Tibet women's football team 'denied US visas'

[smilesammich 10,727]

Quote

They say they were told they had "no good reason" to visit the US.

Most of the players are Tibetan refugees living in India, and had applied at the US embassy in Delhi.

US President Donald Trump has imposed a travel ban (now frozen) on nationals from seven countries, but neither India or China is on the list.

Tibet, a remote and mainly-Buddhist territory known as the "roof of the world", is governed as an autonomous region of China.

Cassie Childers, the executive director of Tibet Women's Soccer and a US citizen, told the BBC that she had accompanied the group of 16 players for interviews at the embassy on 24 February.

"I am disappointed because we had planned the trip for months. It was a big moment in every player's life when they were told about the trip. It was their opportunity to tell the world that Tibetan women are capable of achieving anything," she said.

Ms Childers added that she was "ashamed" that her country refused to grant visas to a women's football team.

However, she said she did not think the denial had anything to do with the Trump administration.

"I had feared an outcome like this because Tibetans usually struggle to get US visas as officials fear that they might request asylum," she said.

She added that her team "was in good spirits despite this setback".

"The players are very positive. I was very dejected but they motivated me. I hope some other place will invite us where Tibetans are welcomed. Otherwise, we will just get together in an Indian city and practice anyway."

 

isn't there a way to just have them sign something stating they absolutely will not apply for asylum and let them come play soccer? jeez.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-39137290

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Tibet has a wimmens football team ?  Who knew.

[Boiler 47,717]

I suppose they would only have need one way tickets.

 

BBC so not Murican Football.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

The 2 in the background look like acceptable players. I would let them play on my team

 

[Boiler 47,717]

Childers said the experience left her feeling “disgusted” and “ashamed of my country”, noting that it cost the team $3,520 – half its yearly budget – plus travel expenses simply to apply. “They weren’t trying to immigrate,” she said. “They were trying to play soccer.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/28/tibet-womens-soccer-visas-denied

 

Call me cynical but seems slightly odd when you have a budget that small you would spend half of it on visa application fees? To fly halfway around the world?

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

1 minute ago, Boiler said:

Childers said the experience left her feeling “disgusted” and “ashamed of my country”, noting that it cost the team $3,520 – half its yearly budget – plus travel expenses simply to apply. “They weren’t trying to immigrate,” she said. “They were trying to play soccer.”

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/feb/28/tibet-womens-soccer-visas-denied

 

Call me cynical but seems slightly odd when you have a budget that small you would spend half of it on visa application fees? To fly halfway around the world?

Like where would the travel money come from dude ?

[Boiler 47,717]

Just now, Nature Boy Flair said:

Like where would the travel money come from dude ?

Air Miles?

[smilesammich 10,727]

so you guys think they're lying.  

[Boiler 47,717]

6 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

so you guys think they're lying.  

Economical with the truth?

[Teddy B 17,252]

37 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

The 2 in the background look like acceptable players. I would let them play on my team

 

You can spot awesome sammich makin abilities from just a photo?

[smilesammich 10,727]

23 minutes ago, Boiler said:

Economical with the truth?

we're not skirting about trump here, you can say "lie" if that's what you think is going on.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

31 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

so you guys think they're lying.

No how in the world did you jump the shark to that conclusion

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

17 minutes ago, Teddy B said:

You can spot awesome sammich makin abilities from just a photo?

How come when a woman ask you to change their tire its not sexist, but if you ask them to make you a sammich it is ?

[Boiler 47,717]

1 minute ago, smilesammich said:

we're not skirting about trump here, you can say "lie" if that's what you think is going on.

"Economical with the truth" became a political catchphrase in the United Kingdom in 1986 during the Spycatcher trial in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, when Robert Armstrong, the UK Cabinet Secretary, was questioned by Malcolm Turnbull, and described a letter thus:

• Q: So that letter contains a lie, does it not?
• A: It contains a misleading impression in that respect.
• Q: Which you knew to be misleading at the time you made it?
• A: Of course.
• Q: So it contains a lie?
• A: It is a misleading impression, it does not contain a lie, I don't think.
• Q: What is the difference between a misleading impression and a lie?
• A: You are as good at English as I am.
• Q: I am just trying to understand.
• A: A lie is a straight untruth.
• Q: What is a misleading impression – a sort of bent untruth?
• A: As one person said, it is perhaps being economical with the truth.

Bob Ellis wrote that the audience had laughed at "bent untruth", and that Armstrong expected a laugh for "economical with the truth" but got none. Political opponents of the government's actions in the Spycatcher case derided Armstrong's distinction.

In 1992, when Alan Clark was questioned at the Old Bailey by Geoffrey Robertson in an Arms-to-Iraq case, he accounted for the discrepancies between his testimony and statements he had made previously. His response became notorious:

• Clark: it's our old friend "economical"
• Robertson: with the truth?
• Clark: With the actualité. There was nothing misleading or dishonest to make a formal or introductory comment that the Iraqis would be using the current orders for general engineering purposes. All I didn't say was 'and for making munitions'.

Alan Durant was an expert witness in a 1992 libel suit brought by a man who had been described as "economical with the truth". The defendant claimed the words did not imply the plaintiff was a liar. Durant, after examining a corpus of uses of the phrase, felt that lying had become the default meaning, but might be over-ridden based on the context. The earlier allusion to Burke or Twain was no longer common. The libel suit was settled out of court.

[smilesammich 10,727]

2 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

No how in the world did you jump the shark to that conclusion

you're questioning their money, boiler is being boiler with the one way ticket..