Steven C. Schulz comments

I understand the UKs decision - this girl showed her values to be fundamentally opposed to those of the free and democratic country's. That said, I wonder by what rule they can revoke citizenship, seeing as she is indeed a citizen, and revoking her citizenship would leave her stateless.

Either way, I can't say I feel even remotely bad for her.

I understand that the British government's position is that, because she is entitled to Bangladeshi citizenship through her mother, removing her British citizenship woukd not make her stateless.

But, although she may be entitled to it, does not have Bangladeshi citizenship in fact.

To me, this seems to be a way to placate those who don't want her to return now, but it will be overturned later in the courts.

That said, it seems to be the position in many European countries that they won't allow ISIS fighters to return.

Spoiled for choice, the market for anime is now too fractured for many shows to make a prime time slot profitable.

The facts are that if the U.S. wanted him, they would have gone for him while he was out on bail in the U.K., a country far closer to the U.S. than Sweden (not to mention that Trump probably has him to partially thank for his election) and the most he faces are a few months to a year in jail for violating his bail, since Sweden can no longer prosecute him.

Abbas compared the expected Trump proposal to the 1917 Balfour Declaration, which saw the British government commit to the creation of a state for Jews in historic Palestine.

"If the Balfour Declaration passed, this deal will not pass," he pledged.

That's dangerously close to saying Israel doesn't have a right to exist. Of course, I've always believed this to be Palestinians' ultimate goal.

The Palestinian leader also renewed his support for salaries for families of Palestinians killed or jailed by Israel.

This is completely unacceptable.

"Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free"... Recognize those words? Well, do you mean them or don't you??

Words put on a statue built in the same decade the U.S. all but excluded Asian immigration to the country for nearly a century. Something tells me the words weren't government policy.

The era of unwavering Arab commitment to Palestine is over.

Saudi Arabia, Egypt and many Arab states are now almost firmly in the U.S. sphere. The Palestinians risk their support if they don't make good faith efforts to accept a peace deal that those agree upon.

A base in Taiwan would be too provocative when the U.S. accepts the One China principle.

However, an alliance and a base in Vietnam might not be out of the question, and wiuld serve the same function.

If "the Empire" really wanted Maduro gone he'd be dead.

Funny enough, the only US equivalent is the president, who must be a "born American citizen," though exactly what that means remains unclear.

It's not unclear. So long as you don't acquire citizenship through naturalization, you are a born citizen. A "born citizen" acquires citizenship at birth by being born on U.S. territory, or by "inheriting" it from a parent who is a citizen.

On the other hand, this is what "hold the government accountable" looks like.

Destroying private property in no way holds the government to account.

It's rioting, not protest, and should be punished as the criminal activity it is.

Incredible discipline from the police. The driver simulates drawing a weapon from his waistband, and pointing it at police. He advances, police retreat and maintain an appropriate distance, and no shots are fired. They take him into custody without further incident.

Wait; Canadian police. That's how they do it in other countries.

And how many people potentially faced harm for their consideration, including the officers themselves?

Irresponsible.

"If you're not with us, you're against us"

That worked out last time didn't it?

Except Trump might be crazy enough to follow through with what that means - withdrawing the U.S. from NATO and other international organizations.

Haley and Trump are correct on the logic. Why should a country get American protection and support when they don't adhere to American interests?

But you lose all leverage if you have an open tantrum about it.

This is the best outcome. There should be no reward for intentionally breaking the law, but it can show compassion on someone who had no say in the matter.

To think that Brussels would go from May's nemesis to savior, essentially saying "the deal is the deal whether you apprive it or not".

@TommyJones

Nor has there ever been a fascist administration. I was pointing out the ridiculousness of CrazyJoe's hyperbole.

@CrazyJoe

Yeah, totally unlike the unelected, bought, and paid-for authoritarian socialists that told the ISPs how they could use their private property in the first place.

They do. Unlike the West, which created this mess in the first place, Japan has consistently taken a different approach in middle east politics, keeping the neutral position from both Israel and Arabs. And that's good for the region and the world.

Not participating is not the same as being neutral. Japan wants a seat at the great power table. Iy should behave like one.

Basically correct. Japan maintains good relations with Israel and with the Arab countries. Geographically it is outside their "sphere of concern". This is like asking China or South Korea where they stand on this issue. They don't care either. Stupid journalist trying to "create" a story.

Japan believes it should become a permanent Security Council member. Then it should show interests in things that concern the Security Council.

It's very unlikely that the Visegrad countries (these three + Slovakia) will stay in the EU in the long-term.

Why are the USA part of the UN again...? If they plan to not participate in anything, they should just quit and do their own thing at home and not bother everyone else.

Because, as a permanent Security Council member, it gets to impose its will on the world.

There is literally no American interest served by moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, unless you think putting a target on the back of every American tourist and diplomat in the city is in America's interest. 

Like them being American isn't reason enough...

Makes me think of the lost stations in New York and London.

It's ironic that a plant who's key ingredient is a pesticide could be so beneficial to human health.

Where have they been for the last 60 years?

Which country has power limited by the rule of law even when it produces suboptimal outcomes? U.S.

Which country is under the discretionary rule of a cabal of religious zealots? Iran.

Republicans in the US always go on about how the government should not be involved in issues, then they put forward a bill like this making the government involved in the internet.

Inconsistency.

They're removing government regulation of ISPs' networks, so not inconsistent.

And this is administrative action, not legislation. Only the FCC board vote.

@Asakaze

The issue in the example of your acquaintance can be explained by the difference in negative and positive rights.

The U.S. constitution has incredibly strong negative rights - restrictions on government action. However, explicit positive rights - compulsions of government action - are completely absent.

Additional implicit negative and positive rights have been fleshed-out over the years, usually when strict constructionists weren't dominant on the Supreme Court. An example is the right of one man, one vote; even though the right to vote itself doesn't actually exist.

Because of this, consequences between one private party and another, such as firing someone for "politically incorrect" speech, has no cause of action for the government to intervene.

I thought hate speech wasn't covered under free speech protection.

Curious position for the US to take.

The First Amendment is all but absolute, and is the most ironclad speech protection against the government in the world.

The closest thing to a hate speech exception requires a directed, immediately actionable call to violence.

By 2007-2008 inflation topped out at 500 billion percent.

That's nearly 16,000% per second. Thats $10 becoming $.06 every second.