That is because we cannot revoke citizenship for non-immigrants [unless we want to re-open the practice of sending people to Australia] but we can deny it in light of what is yet considered a federal crime. In my case the federal government has a track record of wanting to put my profession in prison. Just as being a patient can deny federal backed insurances, having a cannabis business can deny banking and insurance, use can strip the right to gun ownership and some medical services, and employment in the United States can become excluded in many areas [exclusion through urine testing]. This denial is not a new one no more so than the others.
Immigration status is a sensitive thing to embark upon in most nations and the United States is not an exception to that reality [nor should be]. ‘Clarifies’ - not ‘creates’. Such is explained to people entering the country looking for permanent status. It remains the same for those that entered the country illegally. It is personal choice to violate the request of the nation you are entering and asking for a status and that includes a work visa. The ramifications are clearly stated for violating that agreement [and every nation will state them for you]. Australia [just to throw them back in the mix] will not allow you to enter for work unless you can show your job cannot be performed by an Australian. If you don’t think they will deport you if they find that you lied to violate this rule I encourage you to try them and document your journey [see if they mean it]. Does that make Australia ‘xenophobic’? No and nations have laws.
The denial, in this case, is the same as other related denials, in concern of federal laws and violations. No one in his position should even feel that he needs to clarify that yes a federal crime is a federal crime and federal crimes exclude people from a visa. They claim the President was ‘right’ in changing immigration at-will during the Obama administration but it is unacceptable for a President from a different party to do the same [the very next time around the cycle]? Well wouldn’t that mean that they, the law makers and those that be, if this is not a decision of a President, own this decision themselves and having done nothing at all to correct it? Is the hypocrisy not glaring enough?
Personally, with plenty of Americans out of work, and considering a high desire to enter this industry among the population, I do not see why it would be necessary to import workers. Canada, the place of origin of the individual cited but not photographed in this story, will deny an American entry for having a DUI in their history, and it does not need to be a felony conviction. Are they xenophobic racists? No, because in neither of these cases is your country or origin or the color of your skin included in the determination. There is no demand to important workers to fill positions in the cannabis industry. Not that I believe would be an honest one. Paid less and worked harder? Sure, that sounds very ummm… loving to me. If they are in fact a specialist they specialized in a federal crime [life choices]. The image supplied is of someone not cited in these articles as a ‘victim’ [clearly doing alright] because denying [likely] a straight white canadian male would not fit the ‘racist narrative’ so strongly desired. Propaganda has rules, remember? Even though race played no role in the denials or specific country of origin… they must invoke the same rules that were applied to Refer Madness, correct? Tell me, does Cambodia have a marijuana industry sufficient to supply experience? I doubt it considering I have a friend over there right now trying to convince them to do so. Isn’t the skilled worker pool likely in California of all places? What honest reason would they have to important workers? I guess they tried to form a union I heard and umm… Are they importing ‘scabs’ [I am going to look in to that I think]?
A sudden awareness of this reality may shock some people that are not actively informed, bias media members [looking for anything perceived as ‘ammunition’] may have decided [along with the opposition party] to press this issue, get a statement, and create headlines that pull attention to their profits [what they get paid to do] but if people cannot just as well blame everyone it is only a reflection of political self service and a desire for the propaganda. I am not going to create a bias for myself just because I am in the cannabis industry [I don’t feel the right to do so]. It isn’t new just because it is new to someone. It isn’t suddenly more offensive because someone doesn’t like the current administration [nor is it suddenly of a new meaning let alone one that just so happens to fit someone’s desire for character assassination - of their opposing party. What a convenient conspiracy theory]. If this was so offensive to people a few years ago - I didn’t hear them complain or make such accusations. The reasoning is the same regardless of the administration - that adopted the same reasoning from the previous administrations [and other branches past and current]. Stating otherwise could only be from the creativity of the subject [completely].
Taking things we believe to be important to us and allowing others to own the rights to them and our emotional responses is not a good idea. I for one am pro immigration and at the same time anti the abuse of the population already living here and immigrants themselves [economically, physically, and emotionally]. That is the rational place to be. Why wouldn’t I want to find the best result for everyone involved as opposed to deciding who to harm? There is no logical excuse to sit anywhere else [only what might be described as religious beliefs or something. Brainwash on both sides is the only explanation I have for silly behavior from otherwise intelligent people]. Everything doesn’t need to be more fuel for hatred addiction [for crying-out-loud]. It could just be that a lot of people you trusted did this and that is a hard pill to get down just like for someone in support of this administration may be equally offended that it continues without this administration leading a push in Congress to change the law [and give do-gooders, which makes them good at their job, ‘warriors of the law’. nothing to enforce. Enforcement is his duty not his enjoyment]. This is likely resolved by changing the federal status of cannabis, don’t you think? I don’t think searching for a pinata to hit isn’t going to make that happen.
I don’t listen to people on the right when they tell me that ‘Obama was secretly a Muslim’ and I don’t listen to people on the left when they tell me ‘Trump is a racist’ because neither is correct. They both express to me the success of puppet masters. Both have maintained this policy thus far [so is it a sign that Obama is a secret Muslim? Since Muslims may feel strongly about drug and alcohol use this must be the real reason for such policies to exist. OMG I CRACKED THE CODE! Obama really is a Muslim! That is Sharia! No. By the way Sharia, as far as I know, would allow medical use but not recreational use but there seems to be a debate about medical use as well. Though, that just seems to revolve around belief or disbelief in the medical qualities of cannabis]. What made today different for anyone besides bias and where were the same heros, when people they felt were being unfairly attacked, needed them years ago? Perhaps, only when it serves their own needs - that is the sense I get when I see and read these things at this point [and I have been at that point for a very, very long time]. That they view immigrants as a political tool, as though they are ghosts that have no impact on the population, or no souls themselves to consider, and treat them like pawns in some sort of scheme to collect the most lobbying dollars as opposed to doing anything that serves everyone in a healthy way.
Sure, Bars statement offends me personally, I don’'t think any of us are bad characters, but I am also very well aware of things and not shocked that a ‘fed’ would be ‘anti cannabis’.
Anyway, no one here was I directing that at. That is just my responds to the person that wrote the article. That is my complaint about things at this point. You want to solve it? Bring people together - otherwise as fas I can tell you don’t are about the people you claim to care about at all.
