-77 pts · February 2, 2015
You do understand there is a political expense for killing foreign nationals, right?
Yeah, because the next step after deporting illegal immigrants is mass graves...
It's actually done to get more women to play
I agree, but that's why the ban applies to chess.
But isn't that because chess was already gender-separated?
She overstayed her temporary visa and being married to a citizen isn't enough. All she has to do is wait for her green card and then she'll be allowed to stay here legally. But this is why choosing to not apply certain laws is stupid: folks get used to it, even though what they're doing is considered illegal.
Because it's usually not just a race swap. We'll have to wait and see, but the worry is that they'll stray so far from the source material in general that it basically becomes a different story. One of the writers on the show openly even talked about how he doesn't want to do a page-by-page adaptation, which is a stark contrast to the folks who worked on the movies and were very clear about wanting to stay as true to the books as possible.
Doesn't that make it more of a sympathy problem then?
Helps a lot with any kind of relationship too. Good luck if you're the completely oblivious type.
When did I say it didn't have consequences? I'm reiterating what Zelenskyy said himself at the WEF just a little under a month ago:"Europe can’t afford to be second or third in line for its allies. If that happens, the world will start moving forward without Europe, and that’s a world that won’t be comfortable or beneficial for Europeans"Europe unfortunately isn't that kind of a geopolitical force today, and even Zelenskyy has been trying to politely say that.
I mean, Ukraine would still have to accept the deal that gets put forth. Europe would have to be involved if they could single-handedly shift the tide of the war, but we saw what happened the last time the US stopped giving them weapons.
I mean, they benefit from both right now as is, and I don't see what trading Luka has to do with changing Texas politicians' minds when it comes to gambling. So yeah, it's a really dumb conspiracy theory from start to finish. Even the last part doesn't make any sense about saving money by not paying Luka: that's not how it works at all.
I didn't say ownership wasn't involved. They sign off on trades, so they had to be involved, but even they said that they had to be talked into it by Nico. Maybe this is all a conspiracy, but everything before and after the trade points to them just not liking Luka.History is full of really dumb mistakes that weren't part of conspiracies. Saying that this is a conspiracy just because it's so stupid is stupid in itself. And what, is Nico getting paid under the table for nuking his GM career?
How does this tie to the actual expansion aspect of it? I think the NBA would much rather prefer to start a brand-new team in LV, rather than letting the team that's been highest in attendance for years just ditch their entire fanbase for some extra gambling money.Maybe there is some grand conspiracy, but there's been leaks for a while that Nico just didn't like Luka as much as the rest of the league. And he was already a questionable hire: Why is it so hard to accept he made a dumb trade?
Or he got tired of the music. Variety is the spice of life and all that
What's the legal policy though?
But how many Ukrainian refugees are overstaying their welcome here?
You're entirely assuming, just rewatch the interview.He's clearly stating that there's only two options in the case of deportation: separating the family or going together. Which is entirely true, those are the only two things you CAN do in that situation.It sucks he didn't finish the next thought, but he even starts saying, "IF they want to stay with their father". That doesn't sound like he's openly talking about having ICE deport kids with citizenship.
And that wouldn't make sense either way because the Child Citizenship Act specifies one parent just has to be a citizen. It'd be very strange if children born abroad are considered US citizens with only one parent being a citizen, but domestic births require two
But both conditions hinge on neither parent being a citizen. Condition 1: mom is unlawfully here, and so is dadCondition 2: mom is lawfully here but temporary, but dad is unlawfully here
You replied directly to a comment about me saying that I didn't see anything from this administration regarding removing citizenship retroactively, as it pertains to his birthright citizenship executive order.Now you're saying that you don't want to play the interpretation game, and that you essentially just assume the worst with him.
Take him at his word? You're intentionally interpreting it in a way to make it sound like even relatives with citizenship will be deported and have their citizenship removed. He wants families to go together because it's much less of a headache politically, and why not let them get on the same plane together? And if I'm wrong then I'll call myself out for it. I already didn't like his loyalist tendencies to begin with, but I don't like this kind of propaganda either
Aren't both of those still basically saying one parent has to be a citizen?
But at no point does that statement say that those mentioned citizens will lose their citizenship, it sounds very much so like they can just go as a family. And the executive order that this is about purposefully specifies a later date rather than applying it retroactively. I don't understand how that's moving goalposts.
So why does the executive order specify Feb. 19th and onwards?
What are you on about? I'm not apologizing for anyone, and I didn't vote for Trump either way; I'm getting down to the actual facts of what's happening. If this is how you react just having a disagreement online, then I genuinely feel sorry for the people that have to be around you.
Ok, so take my head out of the sand. Where do you want to say I'm wrong?
Why do you think I care about either of them? Ok, if they lied then prosecute them.
No, I ignored one of them, because the last one doesn't really provide any actual information. The first one I mentioned in the beginning, then I mentioned the usastory, which like I said, is only loosely related to the discussion because it's about adults that lied about their identities to hide from previous crimes.
You do understand there is a political expense for killing foreign nationals, right?
Yeah, because the next step after deporting illegal immigrants is mass graves...
It's actually done to get more women to play
I agree, but that's why the ban applies to chess.
But isn't that because chess was already gender-separated?
She overstayed her temporary visa and being married to a citizen isn't enough. All she has to do is wait for her green card and then she'll be allowed to stay here legally. But this is why choosing to not apply certain laws is stupid: folks get used to it, even though what they're doing is considered illegal.
Because it's usually not just a race swap. We'll have to wait and see, but the worry is that they'll stray so far from the source material in general that it basically becomes a different story.
One of the writers on the show openly even talked about how he doesn't want to do a page-by-page adaptation, which is a stark contrast to the folks who worked on the movies and were very clear about wanting to stay as true to the books as possible.
Doesn't that make it more of a sympathy problem then?
Helps a lot with any kind of relationship too. Good luck if you're the completely oblivious type.
When did I say it didn't have consequences? I'm reiterating what Zelenskyy said himself at the WEF just a little under a month ago:
"Europe can’t afford to be second or third in line for its allies. If that happens, the world will start moving forward without Europe, and that’s a world that won’t be comfortable or beneficial for Europeans"
Europe unfortunately isn't that kind of a geopolitical force today, and even Zelenskyy has been trying to politely say that.
I mean, Ukraine would still have to accept the deal that gets put forth. Europe would have to be involved if they could single-handedly shift the tide of the war, but we saw what happened the last time the US stopped giving them weapons.
I mean, they benefit from both right now as is, and I don't see what trading Luka has to do with changing Texas politicians' minds when it comes to gambling.
So yeah, it's a really dumb conspiracy theory from start to finish. Even the last part doesn't make any sense about saving money by not paying Luka: that's not how it works at all.
I didn't say ownership wasn't involved. They sign off on trades, so they had to be involved, but even they said that they had to be talked into it by Nico. Maybe this is all a conspiracy, but everything before and after the trade points to them just not liking Luka.
History is full of really dumb mistakes that weren't part of conspiracies. Saying that this is a conspiracy just because it's so stupid is stupid in itself. And what, is Nico getting paid under the table for nuking his GM career?
How does this tie to the actual expansion aspect of it?
I think the NBA would much rather prefer to start a brand-new team in LV, rather than letting the team that's been highest in attendance for years just ditch their entire fanbase for some extra gambling money.
Maybe there is some grand conspiracy, but there's been leaks for a while that Nico just didn't like Luka as much as the rest of the league. And he was already a questionable hire: Why is it so hard to accept he made a dumb trade?
Or he got tired of the music. Variety is the spice of life and all that
What's the legal policy though?
But how many Ukrainian refugees are overstaying their welcome here?
You're entirely assuming, just rewatch the interview.
He's clearly stating that there's only two options in the case of deportation: separating the family or going together. Which is entirely true, those are the only two things you CAN do in that situation.
It sucks he didn't finish the next thought, but he even starts saying, "IF they want to stay with their father". That doesn't sound like he's openly talking about having ICE deport kids with citizenship.
And that wouldn't make sense either way because the Child Citizenship Act specifies one parent just has to be a citizen.
It'd be very strange if children born abroad are considered US citizens with only one parent being a citizen, but domestic births require two
But both conditions hinge on neither parent being a citizen.
Condition 1: mom is unlawfully here, and so is dad
Condition 2: mom is lawfully here but temporary, but dad is unlawfully here
You replied directly to a comment about me saying that I didn't see anything from this administration regarding removing citizenship retroactively, as it pertains to his birthright citizenship executive order.
Now you're saying that you don't want to play the interpretation game, and that you essentially just assume the worst with him.
Take him at his word? You're intentionally interpreting it in a way to make it sound like even relatives with citizenship will be deported and have their citizenship removed.
He wants families to go together because it's much less of a headache politically, and why not let them get on the same plane together?
And if I'm wrong then I'll call myself out for it. I already didn't like his loyalist tendencies to begin with, but I don't like this kind of propaganda either
Aren't both of those still basically saying one parent has to be a citizen?
But at no point does that statement say that those mentioned citizens will lose their citizenship, it sounds very much so like they can just go as a family.
And the executive order that this is about purposefully specifies a later date rather than applying it retroactively. I don't understand how that's moving goalposts.
So why does the executive order specify Feb. 19th and onwards?
What are you on about? I'm not apologizing for anyone, and I didn't vote for Trump either way; I'm getting down to the actual facts of what's happening.
If this is how you react just having a disagreement online, then I genuinely feel sorry for the people that have to be around you.
Ok, so take my head out of the sand.
Where do you want to say I'm wrong?
Why do you think I care about either of them?
Ok, if they lied then prosecute them.
No, I ignored one of them, because the last one doesn't really provide any actual information.
The first one I mentioned in the beginning, then I mentioned the usastory, which like I said, is only loosely related to the discussion because it's about adults that lied about their identities to hide from previous crimes.