"Americans" who possess dual citizenship....It is nevertheless
illegal.
----
try again
Based on the U.S. Department of State regulation on dual citizenship
(7 FAM 1162), the Supreme Court of the United States has stated that
dual citizenship is a "status long recognized in the law" and that "a
person may have and exercise rights of nationality in two countries
On Dec 28, 10:32 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dual citizenships are illicit, period. (I know, there are many
> "Americans" who possess dual citizenship....It is nevertheless illegal.
>
> An American citizen is "An American Citizen". Doesn't matter where he was
> born. (It is a very narrow window for an American citizen to be born in a
> foreign land).
>
> On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 10:37 AM, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > The
> > foreign born terrorist may not receive a court's review, but the
> > American
> > will.
> > ---
> > oh, so a foreign born US citizen is excluded from the right to a court
> > review?
> > what about those with dual citizenships?
>
> > On Dec 28, 9:21 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Good Morning PlainOl,
>
> > > Yes, including any American who may be associated with terrorists. The
> > > foreign born terrorist may not receive a court's review, but the American
> > > will.
>
> > > On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 1:18 PM, plainolamerican
> > > <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > > > I believe that no American can be detained without a Court's review
> > > > ---
> > > > even someone 'associated' with terrorists
>
> > > > On Dec 27, 11:47 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > After study and review, as well as being familiar with the Supreme
> > Court
> > > > > Decision in *Rumsfeld v. Hamdi*, where the Supremes ruled that
> > EVERY
> > > > > American is entitled to *habeas corpus* and review of detainment;
> > that
> > > > > Section 1022, and the phrase which states in part:
>
> > > > > *b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident
> > Aliens-
> > > > > (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person in
> > > > > military custody under this section does not extend to citizens of
> > the
> > > > > United States.*
>
> > > > > I believe that no American can be detained without a Court's review,
> > > > > whether he has been caught on the battlefield, or in downtown Tampa.
> > > > > This obviously does not apply to foreign enemy combatants, and I for
> > one
> > > > > agree that it should not apply to enemy combatants who are not
> > American.
>
> > > > > On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 12:26 PM, plainolamerican <
> > > > plainolameri...@gmail.com
>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > btw - RP's opposition is that the amendment repeals parts of the
> > bill
> > > > > > of rights, patriot act, 4th and 5th amendments and even magna carta
> > > > > > principles.
> > > > > > Many Americans don't understand the relationship between local,
> > state,
> > > > > > federal, and military authority.
> > > > > > If thinking that our authorities should have all the resources they
> > > > > > need to combat terrorism makes me a moonbat then keep calling me a
> > > > > > moonbat.
>
> > > > > > On Dec 26, 6:28 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > Just in case you missed it:
>
> > > > > > > *(b) Applicability to United States Citizens and Lawful Resident
> > > > Aliens-
> > > > > > > (1) UNITED STATES CITIZENS- The requirement to detain a person
> > in
> > > > > > > military custody under this section does not extend to citizens
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > > > United States.
> > > > > > > *
> > > > > > > On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 7:26 AM, Keith In Tampa <
> > > > keithinta...@gmail.com
> > > > > > >wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Good Morning.
>
> > > > > > > > I am genuinely hoping that you will respond to this post. As a
> > > > side
> > > > > > note,
> > > > > > > > last week, we had Crackpots and Moonbats claiming that this
> > piece
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > legislation, (which is renewed every year since 1961, with
> > various
> > > > > > > > modifications) was setting up camps to imprison American
> > > > citizens,
> > > > > > (I
> > > > > > > > assume Ron Paul supporters) until level heads pointed out to
> > these
> > > > > > > > Moonbats and Crackpots that the legislation didn't say
> > anything of
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > sort.
>
> > > > > > > > What in particular, are you, and others who oppose this
> > > > legislation,
> > > > > > > > opposed to? Here is the section that you reference, (which by
> > the
> > > > way,
> > > > > > > > does not say what you claim it says). I suggest that all of
> > the
> > > > > > Moonbats,
> > > > > > > > and all of the Crackpots read the legislation before they
> > listen to
> > > > > > other
> > > > > > > > Crackpots and Moonbats, and get their proverbial panties in a
> > wad:
>
> > > > > > > > Subtitle D--Counterterrorism
>
> > > > > > > > SEC. 1021. AFFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF THE ARMED FORCES OF THE
> > > > UNITED
> > > > > > > > STATES TO DETAIN COVERED PERSONS PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORIZATION
> > FOR
> > > > USE
> > > > > > OF
> > > > > > > > MILITARY FORCE.
>
> > > > > > > > (a) In General- Congress affirms that the authority of the
> > > > President
> > > > > > > > to use all necessary and appropriate force pursuant to the
> > > > > > Authorization
> > > > > > > > for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40; 50 U.S.C. 1541
> > > > note)
> > > > > > includes
> > > > > > > > the authority for the Armed Forces of the United States to
> > > > detain
> > > > > > covered
> > > > > > > > persons (as defined in subsection (b)) pending disposition
> > under
> > > > > > the law of
> > > > > > > > war.
>
> > > > > > > > (b) Covered Persons- A covered person under this section is
> > any
> > > > > > person
> > > > > > > > as follows:
>
> > > > > > > > (1) A person who planned, authorized, committed, or aided
> > the
> > > > > > > > terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or
> > > > > > harbored those
> > > > > > > > responsible for those attacks.
>
> > > > > > > > (2) A person who was a part of or substantially supported
> > > > al-Qaeda,
> > > > > > > > the Taliban, or associated forces that are engaged in
> > > > > > hostilities against
> > > > > > > > the United States or its coalition partners, including
> > any
> > > > > > person who has
> > > > > > > > committed a belligerent act or has directly supported
> > such
> > > > > > hostilities in
> > > > > > > > aid of such enemy forces.
>
> > > > > > > > (c) Disposition Under Law of War- The disposition of a
> > person
> > > > under
> > > > > > > > the law of war as described in subsection (a) may include
> > the
> > > > > > following:
>
> > > > > > > > (1) Detention under the law of war without trial until the
> > end
> > > > of
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > hostilities authorized by the Authorization for Use of
> > > > Military
> > > > > > Force.
>
> > > > > > > > (2) Trial under chapter 47A of title 10, United States Code
> > (as
> > > > > > > > amended by the Military Commissions Act of 2009 (title
> > XVIII
> > > > of
> > > > > > Public Law
> > > > > > > > 111-84)).
>
> > > > > > > > (3) Transfer for trial by an alternative court or competent
> > > > tribunal
> > > > > > > > having lawful jurisdiction.
>
> > > > > > > > (4) Transfer to the custody or control of the person's
> > country
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > origin, any other foreign country, or any other foreign
> > > > entity.
>
> > > > > > > > (d) Construction- Nothing in this section is intended to
> > limit
> > > > or
> > > > > > > > expand the authority of the President or the scope of the
> > > > > > Authorization for
> > > > > > > > Use of Military Force.
>
> > > > > > > > (e) Authorities- Nothing in this section shall be construed
> > to
> > > > > > affect
> > > > > > > > existing law or authorities relating to the detention of
> > United
> > > > > > States
> > > > > > > > citizens, lawful resident aliens of the United States, or
> > any
> > > > other
> > > > > > persons
> > > > > > > > who are captured or arrested in the United States.
>
> > > > > > > > (f) Requirement for Briefings of Congress- The Secretary of
> > > > Defense
> > > > > > > > shall regularly brief Congress regarding the application of
> > the
> > > > > > authority
> > > > > > > > described in this section, including the organizations,
> > > > entities,
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > individuals considered to be `covered persons' for purposes
> > of
> > > > > > subsection
> > > > > > > > (b)(2).
>
> > > > > > > > SEC. 1022. MILITARY CUSTODY FOR FOREIGN AL-QAEDA TERRORISTS.
>
> > > > > > > > (a) Custody Pending Disposition Under Law of War-
>
> > > > > > > > (1) IN GENERAL- Except as provided in paragraph (4), the
> > Armed
> > > > > > Forces
> > > > > > > > of the United States shall hold a person described in
> > > > paragraph
> > > > > > (2) who is
> > > > > > > > captured in the course of hostilities authorized by the
> > > > > > Authorization for
> > > > > > > > Use of Military Force (Public Law 107-40) in military
> > custody
> > > > > > pending
> > > > > > > > disposition under the law of war.
>
> > > > > > > > (2) COVERED PERSONS- The requirement in paragraph (1) shall
> > > > apply to
> > > > > > > > any person whose detention is authorized under section
> > 1021
> > > > who
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > determined--
>
> > > > > > > > (A) to be a member of, or part of, al-Qaeda or an associated
> > > > force
> > > > > > > > that acts in coordination with or pursuant to the
> > > > direction
> > > > > > of al-Qaeda; and
>
> > > > > > > > (B) to have participated in the course of planning or
> > carrying
> > > > out
> > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > attack or attempted attack against the United States
> > or
> > > > its
> > > > > > coalition
> > > > > > > > partners.
>
> > > > > > > > (3) DISPOSITION UNDER LAW OF WAR- For purposes of this
> > > > subsection,
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > disposition of a person under the law of war has the
> > meaning
> > > > > > given in
> > > > > > > > section 1021(c), except that no transfer otherwise
> > described
> > > > in
> > > > > > paragraph
> > > > > > > > (4) of that section shall be made unless consistent with
> > the
> > > > > > requirements
> > > > > > > > of section 1028.
>
> > > > > > > > (4) WAIVER FOR NATIONAL SECURITY- The President may waive
> > the
> > > > > > > > requirement of paragraph (1) if the President submits to
> > > > > > Congress a
>
> ...
>
> read more »
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment