World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
I would be surprised if this sort of thing was possible and I'm pretty sure it's not and im pretty sure it's a good thing that it's not
Sadly, it is. Britain did it a few years ago to some kid that joined IS. She held rights to a passport to a country that she had never been even visited and that was enough for the Home Office to yank her British one.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shamima_Begum
A pretty tragic tale imo
She didn't have the passport at that time, while musk has probably a bunch of them stashed away. What the British did was directly going against the UDHR, but musk can suck it.
Probably did her a favour not letting her back.
Not seen such a prominent figure of hate since Cat Bin Lady.
Dunno, stateless in a refugee camp currently as Bangladesh won't let her in either. Think I'd opt for keeping a low profile in Britain instead, change name, get the hair dye and sunglasses on and move to a shitty wee town somewhere
The jokes write themselves sometimes.
Charlie Angus wrote about why he's helping to push this through, giving valid legal reasons why it should be done. Seeing as he's a current MP in Canada's parliament I'll believe him before I believe you.
https://charlieangus.substack.com/p/musk-doesnt-deserve-canadian-citizenship
...Especially since the alternative could be just charging him with treason or something.
The gov't doesn't have to charge him with treason to revoke his citizenship. They only have to prove that he committed it.
And then give the US a reason to retaliate against Canada...
It isn't in the US, but the US is not all countries.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afroyim_v._Rusk
EDIT: I haven't previously read up on citizenship law for Canada, so I don't know if this is missing relevant Canadian citizenship law, but a quick search suggests that Canadian law doesn't permit for executive removal of citizenship either:
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-29/page-3.html
None of that section nor paragraph 27 looks like it provides for involuntary removal of Canadian citizenship.
That being said, there is a question of whether this is ordinary federal law or constitutional law. I don't know how one determines that.
In the US, Afroyim v. Rusk found that the US Constitution disallowed removal of citizenship. There is a high bar to modify the US Constitution -- a majority of both legislatures in a three-quarters supermajority of state legislatures need to approve of a constitutional amendment. This is considerably higher than the bar to pass ordinary federal law, which is just a simple majority in the House, Senate, and the President, or a two-thirds supermajority in both the House and Senate.
Canada's constitutional situation is complicated. Canada started out following the UK model, where Parliament can change any law it wants to as easily as any other -- there is no "higher law" like a constitution. At the time that Canada got split off from the UK at a constitutional level, some of Canadian law was decided to be part of the constitution and some not...but it was never defined exactly what law was and what wasn't, so I understand that courts have been working that out ever since. The constitution isn't simply a separate document, as in the US.
Also, different parts of Canada's constitution have different bars for amendment.
So I don't know for sure how strong this constraint is; it might be that the Canadian legislature could remove this bar as readily as they would a typical law.
EDIT2: Someone else pointed out the Shamima Begum case below, where the British executive removed someone's citizenship. I followed that and commented on it when it happened, and it is definitely possible for the executive to strip a citizen's citizenship in the UK; the law explicitly provides for it.
I was fairly concerned about this at the time it was in the news, because most other legal rights depend on citizenship. If you can remove someone's citizenship, you can remove most of their other legal rights and protections.
"Oh no, how do we make sure Diet Hitler stays a Canadian citizen?"
Wtf is your thought process, my dude?
More like there’s systems in place to prevent countries from creating a stateless person, who would have no rights anywhere.
Just because it sounds nice to happen to people you don’t agree with, it’s still something that shouldn’t be allowed to happen.
Musk has dual citizenship, revoking his Canadian citizenship would not make him stateless.
Well then Chuck him out on his ass
Yup. South Africa (birth), Canada (through his mother) and America.
There are indeed systems in place but Elon isn't covered since he has at least dual citizenship. Many countries, and first world countries at that, have citizenship revocation a possible outcome.
Or maybe don't ruin millions of people's lives? From what I understand Canada does have this sort of legal process for exiling people
It is legal. And I'm hoping they yank it.