Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Beyonce and Jay-Z Cuba Visit Queried...

page: 1
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 06:41 AM
link   

Beyonce and Jay-Z Cuba Visit Queried...


www.bbc.co.uk

Beyonce and her husband Jay-Z visited Havana, Cuba's capital, but apparently, they may or may not have gained permission from the US government to travel there, and two Republican members of Congress want to find out if they did?
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 06:41 AM
link   
Okay, so it's not earth-shattering news. It's about nothing more than two American pop stars visiting another country's capital, but what makes it an important issue is the fact that Americans have to seek permission from their government in order to be able to visit certain countries! I wasn't aware of that myself.

Disregard the fact that it is two famous American pop stars, it could just as easily be two ordinary Americans. The issue of this thread is actually about America truly being the 'Land of the Free', because you either 'are' or you are 'not'? You cannot be sometimes 'free'. Do you, as an American, consider that you are living in the land of the Free?


Cuba's tourism industry is wholly state-controlled; therefore, US dollars spent on Cuban tourism directly fund the machinery of oppression that brutally represses the Cuban people...
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Mario Diaz-Balart Republican members of Congress.

So, what about the American government oppressing its own citizens by taking a similar stance on them as the Soviet Union and North Korean governments? Since when do governments of supposedly 'free' countries determine for their citizens where they can and cannot go in the world? Surely, the decision on being able to enter a country is determined by the country one wants to visit, and not by one's own?

It would seem to me that the American government's policy is being forced upon Americans in order to actually do the oppressing of the Cuban people by potentially denying them American tourist dollars through the necessary requirement of having Americans seek permission from the state to visit countries, like Cuba, with whom the American government do not have good relations due to a difference in politics? Truly hypocritical and double standard.

What if you don't agree with the political stance of your government, or are you not allowed to disagree with the politics of your country? Is everybody meant to patriotically toe-the-line of government policy, no matter how draconian or inhibiting of freedom it is? Bear in mind that forced patriotism isn't patriotism at all, it is fascism.

It seems to me that if someone wants to visit a country that does not have good relations with your own, nor has embassorial administrative duties for its citizens in that country, it should still be the sovereign right of both the country to be visited, and the person whom is going to visit, to make the decision, and not the right of one's own country to seek to deny that visit on political grounds you don't agree with? It is up to the visitor to determine their own safety, not for your government to decide for you, except on an advisory role.

Again, and this is the real point. One's government and policies should only be advisory, not rule. Of course, one would not like to see criminals coming back and forth from a country bringing drugs and other contraband into one's country, so I can understand the need for a government to set a policy of query as to why one wants to visit another country, and to determine one's suitability (criminal background checks, etc), but certainly not to determine a wholescale denial of visitation based on diametric politics. That is not freedom, but oppression on its own people, and that of the people of the country one would like to visit.

It is a constitutional right to have freedom of travel anywhere within the United States, including off-shore states, but I cannot find anything constitutional regarding overseas travel to countries having their own sovereignty. That may be because I haven't searched deep enough, but I would think that at the time of the framing of the constitution, America would want to have freedom of egress and trade to and with other countries, and would secure such as a right, not to be determined by one's own government?

www.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)
edit on 7/4/13 by elysiumfire because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 06:49 AM
link   
Yes, I thought American values include freedom of movement. If someone wants to go to Cuba, and can find a route that takes them there, that's their business and nobody elses. Hemingway lived there, and lots of Americans like him enough to want to go see his house for themselves, and to see the areas which he identified with "The Old Man and the Sea". That's one reason to go. The fruit there is wonderful (or so I've heard) and some of it is served nowhere else. Cuba is 90 miles away from Florida, so for the American government to continue its dislike of a nation into its own eleventh presidency since the overthrow of a corrupt regime seems counter-productive and, at some point reached long ago, just plain mean.
edit on 7-4-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)
edit on 7-4-2013 by Aleister because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 07:15 AM
link   
reply to post by elysiumfire
 


I think you need permission because if someone kidnaps you then it's a real headache for the authorities. Makes sense to me.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 07:18 AM
link   
Wait so we can go there but not spend money there?

Or is it that we can leave the us but we cant leave the empire?



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 07:36 AM
link   
Many of you seem to not remember when Cuba was the outpost of the great Satan of the East: USSR.

And our stance on Cuba may have made sense back then. Times have changed, and the Cuban deal has to change too. For the love of God, you can swim from the US to Cuba (in theory, anyway).

I would posit that our position towards Cuba has helped fuel the oppression by robbing them of the ability for trade.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 07:48 AM
link   
Illuminati puppets don't need permission.....



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 09:02 AM
link   
Regardless of whether or not the ban should remain, it was put there for a very good reason.
Which is well-remembered by those around in the early 60s.

No fan of the current administration, but the current reasons are here:

Why the Ban Continues

From the beginning, the large Cuban communities of vital Electoral College states such as Florida and New York have been largely pro-embargo and therefore politicians have continued to uphold the travel ban. Also, as Obama outlined in 2009, the United States is waiting on Cuba to demonstrate to the world its desire to open its society before the trade and travel restrictions can be fully removed. Obama explained that this must include a release of political prisoners, ending government fees taken out of money sent from abroad (especially from Cuban-American relatives living in the United States and letting U.S. telecommunications companies enter Cuba.
www.ehow.com...
www.ehow.com...
edit on Sun Apr 7 2013 by DontTreadOnMe because: tags



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Signals
Illuminati puppets don't need permission.....


But ... but ... aren't Beyonce and Jay-Z well known Illuminati puppets?

Ah, probably just disinformation then, meant to distract from the fact, that they are. Right?



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 09:16 AM
link   
From what I have read, there are a LOT of Americans that visit Cuba each year and they most certainly DO NOT need government approval to do so. Sure, you can't fly direct frrom the USA, which is why people fly from Mexico or elsewhere instead. The Government may not like it but since when was it any of their business?



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 09:51 AM
link   
Two elected republican officials call out Jay-Z and Beyonce for traveling to Cuba. It's those little headlines that turn the youth away from the GOP. A waste of time.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 11:07 AM
link   
Kind of humorous to note that Cuba is actually one of the biggest tourist destinations for Canadians as it is a tropical get-away that is fairly cheap because, well, we don't go there. About a million Canadians are tourists in Cuba each year.

www.tripcentral.ca...

Looks pretty actually.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 12:13 PM
link   
What is most stunning is the usually "able to see EVERYTHING thru Race Tinted Glasses" American media giving the "superstar" couple a pass. To the ten percent Afro-Cuban population, the racist (yes, racist) Castro regime has been brutal--for over 50 years. But THAT can be overlooked somehow when a "cool" AfAm couple wants "to celebrate" their wedding anniversary. Who advises these two...or is it just an "one percenter" in your face move?

babalublog.com...



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   
....and this makes Breaking Alternative News??

I guess the next thread on here will be the possible names for Kim Kardashian and Kanye West's baby....



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ButterCookie
....and this makes Breaking Alternative News??

I guess the next thread on here will be the possible names for Kim Kardashian and Kanye West's baby....

Why not? Maybe it's a son and they call him Adam.

Oh my god! Oh noes! Could it be more obvious: Adam Weishaupt!!!
The Illuminati are really not even trying to cover this up anymore. The end is nigh!



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by ButterCookie
....and this makes Breaking Alternative News??

I guess the next thread on here will be the possible names for Kim Kardashian and Kanye West's baby....


Actually, I think it's more appropriate breaking news than anything the Kardashians' could bust out. I personally hate, hate, hate seeing news articles about celebs doing dumb celeb things and that being passed off as somehow being relevant and newsworthy. However, what we have here is some famous people being queried about their recent honeymoon vacation in another country--Cuba--by our own government. I went to the USSR in 1987 and I certainly didn't get queried about it when I got back (but then again, I did have a Visa for the trip). It's about the freedom of being able to travel where we like without having to ask for permission first.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 02:50 PM
link   
It appears that just about anybody can come up with a reason allowing them to travel there:

CUBA: What you need to know about the U.S. Embargo




Isn't Jay-Z and Beyónce Barack and Michelle's bff's? Don't they get together socially occasionally? I have to think they talked about their plans to travel to Cuba for their anniversary with the Obamas beforehand.



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 02:55 PM
link   
The guy who is accusing this nasty couple of vacationing there is an idiot.
He has no idea of what he's talking about



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Why is the freedom of the Cubans so important to these members of Congress while we can be detained indefinitely without trial? Is not the government supposed to swear loyalty to We the People and not to some foreign people?



posted on Apr, 7 2013 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Glinda
What is most stunning is the usually "able to see EVERYTHING thru Race Tinted Glasses" American media giving the "superstar" couple a pass. To the ten percent Afro-Cuban population, the racist (yes, racist) Castro regime has been brutal--for over 50 years. But THAT can be overlooked somehow when a "cool" AfAm couple wants "to celebrate" their wedding anniversary. Who advises these two...or is it just an "one percenter" in your face move?

babalublog.com...


Who gives a $i&T if they go there. They both are talented and have worked for their $. They are both products of the American dream. We should respect that. The problem is that time, money and energy has been wasted with bitter politicians focusing on this. Why wouldn't the American media give them a pass? Aren't there more important issues to focus on?
edit on 7-4-2013 by capone1 because: (no reason given)









 
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join