My home and native land

[KoolBak]

If you want these things for your child, then raise him / her that way. It doesn't matter where the hell you do it - good and bad people are spawned and raised everywhere. Make the difference as a parent.

My boy started coughing within a few months of birth, we did live in the middle of the PRD, a 150 km corridor of 70 million souls, known as the factory of the world.

Do I want to return to the US? Not really sure. Becoming a father definitely opens up a whole new realm of responsibility. I would like my son to have an open mind, trust in his fellow man and the importance of character over financial success. I would also like him to have a sense of place in the world. If you could offer some advice, I would consider it.

My biggest worry is that children are forced into conformity and indoctrinated into a fixed ideology that doesn't represent a positive future outlook and confines their development.

[2dimes]

Leading by example can be tough but it's far more effective. I couldn't figure out the great things my Dad tried to tell me when I was young. I just noticed he watched a lot of television when he wasn't working.

I guess he didn't figure out the good ideas until he was too busy working to buy his kids crap they thought was important because the other kids said it was.

Thing is he was right in that also. As you've noted your kid is the most important thing.

One thing that is still good about Canada is you can set him up with a brother or sister here.

[_sabotage_]

Leading by example can be tough but it's far more effective. I couldn't figure out the great things my Dad tried to tell me when I was young. I just noticed he watched a lot of television when he wasn't working.

I guess he didn't figure out the good ideas until he was too busy working to buy his kids crap they thought was important because the other kids said it was.

Thing is he was right in that also. As you've noted your kid is the most important thing.

One thing that is still good about Canada is you can set him up with a brother or sister here.

Great, it had to be lead by example? Here boy watch how your daddy gets shit on at the embassy and posts about it on an anon forum. What if my example had been fucked?

BBS, married to a 17 month old for life. I will be see him as a newborn when he's 14 and asking WHY? he can't do herion, didn't you used to say you think drugs should be legal?

[AAFitz]

BBS, married to a 17 month old for life.

Actually a great response there.

Obviously BBS was suggesting your wife was the terrorist in the situation, and to some degree he is right, because it wouldn't be the first time unfortunately, but he is also insanely hypocritical on this because its an example of Government probably going too far, which he usually is against, but instead abandons that because of a personal bias against you. There will be an arrogant answer about how he was right on this occasion as he is right in every instance that he ever posts, which is unfortunate, because it makes every post suspect of bias.

Anyways, obviously your wife did make a mistake buying the wrong ticket, though assuming she was just going to get on the connecting flight to Canada with your child, clearly the customs guy made a mistake. I feel bad for you though, and don't let this little hiccup stop you....and next time, you'll just have to be more careful of the laws governing traveling from China to Canada via the US.

[Dukasaur]

If any of this comes as a surprise to you, you obviously don't have much experience with border guards.

They have almost absolute power, and not a shred of mercy.

[BigBallinStalin]

It's not surprising that the statement, "The risk of Chinese spies, yo," becomes distorted into "BBS was suggesting your wife was the terrorist in the situation" (AAFitz) or 'Sure, BBS, my child is a spy/terrorist!' (sabotage). Gentlemen, the Accidental Strawmen thread beckons y'all for more examples.

IIRC, sabotage mentioned somewhere that his wife is of Chinese ethnicity, and if the youtube videos are his actual kid and his wife talking/filming, then this further supports my recollection.


This thread is another example of unintended consequences:
Instead of focusing on the morality and policy of national security, at first I was more interested in the fact that some people become frustrated about the unintended consequences of a government's defense agencies (e.g. TSA). The risk of Chinese spies from the ongoing intelligence conflict between the US and China has induced the US government to further enact liberty-curtailing activities on US citizens and foreign nationals. Unfortunately, this imposes costs on people who do not deserve it--presumably, sabotage's family. They've become innocent victims of the USG's obtuse net-casting.

Sometimes the source of frustration stems from an incomplete picture about the causes and consequences. "The risk of Chinese spies" is but one, brief explanation--which unfortunately no one questioned, but instead filled in their own assumptions and implications without the need of my verification. From the Ministry of State Security's perspective having an agent marry a Canadian/American and having a child provides a great cover for clandestine operations. Of course, most of these samples are not spies--but there is the risk that some of them are spies, thus sabotage's family unfortunately experienced the net of US national security.

Instead of railing against each other, we should be concerned about the unintended consequences of public policy. I look forward to the day when we can all redirect our criticism from each other and toward the fundamental concerns, the US and Chinese governments. Thanks, that is all.

[nietzsche]

After months of processing, and thousands of dollars, my wife and son have been granted permanent residence in Canada.

My excited wife bought her ticket, and then realized it stopped in Newark, where she would change planes and come on to Halifax.

Of course, to stop in the States, she needs a transit visa. So she books an appointment, and pays in advance, 2200 RMB, over $300, prepares $10,000 cash to show the consulate official, as well as our marriage certificate, Canadian visa, property ownership documents, our sons relevant documents and heads in.

She is then told that she has been denied straight off without an examination of her documents or funds. Apparently she isn't suitable to spend a couple hours at the Newark airport.

From her skype with me just now, when asked the reason they used to deny her:

I don't have social economic and family ties outside of the united state

I'm currently buying a new ticket, as the old one had been non-refundable.

All my family lives in Montana, Oregon and California, and we have been Americans for generations plus native blood.

Thank you for enacting a policy which prevents my wife and son from treading on our proud soil.

Some of you will think, but wait, your son at least should be a US citizen. But you would be wrong. If your child is born overseas and you can't show that you had lived in America for 2 years after the age of 14, they lose the right to citizenship.

The land of the free, and home of the brave.

Isn't it 5 years?

Also, if you are a US citizen your wife can apply for a resident permit first, but she has to stay out of the country while the process goes on, that it's 1 year. I know this because a friend applied for his wife, who had to stay in Mexico for 1 year. But I don't know about your son.

And also, if you want, have your wife and son to fly to Tijuana, I know a guy that can help em cross the border. BTW, when arriving at the airport, if someone asks them for their passport, you know to fill the form and all that, your wife can just flip em off, they won't do anything.

[DoomYoshi]

The land of the Sheep, Home of the Slave.

[_sabotage_]

Yes, I should have booked it, but she did.

I know they have no mercy, but the ticket was bought. I spent three hours talking with the travel agent trying to redirect the booking so she could fly straight into Canada. They wanted three times the cost of the ticket to do it. So forfeit or try for the visa. She didn't exactly want to have to spend another $300 to get a visa, but since we spent it, it would have been nice if she got it.

[_sabotage_]

Thank you nietzsche, but I am not trying to get my wife and kid smuggled into the US, arrested in Mexico or become US residents, I have just spent 8 months separated from them while applying for their Canadian permanent residences and at the moment, I'm not feeling like visiting the US.

And it was two years two years ago according to the consulate officer.

[_sabotage_]

Aw, BBS is being sweet, i didn't know you cared.

[BigBallinStalin]

Aw, BBS is being sweet, i didn't know you cared.

I'll assume you're being sincere.

Of course I care; otherwise, I'd have become a neocon.

[_sabotage_]

[AAFitz]

It's not surprising that the statement, "The risk of Chinese spies, yo," becomes distorted into "BBS was suggesting your wife was the terrorist in the situation" (AAFitz) or 'Sure, BBS, my child is a spy/terrorist!' (sabotage). Gentlemen, the Accidental Strawmen thread beckons y'all for more examples.

IIRC, sabotage mentioned somewhere that his wife is of Chinese ethnicity, and if the youtube videos are his actual kid and his wife talking/filming, then this further supports my recollection.


This thread is another example of unintended consequences:
Instead of focusing on the morality and policy of national security, at first I was more interested in the fact that some people become frustrated about the unintended consequences of a government's defense agencies (e.g. TSA). The risk of Chinese spies from the ongoing intelligence conflict between the US and China has induced the US government to further enact liberty-curtailing activities on US citizens and foreign nationals. Unfortunately, this imposes costs on people who do not deserve it--presumably, sabotage's family. They've become innocent victims of the USG's obtuse net-casting.

Sometimes the source of frustration stems from an incomplete picture about the causes and consequences. "The risk of Chinese spies" is but one, brief explanation--which unfortunately no one questioned, but instead filled in their own assumptions and implications without the need of my verification. From the Ministry of State Security's perspective having an agent marry a Canadian/American and having a child provides a great cover for clandestine operations. Of course, most of these samples are not spies--but there is the risk that some of them are spies, thus sabotage's family unfortunately experienced the net of US national security.

Instead of railing against each other, we should be concerned about the unintended consequences of public policy. I look forward to the day when we can all redirect our criticism from each other and toward the fundamental concerns, the US and Chinese governments. Thanks, that is all.

Total bullshit and you tried to cover it up even more than usual, as predicted, and expected. Your implications and double edged joke was obvious from the beginning, and as I even predicted, you just go on to explain how you were right as always and devoid of any bullshit.

The level of hypocricy and arrogance just gets more and more ridiculous each time.

Keep it up though. You seem to enjoy it, and I certainly revel in seeing you for what you truly are.

Maybe you should just make more holocaust jokes...at least everyone knows they are funny.

Thanks, that is all.

[BigBallinStalin]

Total bullshit and you tried to cover it up even more than usual, as predicted, and expected. Your implications and double edged joke was obvious from the beginning, and as I even predicted, you just go on to explain how you were right as always and devoid of any bullshit.

All I said was "The risk of Chinese spies, yo" and asked "you're married to a 17 month old?," so what am I supposedly covering up?
Nothing, because that's all I said at that time. Recall that your imagination has invented whatever else I allegedly am covering up.

And what implications? The ones you made up? (which amounted to over 200 words--based upon a 6-word sentence).

Your post fails to provide any support for your claims about my actual position, which is not to be mistaken for your imagined position. Any reasonable person can agree that the following is not sufficient evidence: ineffective insults, a supernatural ability to read other people's minds, and odd musings on what the other person didn't say.

Do you consider your position to be reasonable?

[AAFitz]

Total bullshit and you tried to cover it up even more than usual, as predicted, and expected. Your implications and double edged joke was obvious from the beginning, and as I even predicted, you just go on to explain how you were right as always and devoid of any bullshit.

All I said was "The risk of Chinese spies, yo" and asked "you're married to a 17 month old?," so what am I supposedly covering up?
Nothing, because that's all I said at that time. Recall that your imagination has invented whatever else I allegedly am covering up.

And what implications? The ones you made up? (which amounted to over 200 words--based upon a 6-word sentence).

Your post fails to provide any support for your claims about my actual position, which is not to be mistaken for your imagined position. Any reasonable person can reject the following as sufficient evidence: ineffective insults, a supernatural ability to read other people's mind, and odd musings on what the other person didn't say.

Do you consider your position to be reasonable?

Not just reasonable but spot on. You made a stupid joke, almost guaranteed to piss him off, with many ways of interpreting it. Even as I posted, I knew you might be making a commentary on how ridiculous the protocol was at airports, or could be commenting that his kid, or wife was a terrorist, or a spy, or really a few other possibilities. The point is, it was stupid, and I was calling you out on that, and as I said, you would claim no responsibility for it, as you did not, and still will never do. Everything you ever type in here is right, and you will never accept a simple mistake on a bullshit post like that one, which is why I spent some words pointing it out, for those who dont quite see through it as easily.

Im sorry you misunderstood the meaning of my posts though. I as you said, used lots of words, and you still missed the meaning, but clearly its your fault.

Post was bullshit, yo.

[_sabotage_]

Nah the post was sweet, because he felt the need to bullshit.

[BigBallinStalin]

Total bullshit and you tried to cover it up even more than usual, as predicted, and expected. Your implications and double edged joke was obvious from the beginning, and as I even predicted, you just go on to explain how you were right as always and devoid of any bullshit.

All I said was "The risk of Chinese spies, yo" and asked "you're married to a 17 month old?," so what am I supposedly covering up?
Nothing, because that's all I said at that time. Recall that your imagination has invented whatever else I allegedly am covering up.

And what implications? The ones you made up? (which amounted to over 200 words--based upon a 6-word sentence).

Your post fails to provide any support for your claims about my actual position, which is not to be mistaken for your imagined position. Any reasonable person can reject the following as sufficient evidence: ineffective insults, a supernatural ability to read other people's mind, and odd musings on what the other person didn't say.

Do you consider your position to be reasonable?

Not just reasonable but spot on. You made a stupid joke, almost guaranteed to piss him off, with many ways of interpreting it. Even as I posted, I knew you might be making a commentary on how ridiculous the protocol was at airports, or could be commenting that his kid, or wife was a terrorist, or a spy, or really a few other possibilities. The point is, it was stupid, and I was calling you out on that, and as I said, you would claim no responsibility for it, as you did not, and still will never do. Everything you ever type in here is right, and you will never accept a simple mistake on a bullshit post like that one, which is why I spent some words pointing it out, for those who dont quite see through it as easily.

Im sorry you misunderstood the meaning of my posts though. I as you said, used lots of words, and you still missed the meaning, but clearly its your fault.

Post was bullshit, yo.

Oh wow, you need to calm down and think about you've been saying.

You invented a position which I never held, and now you're presuming knowledge over areas to which you have no access, e.g. my mind. Are you Super Freud of the Internets?


Let's reorganize your post:

I perceive myself as reasonable without explaining why such insufficient evidence is sufficient. I'm assuming that my interpretation of your very brief sentences is absolutely correct and that no other explanation is valid because I can read BBS' mind (that's the best explanation I can think of). I perceived a 6-word sentence as a joke, and I presume that BBS' intention is to piss him off sabotage, with many ways of interpreting it.

Wait, since there are many ways to interpret it, and you only chose one way to interpret it, then how do you know that your interpretation is correct?

[BigBallinStalin]

Nah the post was sweet, because he felt the need to bullshit.

No, I am sincere in every post ITT---even my tongue-in-cheek response: "You're married to a 17 month old?" (because when I said "wife," you mentioned "baby," which makes no sense--if taken seriously).


Some people need to recognize the difference between their perception of me and the actual me. The presumption of knowledge can lead people to distorted realities. Hopefully, they can overcome that problem.

[AAFitz]

Total bullshit and you tried to cover it up even more than usual, as predicted, and expected. Your implications and double edged joke was obvious from the beginning, and as I even predicted, you just go on to explain how you were right as always and devoid of any bullshit.

All I said was "The risk of Chinese spies, yo" and asked "you're married to a 17 month old?," so what am I supposedly covering up?
Nothing, because that's all I said at that time. Recall that your imagination has invented whatever else I allegedly am covering up.

And what implications? The ones you made up? (which amounted to over 200 words--based upon a 6-word sentence).

Your post fails to provide any support for your claims about my actual position, which is not to be mistaken for your imagined position. Any reasonable person can reject the following as sufficient evidence: ineffective insults, a supernatural ability to read other people's mind, and odd musings on what the other person didn't say.

Do you consider your position to be reasonable?

Not just reasonable but spot on. You made a stupid joke, almost guaranteed to piss him off, with many ways of interpreting it. Even as I posted, I knew you might be making a commentary on how ridiculous the protocol was at airports, or could be commenting that his kid, or wife was a terrorist, or a spy, or really a few other possibilities. The point is, it was stupid, and I was calling you out on that, and as I said, you would claim no responsibility for it, as you did not, and still will never do. Everything you ever type in here is right, and you will never accept a simple mistake on a bullshit post like that one, which is why I spent some words pointing it out, for those who dont quite see through it as easily.

Im sorry you misunderstood the meaning of my posts though. I as you said, used lots of words, and you still missed the meaning, but clearly its your fault.

Post was bullshit, yo.

Oh wow, you need to calm down and think about you've been saying.

You invented a position which I never held, and now you're presuming knowledge over areas to which you have no access, e.g. my mind. Are you Super Freud of the Internets?


Let's reorganize your post:

I perceive myself as reasonable without explaining why such insufficient evidence is sufficient. I'm assuming that my interpretation of your very brief sentences is absolutely correct and that no other explanation is valid because I can read BBS' mind (that's the best explanation I can think of). I perceived a 6-word sentence as a joke, and I presume that BBS' intention is to piss him off sabotage, with many ways of interpreting it.

Wait, since there are many ways to interpret it, and you only chose one way to interpret it, then how do you know that your interpretation is correct?

Just keep going...lol. Actually, as I said, I guessed at one possible way of interpreting it. However, my main point was that after he wrongly interpreted it, you would take no responsibility for posting a stupid post, and would blame it on him as you did 100% and are still doing.

Its what you do in every post. Its all bullshit, and Im just pointing it out. And Id take it seriously if you ever once actually had a real conversation about it, but instead you just antagonize and pull the arrogant route, and its bullshit, pure and simple. You did the same thing after suggesting holocaust jokes could be funny.

In any case, and by all means, just point out what you actually did mean, and accept it was vague and apologize for sabotage for a perfectly valid interpretation of your stupidly phrased post...or, just keep up with the bullshit. Im happy to call you out on it till the end, and its fun watching you do exactly what I said youd do from the very beginning, however tragic.

[BigBallinStalin]

You "guessed at one possible way of interpreting it," yet without explaining why, you maintain that it is the correct interpretation.

Then you repeat your argument: "I imagine you as X; therefore, you are X, and all evidence to the contrary will be refuted because it does not sync with X."

That's not logical.

[_sabotage_]

Oh, I've overcome my perception of you, don't worry.

But the very idea that we would somehow prevent Chinese spies by denying some visas is like saying we could all stand side by side and stop a flood.

I'm just amused that you felt it was worth a defence.

Anyways, my wife will get here monday with my son and we'll post copies of all material of our spying successes here.

[AAFitz]

You "guessed at one possible way of interpreting it," yet without explaining why, you maintain that it is the correct interpretation.

Then you repeat your argument: "I imagine you as X; therefore, you are X, and all evidence to the contrary will be refuted because it does not sync with X."

That's not logical.

My point was never about what you meant. Ive repeatedly accepted that you could have meant anything, and knew as I typed you might have meant it as a joke supporting him.

My point however, that instead of accepting that, when he very innocently did misinterpret it, which he was bound to do....you simply blamed him for it, arrogantly as you always do, and as I outright predicted you would.

Further, you did it by dragging it out and going into rambling explanations of it, so I did the same to you.

It was a simple, ridiculous mistake, and you got him, and I got you.

Tit for tat.

I honestly assumed you'd get it before now....but its very satisfying to see I was able to keep it up for so long.

Again, I know you will continue with the bullshit, because thats what you do...and thats fine...but all you had do to was reasonably just say hey man, I actually was agreeing with you...instead of dragging it out as if it was he that made a ridiculous mistake, and not you, with a ridiculously poorly worded, joke...that was piss poor at best.

But like youve said before, this forum is beneath you, and theres no way you could be wrong...so dont worry, im sure that makes you right.

[BigBallinStalin]

Oh, I've overcome my perception of you, don't worry.

But the very idea that we would somehow prevent Chinese spies by denying some visas is like saying we could all stand side by side and stop a flood.

Perhaps, but I don't know that much about transnational flight security and its substitutes to comment on its effectiveness. I guess you do?

I'm just amused that you felt it was worth a defence.

Can you distinguish between "explaining X" and "defending X"?

[_sabotage_]

Ancient Chinese saying:

to explain yourself is to admit.