Disney Hosting Immigrants' Citizenship Ceremony

[Tweak766]

To the poster who is so offended by the jets, try and remember that jets don't kill people; leaders who view jets as foreign policy "tools" kill people. Just be happy that the jets are being used for a peaceful, happy event. And there is nothing like jets to add emotional base to an event.

As for the flip side. It frustrates me to no end when people say the military protects our freedoms. This is a cop out. We all must protect our freedoms; that is a citizen's duty. In the modern world our military has two functions: protect our citizens from harm and to accomplish foreign policy objectives. It is a noble thing to defend ones nation. Why must we assign the military another duty for which they are not suited?

The only real threat to our liberty lies from within. The military cannot save us from ourselves. The civil rights movement and the women's suffrage movement were not military operations. There is a constant war being waged to protect our freedoms but it is going on in courtrooms not some distant battle field.

As for the poster who claimed that history would have been different if Vietnam or Korea had strong national identities, well that is the most uneducated thing I have heard...this week. :animwink:

I appologize that this post is non-disney related but this thread has been very non-disney related.

 

[AEfx]

Because no matter what is done someone will have a problem with it. I'd prefer they not use birds in this manner, where are they going to keep these 1,000 doves in the FL heat all couped up before being released. They would have to be brought in way before the ceremony and sit there for hours in the heat before being released and that to me is just cruel.

If they were kept in air conditioning and were being freed from servitutde would it make a difference? LOL.

I understand your point, that no one will agree with everything. I just think there is a difference between finding an agreeable symbol versus using one that is an instrument of destruction are totally different things.

Then again, why do we need a symbol at all? Shouldn't these people becoming American citizens in the happiest place on earth be enough.

It's my right to disagree, and that's all I am doing. However, I have stayed in this thread to correct the assertion that somehow I am the odd one out for understanding the origins of a Jet Fighter.

People can disagree with what it means to them based on what they project upon it and their national identity - but I am absolutely correct in calling it a war machine. That is not a projection but a fact of the items design, intent, and manufacture. Someone above tried to imply that the opposite was true, and I simply feel this fact needed clarification. Now, because of what I project on it based on it's factual status as a war machine, I find it disagreeable. You may not find it such. But the origins and it's reason for existing really aren't debatable.

AEfx

 

[brainpile3000]

What if they were Called Freedom Jets instead of Fighter Jets?

 

[mkt]

What if they were Called Freedom Jets instead of Fighter Jets?

Then I'd hurl.. much like I hurled when the TSA Operations Center in PHL was renamed the Freedom Center, and much like I hurled when I heard a family at WDW order Freedom Fries.

How can something be called 'Freedom' when our Freedoms as Americans are being lesseded day by day.

 

[brainpile3000]

Then I'd hurl.. much like I hurled when the TSA Operations Center in PHL was renamed the Freedom Center, and much like I hurled when I heard a family at WDW order Freedom Fries.

How can something be called 'Freedom' when our Freedoms as Americans are being lesseded day by day.

Amen to that!

 

[ReDisniey E-Dew]

Can you please then tell me why Jet Fighters were invented, and what purpose they serve other than war and the entertainment...er, excuse me, "inspiration" in shows like this?

They serve in defending the nation from aerial attacks.

I just did a cursory look-up of the term, and this was the first thing I found :

"A fighter aircraft is a military aircraft designed primarily for attacking other aircraft..."

The designers assigned the value to it of a war machine. THAT WAS WHY IT WAS INVENTED. If it was invented for air shows and peace rallies they wouldn't put big guns on them, would they?

No where in the quote you provided does it say "war machine." You continue to assign that value to it. You also continue to ignore the defense aspect of jets.

So I'm sorry, but you are just wrong, even if you purport to speak for the Walt Disney Company. In fact, you are stating the opposite of the truth - the truth is, some people HAVE ASSIGNED, as you say, patriotic beliefs to these machines. I didn't assign the status of war symbol to Jet Fighters (the designers of the machine did that for me), and arguing otherwise just goes against all logic. Now, as you say, some people have assigned other beliefs around them, but the fact remains they were invented to be used in war, and they primarily are.

The jets are invented not only to be used in war, but also to be used in preventing wars. You remain the only person who refers to the jets as a "war symbol" in this thread. However, this is semantics - the reason for the display remains an inspirational display of the precision and skill of these pilots who work hard to protect the nation.

Jet Fighters exist to fight in wars. Hence they are a war machine. So yes, that is a fact, sir - war or entertainment, that's the purpose. Anything "patriotic" is assigned by people. It is there RIGHT to do so, but the fact of what a Jet Fighter mechanically is does not change no matter how you wish to spin it.

The only person spinning anything is you when you exclude the other viable uses of jets. Fighting in wars is only one aspect of the jets - they also are used for defense. By your logic, we should immediately remove any Hummers from the WDW properties since they too are used in war (and thus, by your faulty logic, they must be "war symbols").

This ceremony has nothing to do with the military, and if I'm going to be very honest (why stop now) I actually find it sad that these people will be welcomed to this country with violent machines, no matter how "pretty" they may be when they do their dare-devil acts.

There will be no "dare-devil acts." The military is a major part of the United States, and the United States is the entity to which these people are receiving citizenship. It is appropriate for the military to be included in ceremonies.

 

[AEfx]

They serve in defending the nation from aerial attacks.

Which are the result of...acts of war against us. So it's a tool of war still. I never said one word about them being used defensively or offensively. I mentioned that there are Fighter Jets half-way around the world right now fighting, but I never made any political statements of my thinking that positive or negative. I find war in general distasteful, justifiable or not, but that is ABSOLUTELY besides the point.

Fighter Jets are machines, they were designed and intended to be used in war. Hence "war machine", just like a fork is a "eating utensil". It can be used for "good", or "bad", but would you argue with someone who said a spoon wasn't an instrument of eating because some people choose to entertain themselves by balancing one on their nose?

I have no problem with Jet Fighters being in the world. I do have a problem with them AT the World. That doesn't change their right to be there, or anything else - but I refuse to let anyone get by making snarky comments like I just don't "get it" when I know what a Fighter Jet is designed and used for - war, and entertainment (or as you call it, "inspiration") and for me simply expressing how VERY VERY DISTURBING that I find the thought of that beautiful castle framed with machines that were invented to shoot down other machines in violence. To some people that is comforting, to me that is not.

And yes, if you took military Hummers with cammo and big guns hanging off and stuck those in front of the castle, I would be offended as well. The design of that vehicle has crossed into the consumer market because it HAD OTHER USES. Are the ones in use at WDW outfitted with guns and such? A Fighter Jet has no other use other than to Fight and entertain people at shows. People don't take Fighter Jets as transportation. Fighter Jets don't cure diseases, or have any other purpose but to be used in times of war and attack (prevention or cause).

No where in the quote you provided does it say "war machine." You continue to assign that value to it. You also continue to ignore the defense aspect of jets.

I don't ignore their defense at all, now it's you projecting things on me. It is irrelevant if the object is used in defense or offense, it is used in violent acts that pertain to war. Hence war machine. I did not say "war creator", but there is no denying that it is an instrument of war no matter which side it is on (defense or offense).

You are missing the entire point here. I am all for defending this country, and you seem to be projecting things on me that I am not arguing at all. You are taking logical classifications of an items use and assigning political beliefs to it that are irrelevant.

Whichever side of a war you are on, the instruments used are still war machines.

The only person spinning anything is you when you exclude the other viable uses of jets. Fighting in wars is only one aspect of the jets - they also are used for defense.

The only one with faulty logic is you, my friend. My logic follows perfectly. I have not excluded defense at all. In fact, I have made no mention of any such thing either way. If we are defending our selves from something, wouldn't that be...a war? Or an attack? Hence...it is a symbol of WAR. A topic I do not feel appropriate to be associated with Cinderella Castle. In MY view. You don't need to share it.

It is just simple fact what a Jet Fighter is, and I'm sorry you aren't objective enough to see that. It may make you...er, I'm sorry, you are representing Disney's views, right...it may make the Disney company feel patriotic, but it makes me sad. That's what's called opinion. What is not opinion is that I am absolutely correct in calling Jet Fighters instruments of war, no matter if you believe war to be positive or negative, or no matter if they are used in defensively or offensively. It's still a device who's primary intent is war.

As a side note, I am shocked that as a self-appointed representative of the Walt Disney Company you are continuing to give my opinions such GREAT attention and have time to come back for further rebuttals. I had no idea the Walt Disney Company had such strong feelings about this matter. You claim in other threads you are so busy you can't reply to them so I find it very flattering that you have spent all this time in an attempt to present the official standing of the Walt Disney Company on so many issues.

I truly am flattered...even though you are now making comments about things I never implied or said.

AEfx

 

[CBOMB]

I think it's wonderful...everything except the fighter jets. I can't think of anything more crass and obscene than seeing weapons of war flying around the Castle. The thought of it truly offends me.

Guess I'll be writing a letter, LOL.

AEfx

just thinking that myself...

I prefer to think of them as instruments used to protect the peace, and defend our freedoms.

How about those jets being symbolic of the men and women who defend our rights and freedoms. These are the same freedoms and rights that the immigrants will be granted during the citizenship ceremony. I like knowing that there are men and women braver and more courageous than I am for they defend what I take for granted everyday.

Those jets are not only weapons of war, they are symbols of passion, courage, and dedication to stand up and defend what you believe in... after all that is exactly what the pilots behind the controls are doing.

The only reason there is a Cinderella Castle to begin with is because there are people willing to risk their lives to defend those rights for us all...

How did these documents actually become relevant though? When they were first written there was no real meaning to them, anyone can declare something but it took a lot more than written words to give true meaning to the documents you posted.

If it wasn't for those who defend the Constitution how relevant would those written words be today? I feel they would nothing more than some ink and paper whose meanings were lost in time.

Bravo, Bravo

 

[RougeDDD]

Wasn't a castle's purpose for war?? I guess you should write another letter to take the castle out of the MK.

 

[DCOChas]

?

I do speak on behalf of the Walt Disney Company when I reiterate the official policy that we are proud to include the Air Force pilots in an aerial demonstration for our nationalization ceremony. You may quote me as an official representative of the Walt Disney Company, but since I won't be giving you any personal information whatsoever, it won't mean much when you include it in your letter. You will receive a very similar response, however, since this is our company policy in regards to the aerial demonstration by the United States Air Force.

It is understood that not everyone views every action in various ceremonies as being appropriate / positive / necessary. While kind input is always appreciated, let's not forget either that the main focus for the celebration will not be the jets, but will be the men and women who have worked very hard to earn their American citizenship.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Just curious, Who exactly are you that you can officially respond for the company?

 

[brainpile3000]

Wasn't a castle's purpose for war?? I guess you should write another letter to take the castle out of the MK.

hahahahaha :sohappy:

 

[unkadug]

I do speak on behalf of the Walt Disney Company when I reiterate the official policy that we are proud to include the Air Force pilots in an aerial demonstration for our nationalization ceremony. You may quote me as an official representative of the Walt Disney Company, but since I won't be giving you any personal information whatsoever, it won't mean much when you include it in your letter. You will receive a very similar response, however, since this is our company policy in regards to the aerial demonstration by the United States Air Force.

It is understood that not everyone views every action in various ceremonies as being appropriate / positive / necessary. While kind input is always appreciated, let's not forget either that the main focus for the celebration will not be the jets, but will be the men and women who have worked very hard to earn their American citizenship.

Just curious, Who exactly are you that you can officially respond for the company?

If you go and read his past posts you would get a hint :animwink:

 

[Iakona]

So I'm sorry, but you are just wrong, even if you purport to speak for the Walt Disney Company. In fact, you are stating the opposite of the truth - the truth is, some people HAVE ASSIGNED, as you say, patriotic beliefs to these machines. I didn't assign the status of war symbol to Jet Fighters (the designers of the machine did that for me), and arguing otherwise just goes against all logic. Now, as you say, some people have assigned other beliefs around them, but the fact remains they were invented to be used in war, and they primarily are.

The fact remains that these "machines" have a dual image. Many Americans (myself included) view them as more than just a war machine. However, for the sake of discussion let's go with your logic; Fighter Jets were invented for war and therefore in your opinion do not belong in WDW.
Here is a brief list of other "violent" items that need to go:

1. Fireworks - they explode.
2. Representations of the President of the United States (or should I say Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces)
3. Woody (he carries a gun)
4. POTC - Pirates pillaged and looted and fought.
5. The Castle (as already mentioned -invented as a military asset)
6. Buzz Light Year (get rid of those ray guns)
7. Indiana Jones (gun and whip)
8. LMA (too much gunplay and exploding)
9. Backstage tour (scene from Pearl Harbor with a war ship)
10. Star Tours (future Jet Fighters)
11. The Green Army Men in the MGM Parade.
12. No more sword fighting for Peter Pan and Captain Hook
13. Remove the sword in the stone (at least they stopped the ceremony!)
14. End the flag ceremony with the veterans (veterans by definition

I guess my point is that everything has more than one meaning. This ceremony is not only a happy day for these new citizens, but a solemn day where they take an oath to defend this country and our military is a part of that. In addition, the military and defense of America is a part of our culture: a part that Disney has always recognized and honored in the parks. All you have to do is look at the Hall of presidents or The American Adventure to see evidence of this.

Feel free to write your letter, but I hope a lot more write to say how proud we are of Disney for continuing to honor America, our new citizens and our military.

This cerimony has nothing to do with the military, and if I'm going to be very honest (why stop now) I actually find it sad that these people will be welcomed to this country with violent machines, no matter how "pretty" they may be when they do their dare-devil acts.
AEfx

Sorry, but your are wrong here. Taking the oath of citizenship is intrinsically related to our military.
From the oath:
"that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic"
"that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law;"

It has to due with the duty they have to their new country and those Fighter Jets are a representation of that promise.

 

[jmvd20]

Don't they sell toy swords and guns near PotC as well?

Also I'm not sure if they are still there but my brother bought a set of samurai swords from the Japanese pavillion many years ago.

 

[iheartdisney91]

Don't they sell toy swords and guns near PotC as well?

Also I'm not sure if they are still there but my brother bought a set of samurai swords from the Japanese pavillion many years ago.

i saw alot of guns and swords all over the resort!

 

[WDWGuide]

hahahahaha :sohappy:

A castle is an aristocratic residence that may or may not be fortified for defense. Many are not, especially more recent ones. Interestingly, many languages have two (or more) words for castles, distinguishing them based on their role in warfare.

I any case, that hardly has any bearing on the discussion

 

[WDWGuide]

Don't they sell toy swords and guns near PotC as well?

Also I'm not sure if they are still there but my brother bought a set of samurai swords from the Japanese pavillion many years ago.

Are they utilizing these products in the ceremony? If not, this doesn't have any bearing to the discussion, which centered on the appropriateness of jet overflights for non-military events, not whether or not any reference to potentially lethal objects should be barred from Walt Disney World.

 

[AEfx]

Here is a brief list of other "violent" items that need to go:

1. Fireworks - they explode.
2. Representations of the President of the United States (or should I say Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces)
3. Woody (he carries a gun)
4. POTC - Pirates pillaged and looted and fought.
5. The Castle (as already mentioned -invented as a military asset)
6. Buzz Light Year (get rid of those ray guns)
7. Indiana Jones (gun and whip)
8. LMA (too much gunplay and exploding)
9. Backstage tour (scene from Pearl Harbor with a war ship)
10. Star Tours (future Jet Fighters)
11. The Green Army Men in the MGM Parade.
12. No more sword fighting for Peter Pan and Captain Hook
13. Remove the sword in the stone (at least they stopped the ceremony!)
14. End the flag ceremony with the veterans (veterans by definition

I really hope you didn't spend very much time making that list (though it seems you did), because it's completely irrelevant.

No where did I say "ban all violent" anything from WDW. I really shouldn't be dignifying you with a reply since you clearly did not read all of my postings in this thread, or you would know that it is the juxtaposition of the image and specific iconography of Cinderella Castle and it's fairy tale beauty combined with Jet Fighter machines that I have been talking about in this thread. Not "violent imagery should be banned from all Disney parks", or any such nonsense.

As I told our self-appointed Walt Disney Company representative when he mentioned Hummers and their military use, and their consumer/commerical use at WDW, I explained that there is a difference between an item being repurposed in another design for different use, and using his example yes, I'd be offended as well if fully outfitted Hummers with cammo and guns were parked all around the Castle. If they hung giant pistols all over Cinderella Castle I would be bothered as well, but it's appropriate for Woody, a cartoon sherrif (is that what he is, LOL?) to have a cartoon gun. (I can't believe I have to explain the difference...) A Jet Fighter has no other use than to be flown around, waiting for the time when it's used to shoot down other fighters. There is no other use (besides "entertaining" shows like this). But now I'm repeating myself, because I've already clearly explained this.

I think that's what people are missing here, and why just about every supposed "rebuttal" to my opinion has become irrelevant to discuss. That's why I put it in bold above - it is the combination of imagery in the press release that combines Cinderella Castle with Jet Fighters. It bothers me personally, what can I say. I'm not writing a letter (which you'd know if you read the entire thread before replying, I made a joke that turned serious for a moment after the initial "official" reply), but I truly welcome anyone who wishes to do so to write their opinion. I will not be at WDW on that day, and if I were I would simply choose another park to attend. I was just expressing my opinion here, on a message board.

That's really all I can say. Other people see them as something else, but I just don't find Jet Fighters appropriate when flying over Cinderella Castle. It sends shivers down my spine, and not in a good way. I am perfectly fine with other people being inspired by it, I just don't associate such things with my national identity as much as other people, I guess. No one is going to change my mind here, and I'm not going to change anyone elses. The only reason my participation in this thread was as extensive as it ended up being was because I was so flattered a member of the Walt Disney Company took time to make an official reply to me that I felt I really owed replies in kind.

So if people wish to keep making absolutely irrelevant comparisons and then patting each other on the back like they mean anything and somehow mysteriously degrade my opinion, go right ahead. I will not take the time to personally address any of them, as this is one of those things where you understand the concept of juxtaposition of iconography I am talking about, versus "I wanna ban everything violent" or you don't. Personally, it seems like people read a few lines, thought they had a clever retort, and missed the whole point here. However, the one thing I think we can all agree on is that we all are entitled to feel however we want.

And that's what freedom means to me.

(Not that freedom matters on a moderated, privately owned bulletin board, but you get the point...)

AEfx

 

[Iakona]

I really hope you didn't spend very much time making that list (though it seems you did), because it's completely irrelevant.

No where did I say "ban all violent" anything from WDW. I really shouldn't be dignifying you with a reply since you clearly did not read all of my postings in this thread, or you would know that it is the juxtaposition of the image and specific iconography of Cinderella Castle and it's fairy tale beauty combined with Jet Fighter machines that I have been talking about in this thread. Not "violent imagery should be banned from all Disney parks", or any such nonsense.

As I told our self-appointed Walt Disney Company representative when he mentioned Hummers and their military use, and their consumer/commerical use at WDW, I explained that there is a difference between an item being repurposed in another design for different use, and using his example yes, I'd be offended as well if fully outfitted Hummers with cammo and guns were parked all around the Castle. If they hung giant pistols all over Cinderella Castle I would be bothered as well, but it's appropriate for Woody, a cartoon sherrif (is that what he is, LOL?) to have a cartoon gun. (I can't believe I have to explain the difference...) A Jet Fighter has no other use than to be flown around, waiting for the time when it's used to shoot down other fighters. There is no other use (besides "entertaining" shows like this). But now I'm repeating myself, because I've already clearly explained this.

I think that's what people are missing here, and why just about every supposed "rebuttal" to my opinion has become irrelevant to discuss. That's why I put it in bold above - it is the combination of imagery in the press release that combines Cinderella Castle with Jet Fighters. It bothers me personally, what can I say. I'm not writing a letter (which you'd know if you read the entire thread before replying, I made a joke that turned serious for a moment after the initial "official" reply), but I truly welcome anyone who wishes to do so to write their opinion. I will not be at WDW on that day, and if I were I would simply choose another park to attend. I was just expressing my opinion here, on a message board.

That's really all I can say. Other people see them as something else, but I just don't find Jet Fighters appropriate when flying over Cinderella Castle. It sends shivers down my spine, and not in a good way. I am perfectly fine with other people being inspired by it, I just don't associate such things with my national identity as much as other people, I guess. No one is going to change my mind here, and I'm not going to change anyone elses. The only reason my participation in this thread was as extensive as it ended up being was because I was so flattered a member of the Walt Disney Company took time to make an official reply to me that I felt I really owed replies in kind.

So if people wish to keep making absolutely irrelevant comparisons and then patting each other on the back like they mean anything and somehow mysteriously degrade my opinion, go right ahead. I will not take the time to personally address any of them, as this is one of those things where you understand the concept of juxtaposition of iconography I am talking about, versus "I wanna ban everything violent" or you don't. Personally, it seems like people read a few lines, thought they had a clever retort, and missed the whole point here. However, the one thing I think we can all agree on is that we all are entitled to feel however we want.

And that's what freedom means to me.

(Not that freedom matters on a moderated, privately owned bulletin board, but you get the point...)

AEfx

It is very easy to dismiss my (and other) points as irrelevant because in doing so you isolate yours as the only opinion on Jet Fighters that is relevant. However, my examples highlight how many different things could have such dual meanings (and no I didn't spend much time on that list, but thanks for your concern for my time management). No where did I degrade, minimize or assert that your opinion was wrong or invalid.

You focused solely on the list (done partially tongue in cheek, see the Star Wars entry) and ignored the rest of my post.

I guess my point is that everything has more than one meaning. This ceremony is not only a happy day for these new citizens, but a solemn day where they take an oath to defend this country and our military is a part of that. In addition, the military and defense of America is a part of our culture: a part that Disney has always recognized and honored in the parks. All you have to do is look at the Hall of presidents or The American Adventure to see evidence of this.

and in relation to your multiple statements that the ceremony and Jets have nothing to do with each other (since you made the statements I would guess these lines are relevant):

Taking the oath of citizenship is intrinsically related to our military.
From the oath:
"that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic"
"that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by law;"

It has to due with the duty they have to their new country and those Fighter Jets are a representation of that promise.

I have no desire to change your mind. Just as you will not convince me that releasing 1,000 doves to ________ on everyone is a good idea:veryconfu . The doves do nothing for me. I believe there is plenty of room for both opinions and I do ot agree with anyone that would say there is no place for your beliefs or that your opinions somehow represent what is wrong with America. In fact, the multiple opinions expressed are what is right with America.

 

[RougeDDD]

I'm sorry but I did read everything you posted. I knew you weren't writing a letter, but like you said it not easy to detect sarcasm/joking in a forum.
Even though I was joking, just like a fighter jet, a castle was designed for defense thus an object of the war machine ( I didn't assigned this the inventors did).
No matter how you dress it up and now it is viewed as entertainment.Just like you said for the jets Why was it invented?
Just like you can say an unloaded jet (being used for entertainment) is the same as a jet killing elsewhere in the world why can't someone else make the link between the castle and the terror it rained down on a lower class of society?
Nobody is trying to degrade your position, I for one admire you standing up for your position. In a joking way, I just wanted to point out the irony of a weapon of war flying over an object of war. Have a happy 4th of July.:wave::wave:

WDWGuide: how does it not have bearing on the discussion?
It is in his first post not: "which centered on the appropriateness of jet overflights for non-military events" also it's funny you find a definition for castle that suits your purpose. They were invented for one purpose only.

That being said, I totally agree with your "addiction" views, but I guess that really has no bearing.:lol: