|
Brazil tit for tat visa policy. (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| NYCTrancefan |
| quote: | Originally posted by failsafe
So the supreme court ruled in favour for jose. How does that have any effect on the actual changes to your laws? The supreme court and the ACLU have failed to protect the constituion from the patriot act have they not? |
My point is that if the most allegedly treacherous Americans linked to something such as terrorism can be afforded judicial protections under the law then something must be right somewhere.
There is one thing I should mention do you notice in the post on the Patriot Act laws, each one states the government 'may' not necessarily can engage in such behaviour. Your assertion that the Supreme Court and the ACLU have failed to protect the constitution from the Patriot Act is shortsighted because should an American citizen be subject to such actions then certainly they have the recourse to seek representation from these particular bodies (all U.S. courts) on the matter at hand that would instigate such behaviour on the part of the government, its called fair Justice. I guarantee you a case will come up that tests the legality of the Patriot Act. It oftens happens in these kinds of situations.
You seem to talk up the Bush administration more than is necessary in that there exists a U.S. Congress-to fulfill the mandate of Americans and a Judiciary-to protect those mandates. It is not the first time that America has dealt with overarching Executive policies in its history and it won't be the last. These policies must be kept in their limited perspective. I doubt the government is wiretapping my phone and waiting for me to go protest at a rally so as to arrest me, without any legal recourse on my individual part, think about it;) |
|
|
| failsafe |
| It's not that they are wite tapping your phone that's important. It's that they LEGALLY could be. You don't find that in the least bit scary? |
|
|
| LiquidX |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
I do think the US visa policy to Brazil is quiet stupid.
But I think Brazil's reply to Brazil is even stupider. Brazil has no real terrorist threat from the USA, all they are doing by imposing such restrictions on Americans is shooting their tourist industry, and hence their whole economy in the foot.
These policies are sure to hav huge economic fallout for Brazil, a nation which can't and shouldn't endure many economic fallouts at this time, all in all this policy is plan dumb. |
- Allrighty. Brazil has all the right to pose the same steps that US is placing to brazilians. Many of my dad's buisness partners are brazilians, and my ex girlfriend was brazilian. Anyways. The problem is that brazilians, even those with deplomatic, buisness or tourists, are been treated like sh*t in the airports, and been turned back to brazil without even a word of the why/reason. Just suspicions. So now Brazil is firing back. The reason why I named my dads buisness partners and my girlfriend, is because they have both been treated like the worst , and my girlfriend was once even turned back to Brazil without a reason. |
|
|
| failsafe |
| Brazilan girls tend to be hot. |
|
|
| Lira |
:D
It's a shame I missed this thread though... I wonder if the guys who posted here are still willing to talk about it :thepirate |
|
|
| NYCTrancefan |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
:D
It's a shame I missed this thread though... I wonder if the guys who posted here are still willing to talk about it :thepirate |
Since I started the original thread I find it only fair to comment. It's clear the Brazilian policy was simply a way to exact revenge, after all Matto Grosso state doesn't even have an airport in which tourists would come into, by the way for those wondering the judge who issued the order to photograph and fingerprint Americans was from Matto Grosso state. The wierdest thing is that the policy on both sides have amounted to not. All the worry about long lines and delays in Brazil or the United States were for nothing, besides I love Brazilian girls way too much to not go one day to Brazil. Just wish Lula was a little less vehemently anti-American Lira, all in all I love Brazil, beautiful place. |
|
|
| Lira |
Well, here's how I see it, being Brazilian and knowing what the situation is here.
Yes, it is/was some sort of revenge (it's called "reciprocity", which is quite common when it comes to diplomacy) because of the way many Brazilian citizens were treated in the US after 9/11 (read LiquidX's post, which is just another proof).
However, keep in mind that this purely reflects an even more complicated problem, which is the American policy towards Brazil and its consequences. The American government is not well seen by Brazilian people because of many actions (and threats) that have been taking place for quite a long time (from threats in the WWII to the discussion about free-trade agreements). This issue is nothing but another brick in the wall. There was no reason for the US to treat our citizens that way in the airports, as there's no links to terrorism in our territory (the CIA even sent some people to Foz do Iguaçu, because of the arab colony, but found nothing).
Do I find it fair to the tourists (from both countries) involved? No. Do I support the Brazilian revenge? Yes. This is a protest, and it's part of international law, it's time for the American government to realise that there will be reactions to their actions, no matter where. A matter of defending our citizens from more harassment.
As for the economic part: I believe more Brazilians visit the US than the other way round (if I could only get some numbers :(), and I know the importance of tourism in our economy. However, we're a growing market, and the less popular you are here, the harder it'll be to get more profit from us (I know countless people who boycott any sort of product from the US, and it seems to be a trend here not only amongst the youth). If the US doesn't change its policy to our country, we'll eventually strengthen our links to other countries so we can get fair opportunities.
It's that simple. |
|
|
| YaleTrance |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Well, here's how I see it, being Brazilian and knowing what the situation is here.
Yes, it is/was some sort of revenge (it's called "reciprocity", which is quite common when it comes to diplomacy) because of the way many Brazilian citizens were treated in the US after 9/11 (read LiquidX's post, which is just another proof).
However, keep in mind that this purely reflects an even more complicated problem, which is the American policy towards Brazil and its consequences. The American government is not well seen by Brazilian people because of many actions (and threats) that have been taking place for quite a long time (from threats in the WWII to the discussion about free-trade agreements). This issue is nothing but another brick in the wall. There was no reason for the US to treat our citizens that way in the airports, as there's no links to terrorism in our territory (the CIA even sent some people to Foz do Iguaçu, because of the arab colony, but found nothing).
Do I find it fair to the tourists (from both countries) involved? No. Do I support the Brazilian revenge? Yes. This is a protest, and it's part of international law, it's time for the American government to realise that there will be reactions to their actions, no matter where. A matter of defending our citizens from more harassment.
As for the economic part: I believe more Brazilians visit the US than the other way round (if I could only get some numbers :(), and I know the importance of tourism in our economy. However, we're a growing market, and the less popular you are here, the harder it'll be to get more profit from us (I know countless people who boycott any sort of product from the US, and it seems to be a trend here not only amongst the youth). If the US doesn't change its policy to our country, we'll eventually strengthen our links to other countries so we can get fair opportunities.
It's that simple. |
Exactly. The Brazilian has spoken. Reciprocity in this case is totally legit even if it seems a bit petty. What's wrong with the Brazilian government exerting its national sovereignity? :rolleyes:
And also, Lula is not hardly as anti-American as he could be right now...He has compromised a lot. |
|
|
| malek |
| yoepus... Brazil doesn't live on tourism alone, thats pretty ignorant coming from you. |
|
|
| Lira |
| quote: | Originally posted by YaleTrance
And also, Lula is not hardly as anti-American as he could be right now...He has compromised a lot. |
Oi, Lula has been impressing me (in a good way) quite often lately.
I still can't believe he was the first head of state to call members from our hip-hop movement in order to show them he cared about their critics. Even though he seems a bit clueless sometimes (why is he supporting affirmative action in Brazil, for God's sake!?), he's mature enough :)
| quote: | Originally posted by malek
yoepus... Brazil doesn't live on tourism alone, thats pretty ignorant coming from you. |
This is a usual mistake though. For some reason, people still see Brazil as a Banana Republic, although we're a regional power and we used to be one of the top 10 economies of the world (till a financial crisis hit us... we're 15 or something now :p). Nevertheless, we're an industrial country, which produces quality airplanes (and has had commercial disputes with Canada) and has developed its own technology on nuclear power (the US didn't agree on helping us, so we got the basics from Germany in the 70's and did the rest ourselves - reason why the US are now arrogantly demanding to check what we've got, as if we were a threat to any country - there's too much for us to lose, and we have a strong diplomatic policy, why would we waste it all in a war?).
For some reason, the only things we show foreigners are beaches, gorgeous women, samba and rainforests, even though we're a lot more than that. My city, for example, is known for its post-modern architecture, streets with no names and extreme cultural diversity (I don't think 60% of ours inhabitants were born here, as this is a very young city). Anyway, let's not go off-topic :) |
|
|
| NYCTrancefan |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Well, here's how I see it, being Brazilian and knowing what the situation is here.
Yes, it is/was some sort of revenge (it's called "reciprocity", which is quite common when it comes to diplomacy) because of the way many Brazilian citizens were treated in the US after 9/11 (read LiquidX's post, which is just another proof).
However, keep in mind that this purely reflects an even more complicated problem, which is the American policy towards Brazil and its consequences. The American government is not well seen by Brazilian people because of many actions (and threats) that have been taking place for quite a long time (from threats in the WWII to the discussion about free-trade agreements). This issue is nothing but another brick in the wall. There was no reason for the US to treat our citizens that way in the airports, as there's no links to terrorism in our territory (the CIA even sent some people to Foz do Iguaçu, because of the arab colony, but found nothing).
Do I find it fair to the tourists (from both countries) involved? No. Do I support the Brazilian revenge? Yes. This is a protest, and it's part of international law, it's time for the American government to realise that there will be reactions to their actions, no matter where. A matter of defending our citizens from more harassment.
As for the economic part: I believe more Brazilians visit the US than the other way round (if I could only get some numbers :(), and I know the importance of tourism in our economy. However, we're a growing market, and the less popular you are here, the harder it'll be to get more profit from us (I know countless people who boycott any sort of product from the US, and it seems to be a trend here not only amongst the youth). If the US doesn't change its policy to our country, we'll eventually strengthen our links to other countries so we can get fair opportunities.
It's that simple. |
I do hope that you realize that a lot of what you have stated flies in the face of cooperation with the U.S.A. as you would urge the U.S. to do for better relations with Brazil. With that stated I usually read a lot of Brazilian news such as http://jpdf.estado.com.br/ and http://www.brazzil.com/ and there are constant references to the U.S. much more than you could ever see of Brazil in the U.S. mainstream media. If Brazilians feel that they have to boycott U.S. products then that is a choice that they make. Lula has to do what he believes is best for Brazil and I think he is doing just that, I am interested however to see how the issues of drugs and crime in the favelas, Indian land rights and social poverty are being handled by Lula. While he may be leftist it appears the status quo in Brazil still remains as is, he is currenly lagging far behind in his campaign promises and more Brazilians are becoming frustrated with the pace of Lula's reforms. |
|
|
| Lira |
I'm aware of the fact that there are cooperation programmes between our countries. However, this sort of relationship is not so simple, and a dualistic view of "good" and "bad" cannot be applied here, since good actions don't neutralise bad actions this way. In the end of day, there are still hard feelings because of people like Dale Hersh...
... who showed our authorities that the middle finger is an universal sign (that is the moment when he was getting his ID). Believe us when we say we are as irritated in American airports as you are in Brazilian airports: this is actually the reason that started the whole thing - to protest against the harassment of Brazilian citizens. Were there other ways to solve this problem? If there are, I'd like to know.
As for any countries' internal issues, I don't know whether it's possible to understand them properly unless you experience them (living there) or reading a lot about the history and culture of the place you're talking about. The problem with land rights and Native Americans is not that big (there aren't many left anyway, sadly) when compared to th landless people (Movimento dos Sem-Terra), which are not Native Americans: they're a consequence of how Brazil was colonised by the Portuguese. The same goes for the drug problem: it's far beyond the favelas, having deep roots in the history of the society and government of Rio de Janeiro - even thouh I reckon sending military troops might be a good idea, we live in a democracy, which is a system that sometimes may bring problems if you need harsher measures. Socially, Brazil has still many problems to face, but we're sorting them out as the days pass by.
You may say Lula could do some sort of revolution, doing things faster. No, he can't. If he started to change everything here all of a sudden, it would cause chaos in our economy because of foreign investors (?) and THEN we would have many more problems to deal with.
Ps.: By the way, what does this have to do with this topic? I'm lost now :p |
|
|
|
|
