I believe it means: "Come and get them" and dates back
to the Spartans. Don't know all the details.

I may be intruding, but isn't the thread slightly off topic?
I thought TR was questioning how and when a person
is granted "Citizenship" not how to revoke rights.

Further, I thought all residents of the USA were equal under
the law regardless of Citizenship. However, the status
of Citizenship grants people access to areas that are not
normally permitted in other countries. For example: serving
in the Military or Government.

my .02

Which half of the country would have lost citizenship in the Civil War? Those who began the offensive? Those who defended themselves? All the above? I do not have the answer to RL's question, but it will be intersting to see how that is defined in this thread.

Rhonda

I am not sure I have the answer.

I simply feel there should be a way to try even those who have citizenship as an enemy combatant. Citizenship does not guarantee loyalty to the country in which one is a citizen.

The subject is citizenship.

The two items being discussed are, IMHO, different sides of the same coin.

I have not read the Padilla decisions, so I don't know the facts. But there is a difference between a U.S. citizen being captured on a foreign battlefield on which he is fighting with our enemies (e.g. Lindh), on the one hand, and arresting a U.S. citizen in the United States on charges of treason or whatever (which I believe is the Padilla situation, although I'm not sure).

I am wholly in favor of making it easier to prosecute criminal defendants. The exclusionary rule, for example, is a bit out of control at the moment from what I understand. (The rule lets lots of bad guys go free when evidence was not properly acquired, even if the guy is definitely guilty and the crime is horrific.) But if I get arrested and charged with a serious crime, I want the government to have to prove me guilty before my rights are taken away from me. That's the only point I was trying to make with the TR hypothetical. You can't just assume people are guilty first. That is the essence of tyranny.

My own law! ;) Actually it was NDD who wanted to know if his citizenship could be stripped before trial. I guess I find it ironic that these enemy combatants who intend harm and destruction now wish to take advantage of the rights of law abiding citizens of the very country they are trying to destroy.

Edited for clarity

I have to get on a plane soon, but here are some links. I'll read the stuff later if I have time. You all can have a head start. ;)

http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/suprem...-1027.pet.html

http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/suprem...-1027.resp.pdf

http://www.thefiringline.com/HCI/molon_labe.htm

"(mo-lone lah-veh)

Two little words. With these two words, two concepts were verbalized that have lived for nearly two and a half Millennia. They signify and characterize both the heart of the Warrior, and the indomitable spirit of mankind. From the ancient Greek, they are the reply of the Spartan General-King Leonidas to Xerxes, the Persian Emperor who came with 600,000 of the fiercest fighting troops in the world to conquer and invade little Greece, then the center and birthplace of civilization as we know it. When Xerxes offered to spare the lives of Leonidas, his 300 personal bodyguards and a handful of Thebans and others who volunteered to defend their country, if they would lay down their arms, Leonidas shouted these two words back.

Molon Labe! (mo-lone lah-veh)

They mean, “Come and get them!� They live on today as the most notable quote in military history. And so began the classic example of courage and valor in its dismissal of overwhelming superiority of numbers, wherein the heart and spirit of brave men overcame insuperable odds. Today, there lies a plaque dedicated to these heroes all at the site. It reads: “Go tell the Spartans, travelers passing by, that here, obedient to their laws we lie.�

We have adopted this defiant utterance as a battle cry in our war against oppression because it says so clearly and simply towards those who would take our arms.

It signifies our determination to not strike the first blow, but also to not stand mute and allow our loved ones, and all that we believe in and stand for, to be trampled by men who would deprive us of our God-given – or natural, if you will – rights to suit their own ends."

edited: Just saw RL's links (disregard).

All in one answer/questions
 

Promises... Promises.

RL beat me to the punch. If we strip citizens of their Constitutional rights before due process, then what good is the Constitution? If we can go around willy nilly and deny rights to people we think are terrorists, I have a list for you. It starts with a cake baker by the name of...

TR has an interesting point. It is kind of Starship Troopers -ish. I like it. Why should we get these rights just because the place of our birth is geographically desirable?

However, to put a crinkle in your plan, what is to stop an individual from being breed in this county, raised a model citizen, and even joining the military or civil service as a rouse to gain access to rights that only citizens do have? What then?

Or were you suggesting that we take a citizenship test at 18 years-old? Something similar to a driver's license?

That would be the Southern States, right? ;)

Re: All in one answer/questions
 

Hehe. Stop laughing at my broad and out-of-context example. It's the drugs talking. And it is amazing I can still type with this broken finger.

Re: All in one answer/questions
 

I did not say they should have their right to due process denied. He should however be tried as an enemy combatant.

Re: Re: All in one answer/questions
 

That sound like it needs to be in the Narco Terrorism thread. What is it Darvocet? Valium? Lithium? LSD? :eek: BTW if it is Lithium or Valium... pass some this way!

Haha! I am just giving you a hard time waiting for Ktek to surface with a picture of Sherman or TR to sue me for sexual harassment.

Re: Re: All in one answer/questions
 

Ah, but he is a US Citizen. What process would you use to determine the difference between a US Citizen and an enemy combatant?

Re: Re: Re: All in one answer/questions
 

I am actually on maximum dose ibuprofen, lol. It does not take a lot of anything to knock me out. You'll be fine. Breathe deeply.....


Pics....this I have to see.

I agree with you, however - how do you decide between enemy combatant and U.S. Citizen? The Civil War question was posed as a ridiculously broad view of that.