Dear Leader...Who is and Who isn't a Citizen?
Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) is proposing a new law to strip Americans of their citizenship if they're involved with foreign terrorist organizations. Lieberman will introduce the bill, along with Rep.Jason Altmire of Pennsylvania. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has expressed support as well. This bill would empower the State Department to decide -- on its own -- that Americans are conspiring with terror groups and should be stripped of their citizenship. Serving in the army of a foreign state or pledging allegiance to a foreign state would be considered so disloyalty could merit loss of citizen status. Lieberman's law would add involvement with a foreign terror organization -- as opposed to a foreign state -- to this list. Who would determine whether you're involved with a foreign terror group? The State Department would, and they would be "the Decider." Can you imagine the Bush State Department - or the Palin State Department - deciding that you are officially stripped of your citizenship, without a trial before a jury of your peers, in fact with no legal process whatsoever that conforms with the fifth through the eighth amendments of the constitution? Senators Lieberman and Schumer, if they are serious about this, are suggesting we should bring the battlefield of Afghanistan and Pakistan to the United States and destroy the Constitution. If they're so gung-ho to change America from a nation of laws to a dictatorship run by whoever is president, maybe they should renounce their own citizenship and move to Libya or North Korea or some other country where the "dear leader" can decide who is and who isn't a citizen?
I'd always thought of Chuck Shumer as at least a little bit Progressive, but how can he be so short-sighted as to support such a measure? Doesn't he understand that under a Sarah Palin State Department, Greenpeace and the ACLU would VERY LIKELY be named as terrorist organizations? They'd start small, of course - naming any random fringe group as terrorist - ACORN would probably be named pretty early. They'd get around to trhe Green Party before too long.
The goal, I'm sure, would be to declare the Democratic Party a Terrorist organization by the end of her first term. That'll show them troublemakers - RIGHT?
@Pablito - If you can find the House and Senate Bill numbers (I think they might be H.R.1465 and S.686, for the 101st Congress - check me on this) you can look it up at thomas.loc.gov.
Obama may veto the financial reform bill if it keeps the provision to audit the Fed. I guess when you get 1 million from Goldman Sachs, you have to hold your knees. Who's side is he on?
Thom, Why do you have to keep beating this drum about whether or not atheism is or is not a religion? As an atheist I don't believe that I subscribe to a religion. You do. But when it's boiled down, it's simply a question of sementics. In other words, every few months you decide to waste your time on a question of definition within the living language of English. That just seems foolish to me. Let's agree to disagree on the definition of the word 'atheism' and move on with our progressive agenda, what say? I'd love to; how about you?
And with this latest filiguster of your caller, you've lost me. I'll be back in a couple of weeks to see if you've returned to REASON!
I appreciate the exploration of the underlying assumptions, that as axioms in our world-view are actually statements of belief or faith. In particular, the idea that pure reason can be generated from our 'wetware' is actually quite open to question but objectivity and reason are articles of faith for atheists and those who 'believe in science'.
On the topic of this thread, it seems that America is lost... The Supreme Court confuses corporations and people while Senators confuse due process with executive orders, torture and military tribunals. This is an attmept to create the most basic giant loophole in the principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' on the circumstantial and perhaps fraudulent basis of guilt by association.
Many so-called terror convictions are simply for charitable donations (material support of terrorism). Hamas started as a civic/charitable organization and shifted to politics and asymmetric warfare by demand of the oppressed people of Palestine and in response to both PLO and Israeli backlash. The kill ratio since the Intifada has been about 20:1 - ten to twenty times more Palestinians are killed than Israelis and the imprisonment ratio is even more extreme. One must engage in a lot of sophistry or selective blindness about the long-term siege situation in Gaza in order to see Hamas as terrorists rather than as local insurgents or freedom fighters for their neighbors or the elected government that they actually are.
Please notice that these Senators would strip people of their citizenship for donations intended for charity to widows and orphans, while any corporation's expenditures intended to suborn our democracy are protected as free speech (any=domestic/foreign/multinational). The Bill of Rights was intended to protect the people's political speech and activity - now our government is moving to a regime where business activity is the only fully protected form of expression.
Every time I hear this story, I think about the passage in Mein Kampf where Adolph Hitler proposed stripping German citizens of their citizenship if they were "unpatriotic".
Now Joe Liebestraum is quite literally taking a page from Hitler's book.
Joe Lieberman again,I ain't shock folks.
This point may be off topic but I haven't see a post on it on the blog yet,so forgive me please.
The senators who voted for the OPA(offshore pollution Act) in 1990 to fine polluters no more than 75 million $s.Can we have a list of whom these culprits are and how many are still in the senate today.
They are bankrupting America in the name of Corporations.And I haven't seen anyone on the CorporateTV,Olberman ,Maddow & Shultz speak about this but then again I hardly watch TV.