Guns Guns Guns, Now Paris!

[Rudy Tamasz]

I don't think it's at all uncommon for many people to live in countries where they are not 100% (or even close usually) satisfied with the way things are in that country. If we take the attitude that those not happy should go elsewhere, where are they to go?

If you live in a country, even your native one, which you absolutely hate, moving elsewhere is still a better option than going on a shooting spree, no matter what your reasons are. There's plenty of Americans who not only move elsewhere, but go on to denounce the citizenship of the land of the brave, the free, the wealthy etc. In case of these guys, then even had specific places to go, where they could practice their own culture. Long story short, they only have themselves to blame for not integrating.

My other point is that any government encouraging mass migration has to realize that there will always be people, who won't be willing to itnegrate no matter what.

[Starter]

If you live in a country, even your native one, which you absolutely hate, moving elsewhere is still a better option than going on a shooting spree, no matter what your reasons are. There's plenty of Americans who not only move elsewhere, but go on to denounce the citizenship of the land of the brave, the free, the wealthy etc. In case of these guys, then even had specific places to go, where they could practice their own culture. Long story short, they only have themselves to blame for not integrating.

My other point is that any government encouraging mass migration has to realize that there will always be people, who won't be willing to itnegrate no matter what.

"plenty of Americans" ???

[Tazio]

Plenty is a relative term.
Of the millions of Americans living abroad, a very few(relatively) actually renounce their citizenship.

The Federal Register, the government publication that records such decisions, shows that 502 expatriates gave up their U.S. citizenship or permanent residency status in the last quarter of 2009. That is a tiny portion of the 5.2 million Americans estimated by the State Department to be living abroad. Still, 502 was the largest quarterly figure in years, more than twice the total for all of 2008, and it looms larger, given how agonizing the decision can be. There were 235 renunciations in 2008 and 743 last year. Waiting periods to meet with consular officers to formalize renunciations have grown.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/us/26expat.html

The numbers are increasing, and partly due to The Patriot Act, as well as double taxation.

[Starter]

Plenty is a relative term.
Of the millions of Americans living abroad, a very few(relatively) actually renounce their citizenship.



http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/26/us/26expat.html

The numbers are increasing, and partly due to The Patriot Act, as well as double taxation.

I strongly suspect this as the predominate reason.

[Malbec]

And yet after a building burned, and now a murder spree took place, the magazine responds by printing more of an issue that will further infuriate those attacking them. Bravo.... a great way to roll the dice and pull even more nutters into the mix!

I'm all for freedom of speech and the press, personal expression, and human rights. But I also accept that with my freedom of speech comes a responsibility that what I say may have negative consequences.

Sorry, but I am NOT Charlie.

Very eloquently put.

I was very disappointed with the cover. Extremists attacked Charlie Hebdo so the magazine comes up with a cover that most if not all Muslims whether mainstream or not would find offensive. Thats how to build bridges with French Muslims, indeed Muslims globally.

[Malbec]

they only have themselves to blame for not integrating.

Of course, immigrants only have themselves to blame if they don't fit in. The host nation has no responsibility whatsoever. Might want to look into the history of migration across the world or talk to migrants yourself. Things are a little more complicated than that.

[Starter]

Of course, immigrants only have themselves to blame if they don't fit in. The host nation has no responsibility whatsoever. Might want to look into the history of migration across the world or talk to migrants yourself. Things are a little more complicated than that.

Let's think about that one for a moment.

I'm not thrilled with the country I live in for what ever reason - economy, dictatorship, bad climate, etc. So I decide to move to another place which seems to offer a better life or at least relief from whatever I've been suffering under. I arrive in my new country and can't read, write or speak the language. My customs don't fit in well with the local culture either. And, I have no skills which allow good employment in the local economy. So of course I now expect the host country, and its residents, to learn my language or, at a minimum, change all the signs and paperwork to a bilingual form. I also expect them to guarantee me profitable employment and when I don't have any skills to qualify for said employment I expect the host country to spend their money to feed, clothe, and shelter me and my family for some unknown period of time into the future, maybe forever. When my life here doesn't turn out to be quite as wonderful as it seemed it would be from my home in Islamistan, I reserve the right to riot in the streets, burn buildings, etc. The idea that I could correct the problems I face here, at least for the next generation, by assimilating into the local culture and making damn sure my kids get a good education is of course offensive to me. The locals should change their ways to match mine, its only fair.

[Brown, Jon Brow]

Very eloquently put.

I was very disappointed with the cover. Extremists attacked Charlie Hebdo so the magazine comes up with a cover that most if not all Muslims whether mainstream or not would find offensive. Thats how to build bridges with French Muslims, indeed Muslims globally.

True......



.....but it's an effing cartoon picture!!!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-30835625

The Pope thinks freedom of speech 'has limits' and 'you cannot insult the faith of others'.

What a load of ****. What are you going to do Popey if I blaspheme? Burn me at the stake?

[Rollo]

Of course, immigrants only have themselves to blame if they don't fit in. The host nation has no responsibility whatsoever. Might want to look into the history of migration across the world or talk to migrants yourself. Things are a little more complicated than that.

Even if that host nation spent the best part of a decade bombing the infrastructure where the immigrants came from?
The country which I live in (which has never grown the spine to invent its own foreign policy) has done precisely that.
We even elected a government in 2013 that likes to push that same boat... back where it came from.

[Tazio]

I strongly suspect this as the predominate reason.

Maybe,
but apparently the Patriot act seems to have some unintended consequences for many Americans living abroad.

Some U.S.-based banks have closed expats’ accounts because of difficulty in certifying that the holders still maintain U.S. addresses, as required by a Patriot Act provision. “It seems the new anti-terrorist rules are having unintended effects,” Daniel Flynn, who lives in Belgium, wrote in a letter quoted by the Americans Abroad Caucus in the U.S. Congress in correspondence with the Treasury Department.
“I was born in San Francisco in 1939, served my country as an army officer from 1961 to 1963, have been paying U.S. income taxes for 57 years, since 1952, have continually maintained federal voting residence, and hold a valid American passport.”
Mr. Flynn had held an account with a U.S. bank for 44 years. Still, he wrote, “they said that the new anti-terrorism rules required them to close our account because of our address outside the U.S.”
Kathleen Rittenhouse, who lives in Canada, wrote that until she encountered a similar problem, “I did not know that the Patriot Act placed me in the same category as terrorists, arms dealers and money launderers.”
Andy Sundberg, another director of American Citizens Abroad, said, “These banks are closing our accounts as acts of prudent self-defense.” But the result, he said, is that expats have become “toxic citizens.”
The Americans Abroad Caucus, headed by Representative Carolyn B. Maloney, Democrat of New York, and Representative Joe Wilson, Republican of South Carolina, has made repeated entreaties to the Treasury Department.
In response, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner wrote Ms. Maloney on Feb. 24 that “nothing in U.S. financial law and regulation should make it impossible for Americans living abroad to access financial services here in the United States.”
But banks, Treasury officials note, are free to ignore that advice.
“That Americans living overseas are being denied banking services in U.S. banks, and increasingly in foreign banks, is unacceptable,” Ms. Maloney said in a letter Friday to leaders of the House Financial Services Committee, requesting a hearing on the question.
Mr. Wilson, joining her request, said that pleas from expats for relief “continue to come in at a startling rate.”