As if I wouldn’t, otherwise!
Well, back in '07 the CIA extraordinarily renditioned my ass off to some third world shithole, attached electrodes to my 'nads and dialled up the voltage until I told them about my tomato plants, so … yes?
[quote=“CarlMud, post:10, topic:63104, full:true”]Inconsistent use of Oxford commas aside, I’m glad to know that many CIA operatives and drone pilots won’t be readmitted to the United States since we’re completely consistent in what we expect of green card applicants and what we expect of ourselves…right?
[/quote]
No, not really – a citizen cannot be denied re-entry to her own country.
“No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of the right to enter his own country.” (Art 12 S 4). See also U.S. v. Valentine, 288 F. Supp. 957, 980 (D.P.R. 1968).
What is your name?
What is your quest?
What…
is your favorite color?
ETA: Apologies for the bad 'shoop. I’m working with Paint.NET and low-grade colorblindness. Also, I have little to no experience. I even failed art in grade school. Macaroni is a difficult medium to work in.
Gilbert Harding, when applying for an American visa, yielded to temptation and said “yes” to the query as to whether he intended to overthrow their lawful government with “Sole purpose of visit”.
He was refused entry
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/letters/3586253/Overthrowing-the-government.html
Torture is bad when foreign people do it. It’s just fine when red blooded Americans do it, especially if they do it to brown people (who are all automatically either terrorists or criminals).
All the queations relating to torture and genocide are actually part of a recruitment effort. As for “likely to become a public charge,” I’d respond: “If TPP passes, yes.”
Have you ever published or caused to be published either in printed or digital form, or disseminated through means of electronic communication, any stupid government form we have asked you to fill out?
The online version has a select all checkbox. But it’s buggy.
Anybody who intends to be a Federal spook, I suppose. Nothing illegal about that.
Some of this hilarity awaits you if you just ask for plain tourist US visa.
Until some secret court says otherwise or a memo of some government lawyer invents an other definition of “deprived” or “enter”.
“Sorry, citizen, can’t let you in. No, your re-entry into the USA is not denied … just delayed … hmm let me see, yup delayed for the next 49 years.”
I think you missed the “ordered” part of the sentence. Not just CIA operatives and drone controllers … half of the US’s political class including the former and recent president wouldn’t be readmitted.
I’m not - but I wonder if joining the former Norwegian communist party (currently known as “Red”) would obligate me to answer yes to the communist one? And if I did, what consequences it would have?
I remember this ridiculous questionnaire from the time when a former colleague was applying for H1B visa in order to move to the US subsidiary of the company we both were working for. Exactly the same questions about terrorism, polygamy, chemical weapons …
That was in 2000 - wonderful to see how little the world changes …
BTW, what is not shown in this one is a little sentence at the end which said something to the effect: “Answering yes to any of the questions above is not a ground for refusing the visa to the applicant.” I guess that is supposed to make the applicant feel safe and freely admit that they are a communist party terrorists attempting to immigrate to the US in order to practice polygamy with chemical weapons facepalm.
BTW2 - If you had to deal with the ESTA forms (the electronic travel authorization system for travellers from countries where US doesn’t require visa), then these idiotic questionnaires are used there as well.
What if someone - not me of course; just a friend - committed violations against religious freedom, but wasn’t sure if they were just plain “severe”, or “particularly severe”?
This is weird, but when I was being recruited by the company this was the list of things they promised I would get to do. I didn’t buy it. Sure, but once you get in you find yourself sitting at a desk reading the former Secretary of State’s personal emails to her daughter about never calling anymore.
Do you just answer ‘No’ to every one of these, or are a few of them switched around to trick people?
“Arbitrarily” kind of seems like an important word there to me. For example one could consider it a legitimate reason to refuse reentry if someone had committed torture while abroad. In particular if re entry was to a country which might not have laws mandating the extradition of torturers to face consequences with competent international tribunals.
Certainly not arbitrary.
Just as a for example.
I think it’s to suss out which immigrants might be suited to Congress.