SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Caesar's wife must be above suspicion, but Trump's transition team and ultimately cabinet, seems rife with conflicts of ignorance. The Intercept reports that:
Palantir Technologies, the data mining company co-founded by billionaire and Trump transition advisor Peter Thiel, will likely assist the Trump Administration in its efforts to track and collect intelligence on immigrants, according to a review of public records by The Intercept. Since 2011, the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency's Office of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) has paid Palantir tens of millions of dollars to help construct and operate a complex intelligence system called FALCON, which allows ICE to store, search, and analyze troves of data that include family relationships, employment information, immigration history, criminal records, and home and work addresses.
I guess this is what happens when you elect a businessman to political office: they run it like a business.
Working closely with a President-elect who has pledged to dramatically expand ICE, Thiel's varied connections to the immigration agency place him in a position to potentially benefit financially from a deportation campaign that carries highly personal stakes for millions of Americans.
They always say: you have nothing to worry about, if you have nothing to hide.
Palantir, which is backed by the CIA's venture capital arm, did not respond to a request for comment regarding its ICE contracts and concerns over potential conflicts of interest. Peter Thiel spokesperson Jeremiah Hall declined to comment on a list of emailed queries, including a question asking whether Thiel has yet signed the Trump transition ethics agreement.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Thursday December 15 2016, @12:49AM
Why is it when a child is born they receive citizenship? I find it reasonable to source citizenship directly from the parents
Here they say [npr.org]: "only 30 of the world's 194 countries grant automatic citizenship to children born to illegal aliens." Probably there is a reason for that? None of the supporting countries are located in the old, democratic, liberal Europe (or Asia, Africa or Australia, to that matter.)
Perhaps there is a reason. To become a citizen you have to share values of the country. If you are born to citizens, it is their duty, and they are able to educate their child accordingly. If you are not born to citizens, you can be raised in any culture - you may not speak English, you may wear odd clothes, you may pray to odd gods... (not that it's illegal - but it dilutes the contents of the melting pot.) When adults become citizens they are expected to prove, to some extent, that they can be citizens - they must speak the language, they must know a bit of history, they must say the oath. To both natural-born americans and to those who became them through naturalization the way of anchor baby looks like cheating. It only shows that the husband and wife had enough money for a week-long trip across the border close to the delivery time. It's a legal loophole that has no meaning. It does not mean that their child is in any way worthy of citizenship - nor that they even want one [wikipedia.org]. The question of citizenship by every logic known to man should be determined by the prevailing culture (citizenship) of the parents. At the same time citizenship should be changeable by any adult who desires so and is otherwise qualified.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday December 15 2016, @02:05AM
I would mod up if I had points. GP is a very good post as well. Citizenship derives primarily from the citizenship of the parents. I'm not a Jew, have no Jewish parents, or grandparents. Had I been born in Israel, would that make me a Jew? What if I were Arab, and born in Israel, would that make me a Jew?
Among the articles I stumbled across yesterday, was one that says the UK no longer grants citizenship automagically to babies born on it's soil. Likewise with Ireland. European countries are apparently revoking the idea that babies accidentally dropped on a certain piece of land become citizens.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 15 2016, @06:30PM
they must speak the language
This gets complicated when you consider that certain countries own territories (like Puerto Rico) that speak different languages from the parent country. Belgium is an example of a country with multiple languages that have a very large proportion of people that could not communicate with the other half of the country.
(Score: 1) by tftp on Thursday December 15 2016, @09:15PM
This gets complicated when you consider that certain countries own territories (like Puerto Rico) that speak different languages from the parent country.
Yes. You don't even need to go to Puerto Rico for an example. Canada requires immigrants to know either English or French; either will be sufficient to establish themselves in the society. This problem applies not just to immigrants - it applies to everyone, and it has no obvious, democratic solution.