Org Mobile Site
Thread: Norwegian Of The Year 2010
Simplest solution: She should marry her boyfriend.
He should propose to her which means she could apply for a engagement permit and add another 6 months to her stay.
Apparently you are allowed to work on that permit.
He should propose to her which means she could apply for a engagement permit and add another 6 months to her stay.
Apparently you are allowed to work on that permit.
Originally Posted by Sigurd:
Simplest solution: She should marry her boyfriend.
He should propose to her which means she could apply for a engagement permit and add another 6 months to her stay.
Apparently you are allowed to work on that permit.
So we should force people to conform to a christian standard....?Simplest solution: She should marry her boyfriend.
He should propose to her which means she could apply for a engagement permit and add another 6 months to her stay.
Apparently you are allowed to work on that permit.
I did not realize I lived in a fundamentalist state.
So Odin was living a Christian standard by being married to Frigg? Or Thor and Sif?
But that is beside the point.
Her commonlaw husband is Norwegian but under the Norwegian law this union is not recognized.
You could try imposing your heathen common-law marriage custom to the Norwegian system later, but they should seriously consider this option.
But that is beside the point.
Her commonlaw husband is Norwegian but under the Norwegian law this union is not recognized.
You could try imposing your heathen common-law marriage custom to the Norwegian system later, but they should seriously consider this option.
Another question, maybe I live in an authoritarian control state but how did she achieve so much without any papers?
I'm pretty sure I had to show my ID card to get into the Uni, of course I can go sit in a lecture without one as there are no controls at the doors, but to collect points and get the papers in the end you certainly need to be registered. Same for opening a company and many other tasks.
I'm pretty sure I had to show my ID card to get into the Uni, of course I can go sit in a lecture without one as there are no controls at the doors, but to collect points and get the papers in the end you certainly need to be registered. Same for opening a company and many other tasks.
At least this woman was integrated into society. She learned perfect Norwegian got an education and became a Norwegian. This alone should count for much. In fact, it should be a qualifying reason to let someone become a citizen. Not a requirement, but the feat alone should qualify for automatic citizenry.
Originally Posted by Sigurd:
At least this woman was integrated into society. She learned perfect Norwegian got an education and became a Norwegian. This alone should count for much. In fact, it should be a qualifying reason to let someone become a citizen. Not a requirement, but the feat alone should qualify for automatic citizenry.
This feat should be a compulsary part of becoming a citizen, but certainly not automatic citizenry (perhaps in Norway where barely anyone speaks the language, but English is so widespread). Of course, stating that language and education are requirements I hope you realise you are descriminating, something I imagine HoreTore would also be against?At least this woman was integrated into society. She learned perfect Norwegian got an education and became a Norwegian. This alone should count for much. In fact, it should be a qualifying reason to let someone become a citizen. Not a requirement, but the feat alone should qualify for automatic citizenry.
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
Of course, stating that language and education are requirements I hope you realise you are descriminating, something I imagine HoreTore would also be against?
Should I throw the Strawman at you? Of course, stating that language and education are requirements I hope you realise you are descriminating, something I imagine HoreTore would also be against?
I tried to formulate it as carefully a I could stating that if someone was able to copy her feat, there should not be any more talk about "maybe we'll let you in".
Originally Posted by Sigurd:
but they should seriously consider this option.
I don't need to answer this, as she has already done so(it was in one of the dozen articles on vg.no last night, I can't be arsed to find it though):but they should seriously consider this option.
It's a matter of principle to her.
She would not get married at this point in her life under normal circumstances. The only reason to do so now would be to circumvent the legal system, or in other words, cheat. This goes against her principles, and it's something she simply will not do.
Originally Posted by Husar:
Another question, maybe I live in an authoritarian control state but how did she achieve so much without any papers?
I'm pretty sure I had to show my ID card to get into the Uni, of course I can go sit in a lecture without one as there are no controls at the doors, but to collect points and get the papers in the end you certainly need to be registered. Same for opening a company and many other tasks.
It's perfectly legal to study in Norway without legal residence or a work permit.Another question, maybe I live in an authoritarian control state but how did she achieve so much without any papers?
I'm pretty sure I had to show my ID card to get into the Uni, of course I can go sit in a lecture without one as there are no controls at the doors, but to collect points and get the papers in the end you certainly need to be registered. Same for opening a company and many other tasks.
There is no law for a universty against accepting paperless immigrants.
Louis, I'm going to go over this once more, just for you, as I cannot believe that you disagree with it.
The main problem in this case is the political side of it. The problem per se is not that she is thrown out, but why she is thrown out. She is thrown out because she took part in the public debate, and we cannot have that. We cannot punish people for something we should encourage.
We cannot allow our government to punish people for having troublesome opinions. They do that in Russia, but we can't allow that to happen in the EU, now can we? Is this really an appropriate way for a European government to behave?
I am not arguing for special treatment. I'm arguing against targeting people specifically.
There was another paperless and illegal immigrant at the Nansen School wednesday night. But he had not criticized the government, so the police did not arrest him. They only arrested Maria Amelie. We cannot accept this.
The main problem in this case is the political side of it. The problem per se is not that she is thrown out, but why she is thrown out. She is thrown out because she took part in the public debate, and we cannot have that. We cannot punish people for something we should encourage.
We cannot allow our government to punish people for having troublesome opinions. They do that in Russia, but we can't allow that to happen in the EU, now can we? Is this really an appropriate way for a European government to behave?
I am not arguing for special treatment. I'm arguing against targeting people specifically.
There was another paperless and illegal immigrant at the Nansen School wednesday night. But he had not criticized the government, so the police did not arrest him. They only arrested Maria Amelie. We cannot accept this.
So, you have free education for anyone walking through the door and all this other cool stuff, but you have an authoritarian Tribunal that sits in judgment of immigrants and refugees with out political over sight?
In most democratic countries public opinion counts for a lot and if that fails the legislators will jump on board and pass a law, even just for that one person.
That place you live is a little weird.
In most democratic countries public opinion counts for a lot and if that fails the legislators will jump on board and pass a law, even just for that one person.
That place you live is a little weird.
Originally Posted by Fisherking:
So, you have free education for anyone walking through the door and all this other cool stuff, but you have an authoritarian Tribunal that sits in judgment of immigrants and refugees with out political over sight?
In most democratic countries public opinion counts for a lot and if that fails the legislators will jump on board and pass a law, even just for that one person.
That place you live is a little weird.
Her deportation wasn't decided in the courts, it was decided by the justice department(and probably some other parts of the cabinet too).So, you have free education for anyone walking through the door and all this other cool stuff, but you have an authoritarian Tribunal that sits in judgment of immigrants and refugees with out political over sight?
In most democratic countries public opinion counts for a lot and if that fails the legislators will jump on board and pass a law, even just for that one person.
That place you live is a little weird.
Their decision has been reaffirmed by the courts, but if it had been decided by the courts alone, things wouldn't have progressed so fast. A decision taken on tuesday and effectuated on wednesday? No, a state doesn't work that fast. The nromal process takes months and years. it took a day because the decision was taken politically.
If your point is over the speed and process rather than whether she should be deported, then OK.
But if she thought she could enter politics without there being any blow-back she was being dreadfully naive.
But if she thought she could enter politics without there being any blow-back she was being dreadfully naive.
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
But if she thought she could enter politics without there being any blow-back she was being dreadfully naive.
I have no desire to live in a country where people are being punished for their opinions.But if she thought she could enter politics without there being any blow-back she was being dreadfully naive.
If I did, I might as well have moved to Russia myself. Or China.
While in custody, she has given an interview.
My translation. About marriage:
We are all obliged to respect the law. But the law must in turn respect basic human decency.
My translation. About marriage:
Originally Posted by :
- (...) She's had multiple suitors, but she's always said that she'll get married for love, with the right person. To get married in order to stay in Norway has never been a possibility, that goes against all her principals, Eivind(the boyfriend) says.
- That's completely true. People say "can't you just get married?" to me. That's bullshit. I don't want to do it that way, she says, and points out that she doesn't want to live with a fake passport either.
As to why she doesn't want to return to Russia:- (...) She's had multiple suitors, but she's always said that she'll get married for love, with the right person. To get married in order to stay in Norway has never been a possibility, that goes against all her principals, Eivind(the boyfriend) says.
- That's completely true. People say "can't you just get married?" to me. That's bullshit. I don't want to do it that way, she says, and points out that she doesn't want to live with a fake passport either.
Originally Posted by :
First of all because I don't have any network there. I don't know if I have any living relatives, nor where they live [should there be any live ones]. I have no russian education, I've been a refugee almost my entire life. If I'm sent back there, I'll have nothing. I have nobody there. You might as well send me to New Zealand, says Maria.
First of all because I don't have any network there. I don't know if I have any living relatives, nor where they live [should there be any live ones]. I have no russian education, I've been a refugee almost my entire life. If I'm sent back there, I'll have nothing. I have nobody there. You might as well send me to New Zealand, says Maria.
We are all obliged to respect the law. But the law must in turn respect basic human decency.
Originally Posted by Sigurd:
At least this woman was integrated into society. She learned perfect Norwegian got an education and became a Norwegian. This alone should count for much. In fact, it should be a qualifying reason to let someone become a citizen. Not a requirement, but the feat alone should qualify for automatic citizenry.
Exactly.At least this woman was integrated into society. She learned perfect Norwegian got an education and became a Norwegian. This alone should count for much. In fact, it should be a qualifying reason to let someone become a citizen. Not a requirement, but the feat alone should qualify for automatic citizenry.
Wanna know who funded her education? Statoil. The state-owned oil company...
And now they're discussing hiring her as a scientist, which means that she can stay in the country as specialized labour. Though, that may be legally confusing if her deportation is effectuated....
And now they're discussing hiring her as a scientist, which means that she can stay in the country as specialized labour. Though, that may be legally confusing if her deportation is effectuated....
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
I have no desire to live in a country where people are being punished for their opinions.
If I did, I might as well have moved to Russia myself. Or China.
I think you want the Kingdom of La La Land then. I have no desire to live in a country where people are being punished for their opinions.
If I did, I might as well have moved to Russia myself. Or China.
Even America with its First Amendment expect reprecussions if you choose to speak out and are currently breaking the law.
Originally Posted by rory_20_uk:
I think you want the Kingdom of La La Land then.
Even America with its First Amendment expect reprecussions if you choose to speak out and are currently breaking the law.
Of course she knew the possibility. A soldier who goes to Afghanistan should know there's a possibility he might die, but should that mean that we cannot mourn or protest his death?I think you want the Kingdom of La La Land then.
Even America with its First Amendment expect reprecussions if you choose to speak out and are currently breaking the law.
Nobodys saying this came out of the blue. We're saying this is an injustice.
Yup. The world is full of them. To be honest this is so far down the list it's out of view.
"Extra! Extra! Illegal Immigrant given free education up to Masters and deported to Russia! She won't circumvent the law on moral grounds!"
Not quite fleeing the death squads is she? Anyhoo, this is such a non-issue I'm going to stop posting on this thread in protest. I'm sure people will accord equal weight to this as they will to this case.
"Extra! Extra! Illegal Immigrant given free education up to Masters and deported to Russia! She won't circumvent the law on moral grounds!"
Not quite fleeing the death squads is she? Anyhoo, this is such a non-issue I'm going to stop posting on this thread in protest. I'm sure people will accord equal weight to this as they will to this case.
She seems to be making her self a martyr. Up The Cause...
You can blame the politicians but she shares in it too.
You can blame the politicians but she shares in it too.
Originally Posted by Fisherking:
She seems to be making her self a martyr. Up The Cause...
You can blame the politicians but she shares in it too.
You seem to have a very weird way of looking at things.She seems to be making her self a martyr. Up The Cause...
You can blame the politicians but she shares in it too.
I can't seem to plet this go, so I'm going to bore you with another post:
Some people(like Louis) have made this case into a Maria vs. Starvin' Marvin. But how accurate is that? The number of immigrants Norway can sustain will depend on our number of jobs and our production. The more jobs we have and the higher our national production gets, the more immigrants we can sustain, as we can offer them a job and products to consume. Maria Amelie has a technical masters degree. Through her work/research, she will create industrial jobs and increase our production, thus allowing us to handle even more immigrants.
So, it's not a case of "why does she deserve to stay when Starvin Marvin dies in Ethiopia?", the case is tha by allowing Maria to stay, we can allow more immigrants to come.
It's not Maria vs. Starvin Marvin, it's Maria PLUS Starvin Marvin. And a few of his friends.
Some people(like Louis) have made this case into a Maria vs. Starvin' Marvin. But how accurate is that? The number of immigrants Norway can sustain will depend on our number of jobs and our production. The more jobs we have and the higher our national production gets, the more immigrants we can sustain, as we can offer them a job and products to consume. Maria Amelie has a technical masters degree. Through her work/research, she will create industrial jobs and increase our production, thus allowing us to handle even more immigrants.
So, it's not a case of "why does she deserve to stay when Starvin Marvin dies in Ethiopia?", the case is tha by allowing Maria to stay, we can allow more immigrants to come.
It's not Maria vs. Starvin Marvin, it's Maria PLUS Starvin Marvin. And a few of his friends.
If nobody had made a point out of it nobody would have to put heir foot down, it's a discrace but I know who to blame. She's a victim of political correctness and the consequent inhuman rigidness of those cornered by it.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
Some people(like Louis) have made this case into a Maria vs. Starvin' Marvin. But how accurate is that?
Let me give you another, slightly related, angle to chew on: This case shows the dreadful racism and white Christian superiority complex of Norway. Some people(like Louis) have made this case into a Maria vs. Starvin' Marvin. But how accurate is that?
Illegals are deported all of the time. Asylum is refused all of the time.
But now they've managed to find the perfect illegal: a white, Christian, highly educated, young woman. Healthy, pretty, glamorous job. A golden poster child. But surely, if this was about a forty year old, swarthy, Muslim, undereducated man there'd be no public outcry and people protesting in the street? Where were allprotesters when the wretched and the poor were deported?
Picture of random forty-something Muslim illegal immigrant:
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
If she succeeded in Norway I am sure she could do the same wherever. She should be thankful to Norway for having funded her education.
As to her being deported because she is an illegal immigrant, well, she is an illegal immigrant.
As to her being deported because she is an illegal immigrant, well, she is an illegal immigrant.
Louis, I am fully aware of that, and I don't disagree. But I don't see why that should affect this case?
It should be noted, however, that there were a public outcry last time the government shipped 30-something muslim immigrants out. Was it as strong? No, but then again, all of those muslims had criminal records...
Shibumi, you're missing the ppint, which is that Norway will be worse off without her. First of all we will lose a technical worker we are in short supply of, secondly we have lost a political voice.
Everyone loses if she is sent to Russia. Everybody wins if she stays.
It should be noted, however, that there were a public outcry last time the government shipped 30-something muslim immigrants out. Was it as strong? No, but then again, all of those muslims had criminal records...
Shibumi, you're missing the ppint, which is that Norway will be worse off without her. First of all we will lose a technical worker we are in short supply of, secondly we have lost a political voice.
Everyone loses if she is sent to Russia. Everybody wins if she stays.
If you have no selection at the gate you can't afford favoritism. Kick her out and bring her back legally.
Originally Posted by HoreTore:
Shibumi, you're missing the ppint, which is that Norway will be worse off without her. First of all we will lose a technical worker we are in short supply of, secondly we have lost a political voice.
You seem to be forgetting, that is why she's getting deported in the first place.Shibumi, you're missing the ppint, which is that Norway will be worse off without her. First of all we will lose a technical worker we are in short supply of, secondly we have lost a political voice.
Originally Posted by Greyblades:
You seem to be forgetting, that is why she's getting deported in the first place.
Yes, I don't see why our political parties should have the ability to remove unwanted political opposition.You seem to be forgetting, that is why she's getting deported in the first place.
I dont think they have the same sentiments. It's amazing what lengths politicians will go to to win. Defacing or destroying the opposition by exploiting a law is just a bonus.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO