search results matching tag: citizenship

» channel: motorsports

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (42)     Sift Talk (4)     Blogs (3)     Comments (341)   

Undocumented Immigrant Who Works in a Trump Hotel Speaks Out

artician says...

I don't think they're all here illegally any more. They probably got their citizenship sometime in the last decade that they've been here. I don't think he would have spoken out if his entire family risked being deported, but I'm pretty certain he'll lose his job there. From what it sounds like though, he's offering that up in exchange for spreading his message, so much respect for him.
He said he had two other jobs anyways. Good for him, and for anyone who speaks out against overwhelming ignorance.

bareboards2 said:

Well, frick. Now I am worried about him and his entire family. They are all here illegally, is that what he said? He is undocumented?

I applaud his bravery. I hope he doesn't pay a huge price for it.

Frick.

The Fifth Estate: The Silence of the Labs

Bruti79 says...

Yeah, he's been doing this for a while. If you have a majority government, you can pretty much do anything you want. Similar to how a super majority works in the US, except there's not a lot you can do to delay or stop it.

He just passed two new bills C-51 and C-24 which are "anti terror" bills. 51 pretty much gives the gov't the ability to spy on citizens and gives our intelligence service the powers of the police. They can arrest anyone, and not have a whole lot of evidence or reason to. The other, C-24, has created a two tier citizenship. First class citizens can never have your citizenship stripped, while second class citizens can.

What makes you a second class citizen? Not being born in Canada, being a dual citizen anywhere, or being eligible for being a dual citizen anywhere makes it so you can have your citizenship taken away. For example, my mom was born in Denmark, I am still eligible for citizenship there, ergo, I am now a second class citizen. =)

It's pretty fucked, most conservatives are opposing both bills along with the rest of the damn country. =\

To A Childs Delight, George Lucas Says Jedis Can Get Married

newtboy says...

Jedi aren't allowed to fall in love...so married is kind of out of the question. EDIT: Unless we're talking loveless marriage, like one of convenience or to gain citizenship for someone, that might be acceptable. ;-)
Loving/putting a single individual over everything else is a path to the dark side.

eric3579 said:

Are Jedis not allowed to get married or something?

People from Mexico try Taco Bell for the first time

poolcleaner says...

Allerto's off of Brookhurst. That's the shiiiiiit. Best American Mexican food made by American Mexicans, which unless you're dumb and white, is all Mexicans with citizenship. Yer American now make us think you're making us Mexican food. We. Don't. Care. We are a grey race of capitalist alphas. Even the women. We'll fucking kill you, man. For a stick of dorittos flavoured gum.

Sen. Ted Cruz at Liberty University announces his candidacy

bobknight33 says...

I don't know if I ever said he was born in Kenya. I don't know. He ( his parents) did list him as being Kenyan citizenship on some school for or such.
His grandmother or great grandmother indicated he was born in Kenya-- So there is that.

I did say that the birth certificate he posted as a pdf did indeed look odd- When opening it in illustrator.

If you were to get your Birth Certificate copy they would give it to you in person or mail you a copy. If you were to "post" it as the White House did why would you not scan to JPEG or PNG?


They posted PDF. But would that truly produce 13 layers and look that way? We all scanned or OCR a document - you end up with odd characters and broken sentences but not what was posted by the White House..

Odd Very Odd---- never resolved- It ran for 1 week and Bin Laden was taken out and wiped this issue off the radar.

newtboy said:

So...you're on the left now?

OK, Obama never had Kenyan citizenship, but you said his being born there (which didn't happen) would have disqualified him from being president....why not Canada? It's still not the USA. I'm just looking for consistency in the insanity.

Sen. Ted Cruz at Liberty University announces his candidacy

newtboy jokingly says...

So...you're on the left now?

OK, Obama never had Kenyan citizenship, but you said his being born there (which didn't happen) would have disqualified him from being president....why not Canada? It's still not the USA. I'm just looking for consistency in the insanity.

bobknight33 said:

So say the Left.

Actually he was both but renounced the Canadian .

Sen. Ted Cruz at Liberty University announces his candidacy

newtboy says...

Um....yeah....but then why didn't that matter to them when the idiots that support Cruz thought Obama might have been born under nearly identical circumstances? Somehow Obama being born outside the US disqualified him from being president (according to Cruz's followers), but actually being born in another country and having foreign citizenship is a non-issue for Cruz?
Hmmm....lets see...what else is different about the Obama case that makes him seem less 'Mer'can to them? Hmmmm. I just can't put my finger on it.

ChaosEngine said:

@newtboy, apparently he squeaks in on a technicalit
y.

Between being Canadian and being an idiot, you would hope it's the idiot part that disqualifies him. That, and he stole his campaign logo from Al Jazeera

Sen. Ted Cruz at Liberty University announces his candidacy

newtboy says...

Hilarious!!!
Love the Rand Paul shirts all through the crowd that they had to avoid with his camera like the plague, the 'when will this be over' look on most of their faces, the 'I'm going to ask you to break a rule' from the law and order candidate, the 'just text your information to my secret info-grab computer for my later use because I'm the transparency and privacy candidate', the insinuation that a president can erase legislation day one with the swipe of a pen (but Obama can't make any executive decisions including treaties without congress' pre-aproval or he's "over-reaching his authority and abusing executive powers"), the 'imagine' speech from someone with an insanely limited imagination, and the attempt at being president by this Canadian!

Show me the birth certificate!!! If being born in Kenya to a non-citizen father would have made a whit of legal difference for Obama, then actually being born in Canada as a naturalized Canadian to a Cuban father should disqualify him...explain how that's not true please. ;-)

For any red staters...keep in mind that this smarmy socialist Canadian (he just denounced his Canadian citizenship-and trying to tell people they must fully support another individual financially and with their bodies (forced continued pregnancies) is insanely super socialist) for'nur is trying to infiltrate our gubmn't...HE'S TAKIN ER JERBS!

Had to upvote for the hilarity of his 'announcement'...not as support for him.

Julia Nunes - California (Cast Iron Soul)

Shootout in Parliament Building

bcglorf says...

In the past tense, I'd agree but not today. For starters, First Nation people have 100% full Canadian citizenship and the only distinctions made based on a persons treaty status compared to a non-treaty neighbour in any Canadian city is additional rights and benefits that are potentially available to the treaty person. That is to say, First Nations people have all the full rights of everyone else in Canada, and in some situations bonuses as well.

That said, living conditions on Native Reserves in Canada are abysmal. The municipality I live in is just vastly better off than the nearby native reserves. Better access to education, policing, fire protection and health care. If that weren't bad enough, average family incomes in my municipality more than double those of neighbouring native reserve communities.

That abysmal divide in conditions though is NOT an example of we as Canadians treating First Nations terribly. If you take per capita taxes collected from community and take away per capita government dollars put back in, my community still gives more to the government than it gets back. The neighbouring reserves with far worse conditions receive far more money from the government than they pay it back. Systemically, the Canadian government is economically favouring the neighbouring reserves.

That begs the question why are conditions there so abysmal, and I can't claim to fully understand it myself. The components I DO know are at work though are many:
1.Reserves are NOT fit into government the same way as municipalities are. While my municipality is under Provincial jurisdiction, reserves are parallel with the provinces and fall directly under the federal government. The idea is reserves deserve greater autonomy to respect First Nations unique status and treaty obligations. In practice though, IMO they lose out. My community has education and health care handled by the province, which great benefits those kind of items. Reserves are responsible for those things on their own.
2. Reserves create segregation. The idea is again respecting treaty agreements and protecting First Nations culture from being overwhelmed and assimilated. In practice, that isolation is crippling the communities rather than helping them.
3. Historic abuses against previous generations of First Nations people at the hands of government get passed down to the next generation. This is amplified by the segregation on reserves.
4. Absence of accountability. The same transparency rules that apply to my municipality and all other municipalities nation wide do not apply on reserves. If my mayor spends millions of city dollars paying him or his family to do almost nothing it is more traceable than if a chief on a reserve did the same thing. Again, the idea is provide greater autonomy and not 'force' white beuracracy on First Nations, but the effect is to make it harder for them to hold their own leaders to account.

That's hardly a comprehensive list, but I think it highlights a lot of ways in which the current generation of Canadians running the country are very conscience of treating First Nations well and just failing at it through mutual mistakes. Any efforts to convert the failed reserve systems to municipality status will by fought the most by the very people living in the failed reserves. I wish knew how to move things forward to a better place, but the root is nothing as simple as 'treat First Nations better'.

Bruti79 said:

Internationally, not as much, but man we treat our First Nation peoples like they were dirt. =(

Scotland's independence -- yea or nay? (User Poll by kulpims)

ChaosEngine says...

Yes, monarchies are inherently oppressive. They're an archaic throwback and an embarrassment to any country that still clings to them.

For the record I am a citizen of the Republic of Ireland and a permanent resident of New Zealand. I'm a member of the NZ Republic movement. I am not a subject of the crown, and the requirement to swear allegiance to the Queen is the one thing that is stopping me getting my NZ citizenship (which I have long since qualified for).

This is a point of principle and I would support any movement in any country to remove the monarch as head of state, even if they are only a figure head.

Now, all that said, what does that have to do with my approval for Norway's oil industry, NZs gun laws or socialised healthcare in pretty much the entire developed world?

You do realise that one can approve of one aspect of something while simultaneously disliking another aspect of the same thing? I think fast cars are cool, but I don't like their environment impact. I love beer, but I know that it's full of calories, and so on.

Anyway how would secession work in this case? There's no single geographical region to secede. Unless by secession you mean that the citizens of a country should have the right to determine how their country is run, in which case I wholeheartedly agree.

blankfist said:

So Monarchies are oppressive? Hmmm. Interesting. Got it.

But doesn't Norway also have a Monarchy? And in this comment, didn't you extoll the values of their nationalized and socialized industries? Would you not then also give a pass to Norway's people who might reject that form of government and feel the need to secede? Same for Denmark, Switzerland, New Zealand, Australia, Sweden, the UK, and most of the civilized Western world for that matter?

Enter Pyongyang

RedSky says...

I also found it interesting they highlighted the Ryugyong Hotel (the huge pyramid building). It's been under construction for 25 years, largely halted since the Soviet Union collapsed and the slush fund train ended. While the exterior is done according to wikipedia, the interior is not and it's always be unoccupied.

China's metropolises feed a similar misconception. They are similarly impressive that it's easy to forget that the country as a whole is still very poor. China's GDP per capita is half of Brazil, a quarter of South Korea and a tenth that of the US.

While China is obviously not as repressive as NK, the hukou dual citizenship system has a similar effect of segregation rural and urban dwellers. While rural workers may be able to move to work in the cities, they will enjoy none of the social benefits and protections that local citizens do. This has a lot to do with China's disparity of income and accretion of wealth to the large cities.

dannym3141 said:

Sadly yes, that's where all the favourables live. If you win the genetic lottery in NK, you get to eat and be comfortable. The fact that it's so developed is the reason why the rest of the country is left to rot; it's the only part that gets any attention, the only part anyone would let you see.

Cliven Bundy Shares Some Peculiar Views

newtboy says...

Once again you personally insult, and ignore most of the facts in order to further your insanity. I'll see your 'child' and raise you to infant.
FAIL
I only read your post because someone else replied quoting you (and I can't fathom why it showed your comment even then, it should have been hidden since you're ignored...@lucky760, what happened?)
You can't parrot what you haven't heard said, and no one else is pointing out that you can't be a patriot if you don't believe in the Fed, which unites the states....at least no one I've heard.
Your misconception based on intentionally misleading, 1/4 true, right wing media BS is obvious...this guy is a violent felon who publicly threatened to use violent force (against law enforcement that was not yet there in force OR heavily armed) to enforce his "right" to continue to break the law, no question, as are all those that brandish weapons at officers of the law, federal or not. It's the law that you can't do that to people not attacking you or breaking into your property (and NEVER to law officials) ...and no one attacked the cowards hiding behind their wall of women and children OR the Bundys, they simply confiscated illegally grazing cattle on FEDERAL land, belonging to all of us.
EDIT: and you ignore that most of these people don't consider themselves citizens, as they don't believe in the fed...without which there is no U in USA. They are citizens of their own states (in their own minds), considering themselves 'sovereign citizens', even though most don't have the balls to actually renounce their citizenship in the USA.
Non- payment of well known, legal state and federal fees for use of state and federal property, and non-payment of taxes are NOT civil matters, they are criminal, as is failure to appear. Many of his supporters guarding the Bundy's from prosecution (hindering prosecution is a felony too) are the same ones that support the fed seizing property of those caught with a joint, so it's not about state rights or 'freedom', it's about standing with idiots that hate what you hate, namely "the negro" (one in particular).

chingalera said:

Marching in lock-step to your demise, child. Your comments on this matter read like a dutiful slave to your own oblivion.

One of the things no one has even cared to mention about this event is that the federal government, enforcing a civil affair (non-payment of grazing fees) sent armed swat teams to enforce the matter. The citizens of the United States who chose to show up in support of Bundy (a dumb-ass for the shit he's said of late, that the media has completely used to distract the putties with racism being an opportunistic side-issue in this entire debacle), who did so with guns as well-were within their rights to do so, breaking no laws. For this, they are called all manner of names and labeled as agitants, crazies,etc., by people without a clue as to how they are being ass-fucked.

The media, an arm of the state's machine, focuses upon this and continually pumps their brand of newsspeak, loaded language (like newtboy here repeats and foments to his own audience of parrots), and in doing so guides the story in a direction that further ignores facts while blatantly promoting the further erosion of individual rights under the constitution in favor of bigger, stronger, more restrictive government.

We are going to see more and more of this in the coming decade, as well as more people who favor the cozy protection of government control over individual responsibilities and accountability.

Romancing the Drone or "Aerial Citizen Reduction Program"

Januari says...

This is such a strange debate to me... So if this guy had walked into an embassy and renounced his citizenship... then went off to sing kumbaya with al qaeda or the taliban or whom ever. Problem solved... light him up!...

Oakland CA Is So Scary Even Cops Want Nothing To Do With It

newtboy says...

If you change your citizenship to wherever you move they can't tax you anymore...why can't 'free marketers' buy a whole country and try it out fo realsies?
The country and state are owned by us all, we are represented by our government (no matter how poorly). Did school not teach you how that's set up? It should have.
You are saying it SHOULD be all private, which would make it the same thing with no recourse to move out of it, just to different controllers, the new one's not even elected or replaceable. Bad move.
Thank you, the implication that I'm unworthy of discussion with, then continued discussion was at best, odd.
I say the present government sucks, and sucks worse in some places than others. I'm saying we can make it better if we elect better reps, but never perfect for everyone, just not possible. I agree that there's too much 'governing' with far too little result, but I disagree that the answer is to stop governing.
I am surrounded by both cool people and losers, but we're spread out enough that it's easier to ignore the losers from here. I got lucky.
I do, I vote. That's how it's set up to be done, if people were more thoughtful, it would work better.
I only pointed out my situation because you had apparently decided I'm a worthless taker, and that's a mistaken assumption (but an understandable one, I'm odd).
Are you saying I said that 'who cares what you think'? because I never meant to. If you are saying that yourself, that's a problem for rational discussion.
I have little love for the state, but I do see a need for some actual 'higher power' (religious one's don't cut it) to further society in less harmful directions.
If you feel a discussion is me forcing beliefs on you, that's just sad to me. To me, that means you're closed to any discussion that's not preaching to your choir, or to put it another way, you're only interested in mental masturbation, no distractions.
There are degrees of being 'left alone'...just as there are degrees of 'able to do anything that doesn't HARM another'...it's about where you draw the line of 'left alone' or 'harm another'...we obviously draw it in differing places, I'm OK with that.

Trancecoach said:

> "By your logic, taxes are voluntary, you can choose not to live in the US and you don't get thrown in jail for not paying them."

Not true at all. The US will tax you wherever you live. "If you don't like it move" is totally different from "if you don't like it, don't buy this condo." The condo has an owner selling it under some conditions. The "country" or "state" has no "owner" whatever you might think.

> "Again, you claim you don't care about my thoughts, but you continue to prove you do by responding"

I grant you that.

> "but we do have control, we simply need to assert it in thoughtful ways, not react out of fear of the possible future. That's my viewpoint anyway."

You say government sucks and yet, you say something to the effect of, "It doesn't feel that way from where I sit, at my reserved table at the Bohemian Grove, surrounded by cool people, not you losers."

Go ahead and "control" the government. Like I said, no one's stopping you. Do whatever you want from your beautiful acre of orchard and 100% paid for home. Enjoy it.

And if you don't like my tax ideas, who cares what you think?

However you justify your love for the state, that's ok. You're entitled to it. You aren't entitled to any actions that attempt to force your beliefs on me or anyone. Of course you'll try. But as Satochi Nakamoto (or any plutocrat) has (implicitly) said: :-P Good luck with that.

It seems more and more that libertarians and plutocrats, while not in agreement about means, do share the same goal: to be left alone by "the people."



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon