25-01-2005 03:06									#91
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Beyond even that, the point of an executive is to enforce the law, hence even if he did not write it, he is in charge of carrying it out-hence he is part of the system. The EU or any EU member has every right to say its citizens can't be executives in a state that carries out a practice they have banned.

And that's why people are correct in saying it smacks of politics. Because it does. They want to make another 'statement' about the death penalty and right wingers who may back the death penalty.

Oerdin was correct, have to took away citizenship from those who committed murder in another state?

It's all politics.

	25-01-2005 03:11									#92
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui And that's why people are correct in saying it smacks of politics. Because it does. They want to make another 'statement' about the death penalty and right wingers who may back the death penalty. Oerdin was correct, have to took away citizenship from those who committed murder in another state? It's all politics.

Its politics to complain about their action as well, your point??

All laws are politics put into regulations- banning drugs is politics as well- a state can do as it pleases with its rules of citizenship- if Austria want to make it impossible for its citizens to become the chief executives of state that have a practice the EU has denounced , that is as much politics as any other rule regarding citizenship.

So I return to, who cares? I am surprised, as was said before, than he is still an Austrian citizen anyways- you would think it would have been revoked simply when he stopped being just a private citizen and became a public official of a foreign state.

	25-01-2005 03:15									#93
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Its politics to complain about their action as well, your point??

No, not really. It's not all politics to complain about a political decision clothed in natural law language.

	25-01-2005 03:17									#94
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Besides, what could a Dutch official of US citizenship DO that would break the law of the US? And what has Arnold done that has broken the law of Austria or the EU? He did not preside over an execution in the EU. And simply being a citizen does not mean he is subject to the law of Austria when not there, or else the US could prosecute citizens for using illegal drugs in states that allow them.

Well the US can prosecute you for using illegal drugs in states that allow them. Even if you are in a foreign country, you mustnt violate the laws of your home country.
Ofc, in reality this hardly happens and only applies to such laws which involves don'ts concerning an individual.

If e.g. prostitution (the execution of the business) was illegal in the states, you can still go to prostitutes in other states, where it's legal. But if "going to prostitutes" was illegal, you could not (legally).

I am pretty sure you can be tried in your home country when you for example had sex with minors in a third world country.
IIRC there was such a case with a german once.

	25-01-2005 03:17									#95
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: Its politics to complain about their action as well, your point?? No, not really. It's not all politics to complain about a political decision clothed in natural law language.

All laws are political to begin with, hence everything being said here is stuck in the realm of politics - for anyone then use political as a pejorative term is nonsense while speaking about this issue.

Do you dispute the ability of a state to prevent its citizens to become public officials of a foreign state, speically a foreign state with laws incompatible with your own?

	25-01-2005 03:22									#96
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: for anyone then use political as a pejorative term is nonsense while speaking about this issue.

No, it isn't. Using 'politics' as a pejorative term is very apt here. The Green Party minister is displaying outrage over Arnie's allowing of an execution, talking about how this brings disrespect to Austria. It's ALL bullshit, because it's ALL playing politics. "Politics' as pejorative fits here.

	25-01-2005 03:26									#97
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui No, it isn't. Using 'politics' as a pejorative term is very apt here. The Green Party minister is displaying outrage over Arnie's allowing of an execution, talking about how this brings disrespect to Austria. It's ALL bullshit, because it's ALL playing politics. "Politics' as pejorative fits here.

Wow, you get half of it anyways.

Yes, a green party minster is outraged, and he thinks this should be the law- how is that different from person is outraged by X because of their beliefs, hence demands Y be the law?
Please explain the difference.

	25-01-2005 03:28									#98
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: for anyone then use political as a pejorative term is nonsense while speaking about this issue. No, it isn't. Using 'politics' as a pejorative term is very apt here. The Green Party minister is displaying outrage over Arnie's allowing of an execution, talking about how this brings disrespect to Austria. It's ALL bullshit, because it's ALL playing politics. "Politics' as pejorative fits here.

Corporations that don't advertise, don't move product. Politicians that don't get coverage, don't get re-elected. The Green leaders tactics are no tackier than many furniture TV ads. "Political" is no more pejorative a term than "commercial".

	25-01-2005 03:29									#99
	Got spare money?

quote: Yes, a green party minster is outraged, and he thinks this should be the law- how is that different from person is outraged by X because of their beliefs, hence demands Y be the law?

Because the other person is probably ACTUALLY outraged! This Green Party minister isn't outraged. He's just playing politics, by displaying outrage and not meaning it.

	25-01-2005 03:33									#100
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Because the other person is probably ACTUALLY outraged! This Green Party minister isn't outraged. He's just playing politics, by displaying outrage and not meaning it.

Oh, you are a mind reader!? Good to know, tell us great Karnak, what does Ahnold think as well? Maybe with your great mental powers you should wear a cape and go fight crime!

So here we get to the point, you are speaking out of your ass, making baseless insinuations about this guy's motives because at the end, you simply disagree politically with him, and thus use this as your arguement.

	25-01-2005 03:36									#101
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: So here we get to the point, you are speaking out of your ass, making baseless insinuations about this guy's motives because at the end, you simply disagree politically with him, and thus use this as your arguement.

Read the article. The Greens have been trying to rename Swartzenegger Stadium for a while now because of his support for capital punishment. So now, this Greenie is so outraged that Arnold didn't pardon someone that he wants to revoke his citizenship.

It's called 'reading between the lines'. I suggest you start to learn it, if that isn't too difficult for you to comprehend.

	25-01-2005 03:41									#102
	Tired of ads?

Or maybe, their outrage is real, hence why they have been trying to rename Schwartzenegger stadium for so long, and this just adds to their outrage.

Its called not making assumptions, maybe you should stop reading between the lines, because most of the time, there isn't anything there. And the only way you can even read between the lines correctly would be to have a good understanding of actual or possible values and aims.

In the end, you have no clue, and if your entire arguement is "I read between the lines", well, that's a piss poor arguement, now isn't it?

	25-01-2005 03:46									#103
	Support Apolyton

quote: Or maybe, their outrage is real, hence why they have been trying to rename Schwartzenegger stadium for so long, and this just adds to their outrage.

Yeah, because there was no one on death row when Arnold became Governor? And he had no power of pardon either? According to EU law, the conditions of death row are ALSO illegal as inhuman treatment. It is considered just as bad as the death penalty is today (The Soering case). Where was this guy then? Oh wait, that isn't as 'sexy' as this possibility.

quote: if your entire arguement is "I read between the lines", well, that's a piss poor arguement, now isn't it?

No, it's called being perceptive and not being utterly naive and taking everything at face value.

	25-01-2005 03:57									#104
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui Yeah, because there was no one on death row when Arnold became Governor? And he had no power of pardon either? According to EU law, the conditions of death row are ALSO illegal as inhuman treatment. It is considered just as bad as the death penalty is today (The Soering case). Where was this guy then? Oh wait, that isn't as 'sexy' as this possibility.

So? You realize none of your points has diddly to do with you basic assumption that the outrage is faked? Wow, so they took a more public moment, when this is in the consciousness more, to speak..wow, its called working in the real world.

quote: No, it's called being perceptive and not being utterly naive and taking everything at face value.

No, its called masking your own political arguement with cynicism.

And in the end you have not answered the questions I posed anyways:

Does Austria have or have not the power to remove the citizenship of someone who becomes a public official in a foreign government with policies found to be barbaric by Austria?

	25-01-2005 04:02									#105
	Increase Your PM Length

IIRC when a persion takes the oath of citizenship he renounces all foreign allegiances, so technically Arnold had already renounced his Austrian citizenship. I believe it takes an act of Congress in order for a naturalized American to have true dual citizenship.

	25-01-2005 04:05									#106
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I haven't answered it because it is irrelavent. Any state has the power to remove citizenship of anyone for whatever reason they want. So what? The point is why is this being brought up like this? Because they want to make a political point.

It's like saying does the US have or have no the power to pass a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. That question is irrelevent, the question that matters is why (what is their reason for pushing it). To continue to analogy, if you want to believe that politicians are really outraged by gay marriage rather than playing it up for political gain in the 'red states', go ahead, but you'd be really naive to believe so.

	25-01-2005 04:10									#107
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui I haven't answered it because it is irrelavent. Any state has the power to remove citizenship of anyone for whatever reason they want. So what? The point is why is this being brought up like this? Because they want to make a political point. It's like saying does the US have or have no the power to pass a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. That question is irrelevent, the question that matters is why (what is their reason for pushing it). To continue to analogy, if you want to believe that politicians are really outraged by gay marriage rather than playing it up for political gain in the 'red states', go ahead, but you'd be really naive to believe so.

Yes, I do believe that most pols are genuinely outraged by gay marriage- I have no reason to question most of them, given that I can see why someone would hold such a position even thought I find it wrong. You show no proof other than cynicism to say so, and as much as you may repeat it to yourself, it does not make for valid or worthwhile debate, now does it?

As for your first part, of course its obviously yes, hence, this is a NON issue- thought there is a significant difference between a regular law and changing the constitution, now isn;t there?

	25-01-2005 04:14									#108
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Yes, I do believe that most pols are genuinely outraged by gay marriage- I have no reason to question most of them, given that I can see why someone would hold such a position even thought I find it wrong. You show no proof other than cynicism to say so, and as much as you may repeat it to yourself, it does not make for valid or worthwhile debate, now does it?

I can't believe you are actually that naive! Hey, a politician said so, so I should believe them! Have you learned nothing about politicians from your time on this world? Hey, there are Republicans out there that say they are outraged by lack of family values and leave a string of divorcees, or Democrats who say they are outraged by how low taxes the rich pay and then are found to use tax loopholes to reduce the amount they give the IRS.

quote: thought there is a significant difference between a regular law and changing the constitution, now isn;t there?

In terms of whether the government has the power to do so? No, not really. Government has power to do either.

	25-01-2005 04:24									#109
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui I can't believe you are actually that naive! Hey, a politician said so, so I should believe them! Have you learned nothing about politicians from your time on this world? Hey, there are Republicans out there that say they are outraged by lack of family values and leave a string of divorcees, or Democrats who say they are outraged by how low taxes the rich pay and then are found to use tax loopholes to reduce the amount they give the IRS.

Given I actually work with politicians, and FOR a politician, I think I have had a bit more direct experience of this than you- yes, a lot of time politicians do things for political advantage, but a lot, if not most of the time they do what they do because they actually believe what they say.

As for personal hypocrasy, that applies to EVERYONE, politicians or NOT. People have a good way of shoving inconvinient facts, even personal ones, from their beliefs.

	25-01-2005 09:26									#110
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by Atahualpa Well the US can prosecute you for using illegal drugs in states that allow them. Even if you are in a foreign country, you mustnt violate the laws of your home country. Ofc, in reality this hardly happens and only applies to such laws which involves don'ts concerning an individual. If e.g. prostitution (the execution of the business) was illegal in the states, you can still go to prostitutes in other states, where it's legal. But if "going to prostitutes" was illegal, you could not (legally). I am pretty sure you can be tried in your home country when you for example had sex with minors in a third world country. IIRC there was such a case with a german once.

It hardly [ever] happens? It never happens because you're on crack and are inventing things. Extraterritorial laws are extremely uncommon. A Yank may not be prosecuted at home for smoking dope in Rotterdam, no American court has jurisdiction.

There are some explicitly extraterritorial laws though, but that has to be stated in the law. Child sex tourism and mercenary actions are two areas where such laws exist. Incidently, in Canada the laws require our prosecutors to ask the nation the crime took place in for permission to prosecute, due to issues of sovereignty.

	25-01-2005 09:31									#111
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui I haven't answered it because it is irrelavent. Any state has the power to remove citizenship of anyone for whatever reason they want. So what? The point is why is this being brought up like this? Because they want to make a political point.

No they don't. Not since the late 40's.

http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html

quote: Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 15. (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality. (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

	25-01-2005 09:44									#112
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Atahualpa notyoueither: there are two different stories. a.) You just have one nationality b.) You have more than one nationality

Bull. It says states cannot deprive people of their nationality and makes no special exceptions for dual citizens.

	25-01-2005 09:48									#113
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Dissident You guys would probably just cower in fear if you were in cities such as Detroit or south central LA.

I admit it is racist as hell but the general rule of thumb still applies. If you are in a city and you look around and everyone is black then the odds are good that you are in a dangerous neighborhood. I can't say what really causes it but as a general rule it pretty much holds true. I wish it wasn't.

This generally isn't true in the rural areas nor in the suburbs but in cities... I guess it's because most of the cheapest housing for the poorest segments of society cluster in urban areas.

	25-01-2005 10:04									#114
	Increase Your PM Length

Crime and race is a very strange thing. Go North over the 49th parallel, and you should not feel the same stress in minority neighbourhoods.

There have been studies comparing Detroit and Toronto. They are not far away from each other; similar cities in many ways, with similar concentrations of minority populations, yet crime rates that are miniscule in Toronto compared to Detroit.

The same goes across the board. There is a national news cast in the background as I type this. The story is about a string of muggings in Vancouver. When was the last time muggings made national news in the US?

There is something different, and for your sakes I wish we could find it.

	25-01-2005 10:07									#115
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: No they don't. Not since the late 40's.

Power and legality are two different things.

	25-01-2005 10:11									#116
	Remove this text

True that, but I thought GePap and the average Euro would pay more attention to legality than they have displayed so far.

	25-01-2005 10:13									#117
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Bull. It says states cannot deprive people of their nationality and makes no special exceptions for dual citizens.

Except that as Doc pointed out, Ahnold already renounced his Austrian citizenship, or shyould have. If he doesn't want it, he does not deserve it.

Besides, htis would not be an "arbitrary" act either.

	25-01-2005 10:17									#118
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

Actually, GePap, American customs of citizenship have been overtaken by developments since the 2nd great war.

It is thought wise that states no longer have such far ranging powers to control their populations. That may be why the Yanks fail to enforce some of the laws they still have on the books.

Who the hell are you, or any government, to tell a person what they may or may not do so long as they are conducting themselves in a legal and peaceful manner?

	25-01-2005 10:18									#119
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by GePap Except that as Doc pointed out, Ahnold already renounced his Austrian citizenship, or shyould have. If he doesn't want it, he does not deserve it. Besides, htis would not be an "arbitrary" act either.

I can say I renouced my citizen ship a thousand times but it isn't legally binding unless I write the US government telling them. If Arnie didn't do this to the austrian government then it is no more legally binding then those losers who said they'd leave the US if W got reelected. Also the US doesn't officially recognize duel citizenship but it does acknowedlge its existance.

	25-01-2005 10:21									#120
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

American laws on citizenship are tricky now, since enforcing them would cause problems with multiple international treaties that the US is a party to.

Here's the short course, states may no longer go about willy nilly deciding who are citizens and who are not. The Nazis did that. It is now considered to be poor form.