Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: MillCreek on February 21, 2019, 06:36:50 PM
-
https://www.businessinsider.com/american-women-isis-brides-fighters-2019-2?utm_source=feedburner&%3Butm_medium=referral&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+businessinsider+%28Business+Insider%29&utm_content=FeedBurner+user+view
On the one hand, should being young and stupid get you a pass on the basis of people grow up and change, and on the other hand, should you have known better, and it is now time to grow a pair and face the consequences of your choices?
-
Adblocker won't let me read your article, but the one in the news right now is not even an American citizen, so definitely no for her. I would also say that a US citizen that pledges their allegiance to another country (or group) forfeits their US citizenship. Lay in the bed you made.
-
As I understand it there is question with regards to her citizenship status. If she qualifies as a natural born citizen, short of the formal renouncment process, no action on her part can forfeit said citizenship. However, in her case, the prison time she'll potentially have to serve may make coming back undesirable.
If she's a naturalized citizen then it becomes a question of whether or not it can be revoked. There are means to do so, but it usually requires some form of fraud in the application for naturalization.
If she is not a citizen, easy peasy. Just deny her visa application. Though that would open the question of how she got a US passport.
-
And if she (or any of them) is (are) allowed to return, how can we know she/they isn't/aren't coming back for the purpose of relaying information to ISIS operatives in Whatashitholeistan? How can she/they ever be trusted?
-
If she is a native born citizen then sure, let her come home, to be buried.
-
If she is a native born citizen then sure, let her come home, to be buried.
Screw having her buried on U.S. soil. Cremate her corpse and scatter her asses in the deep south pacific. Point Nemo should do the trick. :mad:
-
The answer to the question is simply NO.
-
No.
Next question?
Brad
-
I hear N. Korea is nice this time of year.
-
The answer to the question is simply NO.
True. No matter what legal gobbledygook has to be cooked up to effect this. I mean it's not like goobermink lawyers don't know how to cook up gobbledygook. After all, they have walls full of legal books full of stuff to draw from.
Might take one of those special acts of Congress, though.
Terry
REF:
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/gobbledygook
-
If she took warfighter/insurgent actions against the US... no.
If she just left the US because she was disgusted with its foreign policy... yes.
-
No, they should not be allowed to return home.
IF they are, for whatever stupid legal reason, allowed to return home after taking up arms or giving aid and comfort to enemies of the United States, they should be immediately tried and then hung from the nearest tree.
That would likely stop any more from trying to return.
-
This seems like a pretty easy one to me. No.
-
I'm going to be the odd guy out here, I guess.
I am not comfortable with giving the fed.gov the ability (or making it easier) to strip a US citizen of citizenship because the .gov doesn't like their behavior overseas. There's a lot of obvious ways that can go wrong. Additionally, at least for birthright citizens, I'm not sure citizenship should be something the .gov CAN strip. Who the *expletive deleted*ck is the gov to decide something like that. It works for us, we are not subjects of it.
Now certainly providing support for ISIS is a pretty *expletive deleted*ing bad choice. I've seen social media posts implying that the current young lady is on tape conducting at least two beheadings. We definitely don't just forgive and forget, but (if she is a citizen) I also don't want to give the government the power to just unilaterally say "You're off the Island". That, like the "detentions" will end up spreading and being used by the socialists.
Bring her back, arrest her, try her for treason, and absolutely hang her. Attempt to salvage the kid maybe? I don't know where he stands on the citizenship angle. I just don't think we want to go down the road where the .gov says "You! Not a citizen!"
-
If she qualifies as a natural born citizen, short of the formal renouncment process, no action on her part can forfeit said citizenship.
I just don't think we want to go down the road where the .gov says "You! Not a citizen!"
To me at least, joining ISIS counts as a de facto renouncement.
-
No, if found on American soil immediately incarcerated.
-
To me at least, joining ISIS counts as a de facto renouncement.
Gotta disagree. There's a process with paperwork. If that wasn't done, the renouncement wasn't done.
Again, I'm not trying to say there shouldn't be consequences for treason. Why would anyone that is even the least bit in favor of limited government want to hand power like this over to the gov? What groups constitute "de facto" renouncement of citizenship? Who makes that list?
-
dogmush is correct only if we still live in a country where rules apply equally to everyone.
Unfortunately we don’t.
We let her back, arrest her and a judge sets her free.
Conservative/Republican etc shrugs his shoulders “at least we followed the process”.
She later blows herself up in a Walmart taking a bunch of infidels with her.
Unless we are guaranteed she will be tried as an enemy combatant/traitor by the military then it’s NO.
I’m not sure I trust the military to get it right either.
Better to let her live out her days in some 3rd world *expletive deleted*it hole.
-
Again, I'm not trying to say there shouldn't be consequences for treason. Why would anyone that is even the least bit in favor of limited government want to hand power like this over to the gov? What groups constitute "de facto" renouncement of citizenship? Who makes that list?
I agree with this for those who are actual US citizens. I was working under the assumption that the OP and what the MSM is broadcasting (and maybe I'm misunderstanding) is talking about (let's assume) US citizens returning with no consequences. Hence my "no". If it's "come on back and face treason charges", then yes, as US citizens let them come back and go through our legal system to be proven innocent or guilty.
I think there have to be some ramifications for swearing allegiance to a US enemy, which is different than just saying, "The US sucks!" If that were the criteria, we could quickly relieve ourselves of Hollywood and antifa. :)
Also, Ron was posting while I typed. From the moral vs legal side, I agree it would be infuriating to see someone who has sworn themselves an enemy of their country come back, get an SJW judge, then six months later kill a bunch of people.
-
Unless we are guaranteed she will be tried as an enemy combatant/traitor by the military then it’s NO.
I’m not sure I trust the military to get it right either.
So your workaround is to make civilians subject to military tribunals? Uh, hard no. Like really hard. Like, " It's time for citizens to start shooting government agents" hard.
Ron has literally typed "The US Justice system might let a guilty person go free, so we should circumvent it and punish people extra-legally". That's the opposite of how are legal system is supposed to work. We should be advocating a return to the rule of law, not trying to be in charge of the capricious rules.
I often see this Franklin quote bandied around on "conservative" places:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
That's what some folks here are advocating though. Give the .gov the power to decide if you're a "true Citizen" so that you don't risk a terrorist attack.
It's easy to jump on this one because the lady currently in the news is pretty vile, but literally every time the people have given the government a power, the government has stretched it to encompass more. Yes, maybe one of these women would come back, and maybe she would escape justice in a trial, and [maybe/i] she would retain her radicalized beliefs, and maybe she would act on those beliefs. That (and more) is a risk we take in living with freedom, (even the truncated, legislated version of freedom we currently have). You should not be willing to give even an inch more freedom up.
-
To me at least, joining ISIS counts as a de facto renouncement.
I agree.
-
Gotta disagree. There's a process with paperwork. If that wasn't done, the renouncement wasn't done.
Again, I'm not trying to say there shouldn't be consequences for treason. Why would anyone that is even the least bit in favor of limited government want to hand power like this over to the gov? What groups constitute "de facto" renouncement of citizenship? Who makes that list?
I would start with groups that openly proclaim that they want to kill Americans and impose their version of "society" on the United States.
Who might that include? Lemme see -- there's this group in the Middle east called ISIS, or something like that. Isn't the killing of Americans and the destruction of the United States part of their manifesto?
-
I would start with groups that openly proclaim that they want to kill Americans and impose their version of "society" on the United States.
Who might that include? Lemme see -- there's this group in the Middle east called ISIS, or something like that. Isn't the killing of Americans and the destruction of the United States part of their manifesto?
I would still disagree. We didn't revoke citizenship of folks who fought for the friking NAZI's. I'm not convinced ISIS is that much worse.
-
So your workaround is to make civilians subject to military tribunals? Uh, hard no. Like really hard. Like, " It's time for citizens to start shooting government agents" hard.
Ron has literally typed "The US Justice system might let a guilty person go free, so we should circumvent it and punish people extra-legally". That's the opposite of how are legal system is supposed to work. We should be advocating a return to the rule of law, not trying to be in charge of the capricious rules.
I often see this Franklin quote bandied around on "conservative" places:
That's what some folks here are advocating though. Give the .gov the power to decide if you're a "true Citizen" so that you don't risk a terrorist attack.
It's easy to jump on this one because the lady currently in the news is pretty vile, but literally every time the people have given the government a power, the government has stretched it to encompass more. Yes, maybe one of these women would come back, and maybe she would escape justice in a trial, and [maybe/i] she would retain her radicalized beliefs, and maybe she would act on those beliefs. That (and more) is a risk we take in living with freedom, (even the truncated, legislated version of freedom we currently have). You should not be willing to give even an inch more freedom up.
I agree with you in principle.
The problem is the majority of the country doesn’t, including a good chunk of the so called right. It’s not about justice anymore but wielding power.
The Justice Dept and FBI for all practical purposes just attempted a Presidential coup, our courts have implemented totalitarian cultural Marxism by fiat over the last few decades and you’re going to lecture me on the rule of law?
Rule of law works for high trust, low time preference homogeneous peoples who share a common culture.
In diverse multicultural countries it’s all about power, rules be damned.
Let her rot in a 3rd world *expletive deleted*it hole. We can’t trust our government to do the right thing.
-
De facto? Maybe. De jure? Oh, hell no. We're still, nominally at least, a nation based on the rule of law. If we on the (more or less) conservative side start advocating revoking citizenship from birthright citizens for joining a group like ISIS then where will it end? Not all that far down the slope to members of APS being declared terrorists by a leftist government.
Yeah, I get it. The left doesn't care if we follow the rules. Yeah, I get it, that woman is vile and should be tried for a lot of crimes if she comes "home".
I think the Abe Lincoln "Know-Nothing" quote is applicable here. "As a nation, we begin by declaring that "all men are created equal." We now practically read it "all men are created equal, except negroes." When the Know-Nothings get control, it will read "all men are created equal, except negroes, and foreigners, and catholics." When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty-to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy."
-
All that is left is the pretense sumpnz.
We live in cargo-cult America.
-
I'm going to be the odd guy out here, I guess.
I am not comfortable with giving the fed.gov the ability (or making it easier) to strip a US citizen of citizenship because the .gov doesn't like their behavior overseas. There's a lot of obvious ways that can go wrong. Additionally, at least for birthright citizens, I'm not sure citizenship should be something the .gov CAN strip. Who the *expletive deleted*ck is the gov to decide something like that. It works for us, we are not subjects of it.
Now certainly providing support for ISIS is a pretty *expletive deleted*ing bad choice. I've seen social media posts implying that the current young lady is on tape conducting at least two beheadings. We definitely don't just forgive and forget, but (if she is a citizen) I also don't want to give the government the power to just unilaterally say "You're off the Island". That, like the "detentions" will end up spreading and being used by the socialists.
Bring her back, arrest her, try her for treason, and absolutely hang her. Attempt to salvage the kid maybe? I don't know where he stands on the citizenship angle. I just don't think we want to go down the road where the .gov says "You! Not a citizen!"
She's not an American citizen. Atleast, that's the claim. If true, she DOESN'T come here. Ever.
-
Seems simple to me. Bring back the citizens, try them for treason, and if they joined ISIS, execute them all.
-
Treason is the new patriotism according to the Justice Dept and FBI.
-
Treason is the new patriotism according to the Justice Dept and FBI.
Official citation needed or I'll kindly ask you to leave the thread to the adults trying to have an actual discussion.
Chris
-
Treason is the new patriotism according to the Justice Dept and FBI.
Hmmm. Terry mulls over that wisecrack, sees the germ of truth in it, decides that it is not funny.
Not funny at all.
Terry, 230RN
-
Running an operation to unseat the President in a soft coup is treasonous.
Sorry if it ruffles your sensitive feelings.
Have you been ignoring the news for two years? Even the mainstream media has been unable to hide the truth.
The Justice Dept and FBI attempted to sabotage a presidential election and then worked against the elected president, even discussing removing him via the 25th amendment using phony intel.
How do you explain their actions? They thought they were the adults in the room.
Maybe youre not the adult in the thread but the dolt in the thread.
Furthermore, until the guilty parties are held accountable, the institutions just aren’t tainted but are untrustworthy.
Treasonous, enemies of our constitutional order, you can call it whatever you like. This is banana republic level corruption and youre trying to shame me for naming it?
Here is a nice little synopsis of what us little people are allowed to know, the rot is much deeper no doubt.
https://amgreatness.com/2019/02/17/autopsy-of-a-dead-coup/
-
Maybe youre not the adult in the thread but the dolt in the thread.
Since you had to go make it person, thread locked.
Chris