SirBillybob

One way to crash a BBQ …

Then you can decode “exclsuive’, or was it just a case of spelling bee runner-up?

FL don’t matter none, especially if the sitch is peck … 🤥

I agree a lot to be said for keeping the fourth wall intact and refraining from installing a coin slot to keep the line open. The pressure …

I rather think that dead resolves the scheduling conflict. Burial is just added admin.

You can almost taste the hotdogs while wishing your tired feet were fireproof.

Kitchen counters redone. Agent headshot fit for the time capsule under the manicured lawn. Release update stuck in escrow.

That’s a receipt I’ll co-sign.

Did I miss a post where somebody suggested an exemption from the type of rules they are citing?

I get the concern about profiling and the heads up, but the former is doing a surprising amount of work here … officers, posters appearing to be less than outraged, and even Miles reduced to types.

Most of the rare times I’ve subscribed at very little relative expense were to gather more image intel to seal a hire deal. Not disappointed so far. Also post hoc memory augmentation. So not uncoupled.

As if that wouldn’t be hard enough.

With that the thread is thrifting.

Gotta have roots before branches. Up here where I live this is the name established decades ago …

The good news is that waivers in general are possible, but I think we’re mixing apples and oranges here. Not all banishments are the same and where a formal bar exists the expected route is a short-term inadmissibility waiver granted ahead of time. The downside of a less structured attempt isn’t just inconvenience. A test entry isn’t “neutral” and can add to the record rather than improve it. The accumulation of well constructed swings (sure, albeit with misses) bodes better for eventual success. The billeting idea is innocently cute but not helpful in a public forum if the concept of trade is inferred, however baselessly, considering this time the intention not reaching out for a session.

It’s a subtle if not innocuous way to throw shade.

Even if suspicion crystallized during the interview that time, Milo’s prior uneventful US entries don’t rule out that officers came in this time with information. He himself - and the various media commentary - floated ads, facial recognition, or a tip-off. Omitting that makes it look like officers had to manufacture suspicion, which isn’t the only plausible read. And cross-border activity in that “space” clearly isn’t uniformly enforced (AFAIK wrt other performers), which further complicates any single-cause explanation.

R vs Canfield distinguished electronic devices from routine ‘goods’ searches at the border. Prior to that, phones were effectively fair game with no device-specific threshold. The Court introduced a requirement often framed as ‘reasonable general concern.’ That doesn’t gut border search powers; it moves the threshold off zero. In practical terms, it’s more a speed bump than a barrier. Which is why the Canada/U.S. rights asymmetry here is easy to overstate; the two systems are closer in effect than the rhetoric suggests. I have been flagged a few times for secondary inspection when returning home to Canada, based on simple math probability metrics if not travel patterns as well. If my phone were to be confiscated for search … and the distinction here between forensic concern and visitor visa violation concern is also relevant … I would not have the option to ‘opt out’ in the same way a Canadian in US preclearance has that prerogative (not to romanticize it, because walking away doesn’t nullify refusal dispositions) but I would certainly reference my Charter rights, the Alberta and Ontario cases, ask for CBSA’s interpretation of general concern in the inspection context, and document it. Only for formality, as they could have at it with no objection on my part pre- or post- Charter rights-based ruling. How I am kitted out for sex tourism abroad, as reflected in residual unused items in my luggage, is far more private and revealing. Finally, for visitors plying specialized consulting services up here involving payment in kind for time delivered, occupation on its own won’t justify a device search by CBSA but won’t insulate you from one either.

The view that at the intersection of immigration law, border enforcement culture and individual case discretion the disposition could have been “Oopsie, looks like a repeated pattern of visiting without a B-1 for awards presentation and event handbill autographing, or P-1 for film acting income earning … cross those T’s and dot those I’s, like Hudson Williams, and circle back later” is not unreasonable. Each has an IMDB page.

Not just US laws. While customs officers do not formally conduct income tax audits, both countries collaborate to flag violations of income tax treaties either direction. Even it were simply nominated, presenting, etc at the Grabby Awards, or in this case GayVN(?), being an adult film actor would ordinarily raise eyebrows in that regard. If Mr. Miles (now ‘My Low Miles’) had immediately described upon inquiry being a Canadian engaging in at-will employment, erotic or otherwise, in the United States without a complete declared income trail with film production checking all of the legal boxes the interrogation would likely have been truncated within a few minutes in order to complete the ban paperwork. Volitional subterfuge following repetitive desensitization being under the radar conflated with personal rights regarding past entries, is likely what yielded the hours of detention.

I’m somewhat confused about the procedural baggage inspection and the breadth of contents the officers reportedly searched. I thought that at Toronto or Montreal (and 7 other Canadian airports) one’s luggage not qualifying for carry-on was deposited on the belt at ticket check-in prior to security and US border control. Isn’t that first travel stage ground-side?

Metcalf is hysterically funny.

Kong chaperoning in the background … He’s like “Carry on, gents — respectfully, or Imma smash these pumpkins too.”

We’ve been through this. Whatever the intent and the ensuing commentary, if you don’t want your plausible deniability wearing a trenchcoat you would best frame your topic opener more neutrally, eg, a positive statement about market diversity, or the usual ‘any experience?’, and avoid setting up for yes / no answer based on appearances. Or simply recognize chacun ses goûts and skip posting.

This Booker Prize (2024) winning novel on space station flight is an essential companion piece to this week’s Artemis endeavour. Gorgeous prose.