush, but I usually don’t see or hear of them at all. I don’t know of many people who do.

A friend of mine from here in McCook assures me that a few still walk among us, and of course, there was that clown who thought it was a good idea to drive through town with a Nazi flag on his truck a couple of years ago (Hitchcock plates as I recall). People have a right under the first amendment to say weird things and wave flags, but unless that guy was just proud of his WWII memorabilia collection, I can only guess that his intentions weren’t good. When we encounter those rare instances, we have to ask ourselves, “Are these normative behaviors or just fringe actors seeking attention?”

The racial history of our country is never easily discussed, and the politically charged rhetoric that follows a setback like the one in Buffalo makes it even harder. What is important to remember is that, unlike the 1960s, no one thinks this is OK. That deserves repetition. No one thinks that this stuff is OK. The condemnation is universal and in spite of our well-publicized shortcomings, the prevailing attitude in the country is one of inclusiveness.

In spite of our setbacks, we have come a long way. Some of us, influenced mostly by exposure and to some degree, education, have been free of racial biases our entire lives. Others, particularly older folks, inherited the attitudes of previous generations that can be hard to shake.

To that extent, most people my age were on the front lines of the issue back in the ‘60s and ‘70s, in at least a limited fashion. No, we didn’t all cross the Edmund Pettus Bridge with John Lewis, but I distinctly recall my mother telling my grandmother not to use the N-word around the kids. I know that’s a minor development in the grand scheme of history, but it’s a conversation that was taking place in millions of homes throughout the country.

In the end, the real transformation of our country happened at the dinner table, and in churches, and within ourselves. Inclusion is not just a belief, it’s a value, and it burns my hide when someone tells me that we have not made progress. Granted, we have a long way to go, but let’s not forget how far we have come.

On a lighter note, the Deputy Director of Naval Intelligence, Scott Bray testified before congress about UFOs, or as they are now called, UAPs (unidentified aerial phenomena) on Tuesday. UFO/UAP enthusiasts, the most devoted believers, are typically disappointed by government announcements. In their view, our Federal Government has been aware of the presence of aliens (of the outer space variety) since the Roswell incident in 1947. So-called UFOlogists have been waiting for the big reveal ever since.

In Tuesday’s hearing, there were no bombshell announcements, but they did discuss the authorization of a task force with the catchy name, “Airborne Object Identification and Management Synchronization Group,” from which they derived the acronym AOIMSG, but curiously pronounce it as “AIMSOG.” The task force, as Bray describes it, aims to “destigmatize” the report of sightings and to move from an anecdotal review process to a standardized reporting system that is more analytical in nature, and “rooted in engineering and science.”

Bray said that the task force had created a database of more than 400 sightings, and includes records of several incidents that remain unsolved. He also reported that the database included 11 alarming “near misses” with unknown, airborne objects. Bray then added something that I found particularly interesting. Throughout the testimony, he mentioned that one of the characteristics that the task force would try to detect is “signature management.” He said it several times in the hearing before I figured out that signature management is the operational term used to describe stealth technologies. The implication is that the unexplained sightings may be the work of terrestrial adversaries who have developed stealth technologies superior to ours.

As a member of the skeptical but open-minded club, I’m wondering why we haven’t been doing this all along. All people, and military pilots in particular, should be able to speak up when they see something they can’t identify without fear of professional or social consequences. The object in question may be something that can easily be explained, or it may reflect an effort of an unfriendly military to probe our defenses. In either case, a responsible military would investigate unknown flying objects as a potential national defense issue, or at least a possible hazard to commercial flights. It should not be left to the imaginations of the guys with the tin foil hats.

As I peck away at these two dissimilar topics: racial violence and UFOs, a hypothetical question that periodically floats around the Internet comes to mind. The question is, “When aliens fly past the earth, do you think they roll their windows up and lock the doors?” It’s meant to be humorous, but looking at the shootings, how they are politicized, and the archaic attitudes of a few, my guess is that it’s probably more like driving past a feedlot.