Each group will find one article or one visual per person on the assigned subject. They will post the articles or visuals as comments to this blog (put them on this thread); for each article or visual, the group will write a short summary so that we can understand the gist of the issue. Feel free to utilize other resources to help you summarize the situation, but make sure you do so in your own words. Group assignments will follow.
Your article doesn't have to be a newspaper article per se. For example, Craig is using the Canadian government immigration website as his source.
The point of the assignment is to compare the immigration issues we experience here in the US with the experiences of other countries so that we can understand the issue of global immigration - as a whole - better.
Your article doesn't have to be a newspaper article per se. For example, Craig is using the Canadian government immigration website as his source.
The point of the assignment is to compare the immigration issues we experience here in the US with the experiences of other countries so that we can understand the issue of global immigration - as a whole - better.
As far as becoming a citizen in Canada there are several laws. First of all you have to be at least 18years old but if you’re under the age you have to have parents that are Canadian or your parent has applied at the same time you do for citizenship. Then adults have to live in the country for al least 3 years there in a 4 year time period. They also test you on your ability to speak French or English. Also you can’t be a criminal or felon if you want to enter Canada.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cic.gc.ca/english/citizenship/become-eligibility.asp
Here are some interactive activities to see if you can be a resident:
Residence Calculator: https://eservicesak.cic.gc.ca/rescalc/resCalcStartNew.do
Self-Assessment Tool: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/citizenship/rules/index.asp
Danish Cartoon Controversy
ReplyDeleteARTICLE:
http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/d/danish_cartoon_controversy/index.html
IMAGE:
http://www.humanevents.com/images/islm_cartoon_7.jpg
The article presented in the New York Times, written by Patricia Cohen, pinpoints the uproar about the Danish Cartoon Controversy. In 2005, a Danish newspaper released cartoon drawings of the Prophet Muhammad. The drawings caused a violent uproar in the Muslim community in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. There were many embassies and churches burned. At least 200 people were killed in riots and fights with police. As retaliation, Al Queda bombed the Danish embassy in Pakistan, killing eight people. The Yale University Press asked the question: “Should the cartoons be included in a forthcoming book about the original 2006 crisis?” The question was assessed by two dozen experts on Islam, terrorism and diplomacy; the ending answer was “do not print the cartoons”.
The image is of a Muslim man. There is bomb where his turban should be. This symbolizes terrorism. The picture has a negative approach on the Muslim community.
The article talked about the controversy going on between europe, and the muslim community as a whole. A danish newspaper released several drawings of the muslim prophet muhammad. The drawings were harsh, and not accurate of all muslims. This made people furious. Fights, riots, and religous buildings were being burned. Things got out of hand really fast. Al Queda replied by bombing a Danish embassy, and killing 8 people. He said it was a fair trade.
DeleteAlthough the newpaper has freedom of speech, this sparks a new question. The article has a good point, "How do you draw the line between free expression and respect for religion?"
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThe image shows a Muslim man whos head is a bomb. I believe this shows that Muslims are like terrorists and bombing things is all they think about. Most Americans think that Muslims are all bad, and i don't think that they'd want them to be immigrants here.
DeleteThere are several rules to becoming a citizen In Britain. You must be at least 18 years of age, be of sound mind (meaning not crazy), you must intend to continue living in the UK or continue in Crown Service, you must be able to communicate in English, Welsh, or Scottish Gaelic to an acceptable degree, have sufficient knowledge of life in the UK, be of good character, and meet the residential requirements which include: Having been a resident for five years, been present in the UK five years before the date of your application and not having spent more than 450 days outside the UK during that five year period. Also, you must not have spent more than 90 days outside the UK during the last 12 months of that five year period, as well as having not been in breach with the immigration rules at any point during that five year period, these rules differ if you are married or have a civil partnership with someone who is a citizen of the UK. Instead of having to be in the UK for 5 years before your application, it switches to three, and you must not have spent more than 270 days outside of the UK during those three years, again you must be at least 18 years of age. The rest of the rules are the same. Not so surprisingly the rules are very similar to that of immigrating to the US in fact I believe they're the same, the time you can spend out of the country is a little different though. As far as numbers in immigration, net immigration has added about 1.5 million in the past 10 years in the UK and the US has undoubtedly accepted way more, about 38.1 million in 2007.
ReplyDeleteArticles: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/britishcitizenship/eligibility/naturalisation/standardrequirements/
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=d84d6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=d84d6811264a3210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD
Visual: http://www.britishimmigrationlawyers.co.uk/Images/UK%20Immigration%20Map.gif
This article talks about the requirements for gaining citizenship in the UK. In the UK, you must be 18 years of age and have lived in the country for five years. You must also have knowledge of life in the UK. There are a lot of requirements to receive citizenship in the United Kingdom. In my opinion, it seems a lot easier to become a citizen of Britain than it is to become a US citizen. It seems as if America is much harder to get into than a lot of other countries. Why is that?
Deletehttp://www.migratenow.ca/articles/100.asp
ReplyDeleteCanada has many laws and rules before someone can become a Canadian citizen. I think the main things would be that you have to be 18, and have to live in Canada for at least 3-4 years, which is how it is in the US as well and probably other countries too. It's pretty similar to other countries, you have to know at least one language (English or French), know the history, and know the rights and responsibilities of being a citizen. All citizens must help one another out like neighbors, vote in elections, help out in the community, its all part of the responsibilities and getting involved.
In this article it states that your have to be a permanant resident, 18+, for citizenship you need to be a 3/4 year resident, know english or french, know their government, rights, history, and geography. In addition, it also shows an over view of their responsibilities, rights, benifits, and how they can get involved with Canada.
DeleteHow would you compare that to another country? Do you mean that you have to be 18 to be a citizen? What if you are born there, like an anchor baby?
Deletehttp://articles.cnn.com/2010-04-06/world/world.health.day.urban_1_world-health-day-individual-health-infant-mortality?_s=PM:WORLD
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about the effects of urbanization worldwide. They say people who live in increasing urbanization have produced many health related problems, some of them being diabetes, tuberculosis, and even HIV/AIDS. “Social isolation is also an issue for large cities in rich countries, whereas in developing countries it is overcrowding, infant mortality, diarrhea and other health issues.” It later goes on talking about Japan being a good example of a rich capitalist city that has excellent health record partly because there are smaller gap between the poorest and the richest.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/24/us/politics/24immig.html
ReplyDeletethis article talks about how Arizona passed an immigration law which forces people to carry their immigration papers allowing officers to check any ones papers and detain them if the don't have their papers which caused protests. Hispanics were especially mad and called the law a form of racial profiling and Goner Brewer said that the new law would cause "the state to live in fear, community distress, increased crime and costly litigation, with nationwide repercussions". Brewer believed that since Arizona is a border state it makes it ideal for illegal immigrants but with the law it will help officers better enforce the borders. Years before president George bush attempted to pass a similar law but failed because his party divided on their beliefs of the issue. Russel Pearce said that the new law is "a state crime — a misdemeanor — to not carry immigration papers" and allows people the right to "sue local government and agencies if they believe that the law is not being enforced".
It discusses the law that was passed last April regarding to Arizona’s law on immigration. The law was basically a law saying that if a police officer, for any reason, thinks someone may be here illegally they have permission to ask for proof of documents. If the accused fails to provide such documentation, the police can charge them of a misdemeanor crime. Mexico’s foreign minister has concern for his citizens since the law took effect. He is worried for the rights and relations his citizens may have in Arizona. And some authorities call this law an act of “Nazism”. While many believe that this can cause racial profiling, Ms.Brewer says that officers will have proper training on the matter and that racial profiling wouldn’t be tolerated as well.
DeleteThis article shows xenophobia in the eyes of the USA. Before we never had such a law in any of the states, but since the killing of farm rancher in Arizona by a Mexican smuggler it all of the sudden causes a big red alarm. An alarm, that everyone here illegally has to be a murderer and should be sent away to their home country. Many that come here are simply looking to be free and have a better life here in the USA, not to come and kill people. The New Colossus has a line in it saying “Give me your tired, your poor. Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free”. They are coming here for such reasons and now laws are being passed not allowing them to be here.
http://www.altoarizona.com/images/juan_luis_garcia.png
ReplyDeleteDo I look illegal? - The Arizon law SB1070 give local police officers the right to stop anyone who is driving who may look “suspicious” for proof of citizenship. SB1070 is simply racial profiling, what makes someone look illegal? Is it darker skin? Police officers are stopping random cars claiming they look “suspicious” simply by some one’s skin color or physcal features.
I also agree that this visual is pointing out a clear situation of racial profiling. Considering the cartoon is brown I know this is pointed towards Mexican. This reminds me of the state where there was a problem and Mexicans had to carry around papers saying they were legal. This is definitely not a welcoming attitude towards diversity and shows the ugliness from the movie on Tuesday.
DeleteI remember when this policy was taking place. Many families and citizens were affected by this policy and found it hard to travel anywhere without being pulled over or questioned. I couldn't imagine how hard it would be to go through that while I am a legal citizen.
Deletehttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12081172/ns/msnbc_tv-the_ed_show/t/fence-proposed-along-us-mexico-border/#.TysHDONWp8M
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about the 700 mile fence border between the U.S. and Mexico. It is a conversation between Colin Hanna and Carlson. Colin Hanna believes that right now the U.S. border security just ins't enough. She sees it as right now the US is saying come over here illeagal and we'll make you a citizen anyway but with the fence we'll be saying you can come over but make sure its legal. Hanna supports immigration but only if its legal. In addition, the fence that we have is already effective but, the fence that they have designed is based off of that one which makes it better.
I agree with Hanna when he says that just having security is enough because I still believe that there are ways to get aroubd security no matter how strict it is. Having the 700 mile fence border, I think, is more reassuring because at least when there are illegal immigrants trying to cross the border, something will stall them and eventually will be caught. Hanna also says that he believes the idea of the fence is very effective so I say why not build it now? Carlson agrees with Hanna as well because everyone knows and thinks that the immigration between the US and Mexico is out of control.
DeleteNo matter how much security we have, there will always be illegal immigrants coming over to the U.S. What this 700 mile fence proposes is a obstacle. With it up, there will be less people attempting to cross and it would at least slow them down. Anything that we can do to prevent drug smuggling is also a bonus. As for how effective this fence is, only time can tell.
DeleteArticle:(look @ Janae Butler)
ReplyDeleteImage
http://www.thfire.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/New_York-Ground_Zero.jpg
This shows the construction site of the New York mosque two blocks away from ground zero. The reason of building another mosque is to make sure that the new building meets "architectural criteria for protection from the city."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/01/02/us-crime-newyork-idUSTRE8010IE20120102
DeleteSummary of article: this article is about how there have been numerous attacks at a mosgue in New york. They all haven’t been at the same one but they have been at different ones.
http://www.languagepolicy.net/archives/LLPT2.htm
ReplyDeleteThis article is about the two view points over the debate of language policy. One view is on the fact that if we allow immigrants to post ballots and go to schools native to their tongues it will reduce their incentive to learn English. This view wants to accept ethnic traditions without losing English as the main language. The other view is over rights for those who have language barriers and freedom of speech. They see it as natives verses new comers.
Article: Look at Willie
ReplyDeleteImage:
http://www.aerialarchives.com/San_Ysidro.htm
This image shows the Tijuana-California border and how backed up it can get. The side you see the most of is the Tijuana side, those people are trying to cross in to America.
In this image it shows how long the border line can get, from personal experience, it can take many hours. Many people go through the boreder daily, and it is constantly like the image shows.
DeleteThe images shows the busiest land border crossing in the world. Explaining how many people are trying to cross daily, and how long the process can be.
DeleteDanish Cartoon Controversy
ReplyDeletemovie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBSxrLrTIF0
This video explains a little about who thought of the Danish Cartoon and how his life was in danger.
http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Features/WorldOfChange/dubai.php
ReplyDeleteThis is a time lapse of pictures of Dubai, and how its continuing to build its city and grow. The pictures start at november 11, 2000, and end april 25, 2011. The United Arab Emirates wanted a way for Dubai to have more tourism. This could help stimulate Dubai and its economy, as well as others around them too. They started to build hundreds of artificial islands around the Persian gulf. The islands were built from sand on the sea floor and rock erosion protects them and gives them shape. If you look at the pictures, all the islands line up to make one big palm tree. I think that is pretty crazy that people can do that. The pictures also have color codes, showing how the land was dry before, where vegetation came in, water, and buildings. Its a good way to really see the urbanization going on here because you can see the progress theyve made through the time lapse. Buildings being built, roads, and urbanization.