UPDATE: Well, crap. I think Pacifica just blew this post out of the water with her comment below.
In the series The Vikings, Rollo becomes a Christian (see below). Afterwards, his Viking companion Floki reproves his abandonment of the gods of the Vikings. Rollo protests that it was just a joke and he wasn’t serious. So is Rollo a Christian or not? Floki says that the Viking gods didn’t think it was much of joke. The attitude of Floki harkens to an ancient view that oaths made before men and gods are serious business, and one cannot enter into them casually or lightheartedly. For him, this baptism is no joke but a formal and solemn oath, a clear change of allegience.
US immigration law states the following:
A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality—2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen years;
Now it is unlikely that a person claiming the singing of “O Canada” as an expatriating act will easily persuade a US State Department official. However, I would argue that it is, that a person could indeed claim the singing of “O Canada” as an expatriating. Many border babies have been trapped in a situation in which they have not had to swear an oath to the Queen of Canada because they either were born Canadian citizens or they became naturalized citizens before the age of 18. Yet it is unlikely that any Canadian citizen has never had an occasion to sing “O Canada”.
The singing of “O Canada” is a formal affirmation of allegiance for the following reasons:
(1) It is the officially recognized National Anthem of Canada. Upon swearing my oath to the Queen, we immediately sang “O Canada” in both French and English. When it is sung, it often serves to make an event more solemn and formal, e.g., a hockey match.
(2) People sing it in front of witnesses. Likely, other people saw me actually singing “O Canada” at the Georgetown Rotary Club on Saturday evening.
(3) Body posture is important. While we don’t put our hands on our hearts here in Canada when we sing, we do take off our hats (gents) and turn towards a Canadian flag if one is present.
(4) The words of the song presuppose sole allegiance to Canada. True Patriot love indicates something which is undivided with the love of another country, including the United States. We sing that we will defend Canada, and this means against any invader, even if it is the United States. This is our duty as Canadians, and we should take it as seriously as did General Isaac Brock who sacrificed his own life defending Canada. This is a potentially expatriating act in and of itself.
(5) It is common to sing “O Canada” as a regular part of school curriculum in Canada, to inculcate a love of country in Canadian youth. This means that it is a formal aspect of Canadian nationalism and thus teaches the exclusivity of Canada’s role as protector.
(6) “O Canada” is in lyric and verse, and the intention of this poetical form is to aid memorization and to stress its solemnity in formal situations.
(7) “O Canada” invokes God. Thus, it follows a very ancient form of an oath, which calls on a god or gods to help or to act as a witness. Webster’s dictionary, for example, states that an oath is “a solemn usually formal calling upon God or a god to witness to the truth of what one says or to witness that one sincerely intends to do what one says … “
Perhaps we overlooked the singing of “O Canada” as a formal declaration of allegience because it is so common. It is the 400 lb gorilla in the room. But just because it is such a common occurrence in Canada does not mean it is not a formal declaration of allegiance. It is indeed a formal oath before God of exclusive allegiance to Canada, and I mean it every time I sing it, even if Stephen Harper doesn’t.
Now, the only other really important aspect of this formal affirmation of allegience is whether the person sings it with the intention of relinquishing US citizenship. Look in your heart and ask yourself if you ever sang “O Canada” and really meant it. Or did you sing it like Rollo, with no intention of being an exclusive defender of Canada? If you did mean it, rejoice! For you are not a US citizen–at least under the correct spirit of the meaning of US law.
@ Wondering took me a couple of reads through your post but yup we are being made second class citizens only because of genetics.
@ WhiteKat thanks for the spelling correction 🙂
@You’reReaching so can you please explain to me why (aside from some law that i was never informed of and that most of the rest of the world knows nothing about either) it is any business of the united states of america to know anything about my finances on 100% earned income not from inside the u.s. of a? i am 100% tax compliant in my country of resience and have not earned a dime in america since 1989, in additon why are they interested in my spouses information? she has even less ties to the states than i do but they want to know about her because we share a chequing account.
why does the irs and the us gov’t not go after all the resident citizens in america that hide behind trusts or what not held in south dakoda or delaware? should not america get its own house in order before they start to reach outside of the borders and go after the little people who knew nothing about having to comply with only one of 2 countries in the worlds ways of taxation?
@WhiteKat: I am aware Canada taxes residents based on world wide income. So do many other countries. I only posted the information about Australia and Japan in response to You’reReaching’s comment about those two countries.
I found this ages ago and keep it on my desktop as a reference (a know-thine-enemy type of thing). Unfortunately I do not know the source so if it is breaking a rule to post it please feel free to delete it. I think it might be part of a manual for COINTELPRO agents. Sorry it’s so long.
COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of an internet forum.
There are several techniques for the control and manipulation of a internet forum no matter what, or who is on it. We will go over each technique and demonstrate that only a minimal number of operatives can be used to eventually and effectively gain a control of a ‘uncontrolled forum.’
Technique #1 – ‘FORUM SLIDING’
If a very sensitive posting of a critical nature has been posted on a forum – it can be quickly removed from public view by ‘forum sliding.’ In this technique a number of unrelated posts are quietly prepositioned on the forum and allowed to ‘age.’ Each of these misdirectional forum postings can then be called upon at will to trigger a ‘forum slide.’ The second requirement is that several fake accounts exist, which can be called upon, to ensure that this technique is not exposed to the public. To trigger a ‘forum slide’ and ‘flush’ the critical post out of public view it is simply a matter of logging into each account both real and fake and then ‘replying’ to prepositioned postings with a simple 1 or 2 line comment. This brings the unrelated postings to the top of the forum list, and the critical posting ‘slides’ down the front page, and quickly out of public view. Although it is difficult or impossible to censor the posting it is now lost in a sea of unrelated and unuseful postings. By this means it becomes effective to keep the readers of the forum reading unrelated and non-issue items.
Technique #2 – ‘CONSENSUS CRACKING’
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at http://www.abovetopsecret.com) is ‘consensus cracking.’ To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made – but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger ‘evidence’ or disinformation in your favour is slowly ‘seeded in.’ Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then ‘abort’ the consensus cracking by initiating a ‘forum slide.’
Technique #3 – ‘TOPIC DILUTION’
Topic dilution is not only effective in forum sliding it is also very useful in keeping the forum readers on unrelated and non-productive issues. This is a critical and useful technique to cause a ‘RESOURCE BURN.’ By implementing continual and non-related postings that distract and disrupt (trolling ) the forum readers they are more effectively stopped from anything of any real productivity. If the intensity of gradual dilution is intense enough, the readers will effectively stop researching and simply slip into a ‘gossip mode.’ In this state they can be more easily misdirected away from facts towards uninformed conjecture and opinion. The less informed they are the more effective and easy it becomes to control the entire group in the direction that you would desire the group to go in. It must be stressed that a proper assessment of the psychological capabilities and levels of education is first determined of the group to determine at what level to ‘drive in the wedge.’ By being too far off topic too quickly it may trigger censorship by a forum moderator.
Technique #4 – ‘INFORMATION COLLECTION’
Information collection is also a very effective method to determine the psychological level of the forum members, and to gather intelligence that can be used against them. In this technique in a light and positive environment a ‘show you mine so me yours’ posting is initiated. From the number of replies and the answers that are provided much statistical information can be gathered. An example is to post your ‘favourite weapon’ and then encourage other members of the forum to showcase what they have. In this matter it can be determined by reverse proration what percentage of the forum community owns a firearm, and or a illegal weapon. This same method can be used by posing as one of the form members and posting your favourite ‘technique of operation.’ From the replies various methods that the group utilizes can be studied and effective methods developed to stop them from their activities.
Technique #5 – ‘ANGER TROLLING’
Statistically, there is always a percentage of the forum posters who are more inclined to violence. In order to determine who these individuals are, it is a requirement to present a image to the forum to deliberately incite a strong psychological reaction. From this the most violent in the group can be effectively singled out for reverse IP location and possibly local enforcement tracking. To accomplish this only requires posting a link to a video depicting a local police officer massively abusing his power against a very innocent individual. Statistically of the million or so police officers in America there is always one or two being caught abusing there powers and the taping of the activity can be then used for intelligence gathering purposes – without the requirement to ‘stage’ a fake abuse video. This method is extremely effective, and the more so the more abusive the video can be made to look. Sometimes it is useful to ‘lead’ the forum by replying to your own posting with your own statement of violent intent, and that you ‘do not care what the authorities think!!’ inflammation. By doing this and showing no fear it may be more effective in getting the more silent and self-disciplined violent intent members of the forum to slip and post their real intentions. This can be used later in a court of law during prosecution.
Technique #6 – ‘GAINING FULL CONTROL’
It is important to also be harvesting and continually maneuvering for a forum moderator position. Once this position is obtained, the forum can then be effectively and quietly controlled by deleting unfavourable postings – and one can eventually steer the forum into complete failure and lack of interest by the general public. This is the ‘ultimate victory’ as the forum is no longer participated with by the general public and no longer useful in maintaining their freedoms. Depending on the level of control you can obtain, you can deliberately steer a forum into defeat by censoring postings, deleting memberships, flooding, and or accidentally taking the forum offline. By this method the forum can be quickly killed. However it is not always in the interest to kill a forum as it can be converted into a ‘honey pot’ gathering center to collect and misdirect newcomers and from this point be completely used for your control for your agenda purposes.
CONCLUSION
Remember these techniques are only effective if the forum participants DO NOT KNOW ABOUT THEM. Once they are aware of these techniques the operation can completely fail, and the forum can become uncontrolled. At this point other avenues must be considered such as initiating a false legal precedence to simply have the forum shut down and taken offline. This is not desirable as it then leaves the enforcement agencies unable to track the percentage of those in the population who always resist attempts for control against them. Many other techniques can be utilized and developed by the individual and as you develop further techniques of infiltration and control it is imperative to share them with HQ.
@Blaze, I figured you knew this. I was just trying to hammer the point across to You’reReaching and anyone else who might be reading the dialogue. Oftentimes on articles that many of us comment on, we tag team each other like that. 🙂
If u live in canada… u pay on all… if u leave… just pay us what is owed on what is made in canada then they wave to u & wish u a good trip & rep Canada well on your travels. We will welcome u home when u come back. The US is opposite…. here is the noose on your neck… don’t care if u left… *yank noose* now empty your pockets… we don’t give a dang if u never set foot on our lands… u are ours to the day u die. & we also make sure we get a cut from what u leave behind..
Re: “COINTELPRO Techniques for dilution, misdirection and control of an internet forum.”
Thank you Em for sharing this.
As I was recently interviewed by AboveTopSecret, I appreciate that there are folks and agents that attempt to skew any rational conversation.
The Boot-Strap Expat
http://thebootstrapexpat.com/
@You’reReaching
Thank you for your comments. Some thoughts:
1. Your main point appears to be that (whether true or not) citizenship is relevant to taxation in more countries than the U.S. and Eritrea, and therefore it is wrong to “single the U.S. out”.
This is irrelevant to the issue of citizenship-based taxation general. Whether other countries make citizenship a factor in taxation doesn’t affect change the abusive way in which it is practiced by the U.S. I am sure you would agree that there is no country that has tried to enforce citizenship-based taxation on the world in a FATCAesque manner.
2. That said, I invite you to elaborate on your “citizenship-based taxation report”. By that I mean, would you provide a list of countries, that you know:
– chase their citizens around the world demanding taxes;
– using threats of draconian penalties;
– by bullying other countries into enforcing U.S. laws in their country;
– attempting to impose taxes on people who are not their citizens and who do not live in the United States;
– imposing “Exit Taxes” on their citizens triggered by renouncing citizenship
– punishing their citizens abroad who marry citizens of other countries
Can you name another country that has these characteristics. Or at the very least, please list the countries that have some of these characteristics and which ones. By so doing, I believe that you would make a valuable contribution to the discussion of this issue.
The U.S. gets a “bad rap” on the citizenship-based taxation issue because it deserves it. Please identify the country or countries that have risen to the same level of abusiveness.
There is a difference between “citizenship being relevant in taxation” and “citizenship-based taxation”.
@WhiteKat and all
It’s time to stop talking about the U.S. and Eritrea as though they are the same. The truth is that the comparison of the U.S. to Eritrea is a gross insult to Eritrea and obscures how abusive the U.S. has become.
All Eritrea wants is 2%. The U.S. wants far more.
To pay Eritrea all you have to do is pay the 2%. To pay the U.S. you must first pay the accountants and the lawyers and then pay the IRS (a tax on tax).
Some countries (Canada for example) will protect Eritreans from Eritrea. The Government of Canada will not protect Canadians of U.S. taint from the United States.
Furthermore, the U.S. has encouraged governments around the world in joining the “Great U.S. Person Roundup.” There is no “Worldwide Hunt” for citizens of Eritrea.
The U.S. has enacted “Whistle Blower” rules making every U.S. citizen a potential retirement plan for a whistle blower. Eritreans are NOT a retirement plan for a whistle blower.
The only legitimate comparison between the U.S. and Eritrea is that they both use the proceeds of their respective “Disapora shakedowns” to finance their war efforts.
In its abuse of its citizens abroad, the U.S. stands alone – one more example of U.S. exceptionalism!
@ USCitizenAbroad
Excellent compare & contrast re: USA and Eritrea. Just one thing though. It was my understanding that Eritrea is using its diaspora tax to rebuild from its war with Ethiopia. The USA uses its diaspora tax to deconstruct other countries with wars.
@USCitizenAbroad
In the Q & A after my presentation to the NZ Select Committee on Wednesday I had an opportunity to use your line “the comparison of the U.S. to Eritrea is a gross insult to Eritrea”, so I did. I detected a few laughs from the public area behind me, but I don’t think the MP’s had any idea what I was talking about. Whatever, I got a kick out of using it in that setting – hope you didn’t copyright it 😉
@Em
Thank you for pointing out my error. Much appreciated. You are right. I should have said something like:
Eritrea uses the proceeds of the tax on it’s citizens abroad to finance a humanitarian effort (promoting peace) , while the U.S. uses the proceeds of the tax on its citizens abroad to pay interest to China (financing the build up of the Chinese military) and on its own attempts to wage war on the world (including its weekly drone attacks in other countries). Yes, “thank you” setting me straight.
@Osgood
I am thrilled that you were able to carry this message all the way to New Zealand. You really should let the Government of Eritrea know that you are “preaching its virtues” the world over.
Wonderful.
@You’reReaching, It must be difficult to take having your State Department bullshit proven by the people on a “blog” to be crass apologetic and propaganda. At this point, you must feel like a member of the US women’s hockey team.
@Petros, LOL!
Excellent, Petros. Touché.