If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Sir" Allen Stanford
"Calif Bill" wrote in message
m... I think the naturalized citizens have to give up the previous citizenship. But lots of Americans still hold dual citizenship via birth. Former neighbors daughter was born while he was working for Bectal in Rhodesia. She still has Rhodesian or what ever it is call now, citizenship. Yes, naturalized citizens are required to renounce their previous citizenship, but, that's only in the eyes of the American government which has no jurisdiction in the immigrant's native country. While the U.S. no longer recognizes their native-born citizenship, their original country may very well still either honor their original citizenship and dual citizenship. Most countries are only concerned that people are citizens of the current country of residence and don't care if those people have citizenship elsewhere. The United States doesn't fall into that category. Rhodesia no longer exists. In those days there was Southern Rhodesia and Northern Rhodesia, neither of which were independent. Southern Rhodesia is no longer a Portuguese colony and is now Zimbabwe. So there was no such thing as Rhodesian citizenship. Either she was a citizen of Portugal (unlikely) or a citizen of Zimbabwe. If she was born in Northern Rhodesia she was a citizen of Great Britain (unlikely) or when the area became independent, Zambia. KM -- (-:alohacyberian:-) At my website view over 3,600 live cameras or visit NASA, the Vatican, the Smithsonian, the Louvre, CIA, FBI, and NBA, the White House, Academy Awards, 200 language translators! Visit Hawaii, Israel and more at: http://keith.martin.home.att.net/ |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
"Sir" Allen Stanford
"Alohacyberian" wrote in message ... "Calif Bill" wrote in message m... I think the naturalized citizens have to give up the previous citizenship. But lots of Americans still hold dual citizenship via birth. Former neighbors daughter was born while he was working for Bectal in Rhodesia. She still has Rhodesian or what ever it is call now, citizenship. Yes, naturalized citizens are required to renounce their previous citizenship, but, that's only in the eyes of the American government which has no jurisdiction in the immigrant's native country. While the U.S. no longer recognizes their native-born citizenship, their original country may very well still either honor their original citizenship and dual citizenship. Most countries are only concerned that people are citizens of the current country of residence and don't care if those people have citizenship elsewhere. The United States doesn't fall into that category. Rhodesia no longer exists. In those days there was Southern Rhodesia and Northern Rhodesia, neither of which were independent. Southern Rhodesia is no longer a Portuguese colony and is now Zimbabwe. So there was no such Both Northern Rhodesia AND Southern Rhodesia used to be British colonies. Portugal's sphere of colonization in Africa included Mozambique, Angola, the enclave of Cabinda and Portuguese Guinea. thing as Rhodesian citizenship. Either she was a citizen of Portugal (unlikely) or a citizen of Zimbabwe. If she was born in Northern Rhodesia she was a citizen of Great Britain (unlikely) or when the area became independent, Zambia. KM -- (-:alohacyberian:-) At my website view over 3,600 live cameras or visit NASA, the Vatican, the Smithsonian, the Louvre, CIA, FBI, and NBA, the White House, Academy Awards, 200 language translators! Visit Hawaii, Israel and more at: http://keith.martin.home.att.net/ |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
"Sir" Allen Stanford
On Feb 21, 8:28*am, "James Silverton"
wrote: *Mike *wrote *on Sat, 21 Feb 2009 12:35:46 +0000: Calif Bill wrote: *I think the naturalized citizens have to give up the previous citizenship. But lots of Americans still hold dual citizenship via birth. *Former neighbors daughter was born while he was working for Bectal in Rhodesia. She still has Rhodesian or what ever it is call now, citizenship. How does a naturalized citizen like me give up his previous citizenship and still possess dual citizenship, which I do? It seems a contradiction in terms since the oath I took on becoming a citizen said " I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen" Very often, the naturalized citizen's original country does not view the renunciatory statement in the US oath as having any effect under the original country's laws. When that happens, the person ends up being both a new US citizen and he also keeps his original citizenship. The US has no renunciatory requirement, other than the statement of renunciation in the naturalization oath. The US can't force the other country to "let go" and as of now, US law requires nothing else be done. |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"Sir" Allen Stanford
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
"Sir" Allen Stanford
"Zane" schrieb
it seems apparent that quite a few Europeans get US citizenship just for tax purposes You must be very careful which citizenships you have: You wouldn't want to end up paying taxes to two countries, do you? If you are born in the US, you are American, if your parents are German you are German...: dual citizenship, just because your parents chose to be on vacation at the time of your birth. Not for tax reasons. I don't understand what all the fuzz is about: It's simply a bureaucratic neccessitiy to have one. Having more than one makes some things easier, some things more complicated. Jochen from Germany |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
"Sir" Allen Stanford
"Mike O'Sullivan" wrote in message
... Sharx35 wrote: So, to which country to you owe loyalty? No man can serve two masters. You don't "serve" a country surely? The state answers to you, not vice versa. Oh, how I wish that statement were still true. Many of my dealing with civil servants, particularly union members, has lead me to believe that a lot of those employees and bureaucrats really believe that government exists to serve government. Most government officials could care less about what the electorate thinks and their handlers cook up a batch of whoppers so the politicians can say the right things to the public and vote the opposite. KM Diplomats lie to journalists and believe these lies when they see them in print." ~ Karl Kraus -- (-:alohacyberian:-) At my website view over 3,600 live cameras or visit NASA, the Vatican, the Smithsonian, the Louvre, CIA, FBI, and NBA, the White House, Academy Awards, 200 language translators! Visit Hawaii, Israel and more at: http://keith.martin.home.att.net/ |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
"Sir" Allen Stanford
"Sharx35" wrote in message
news:7Xqol.14350$PH1.2830@edtnps82... "Alohacyberian" wrote in message ... "Calif Bill" wrote in message m... Rhodesia no longer exists. In those days there was Southern Rhodesia and Northern Rhodesia, neither of which were independent. Southern Rhodesia is no longer a Portuguese colony and is now Zimbabwe. So there was no such Both Northern Rhodesia AND Southern Rhodesia used to be British colonies. Portugal's sphere of colonization in Africa included Mozambique, Angola, the enclave of Cabinda and Portuguese Guinea. LOL! Yes, before I opened your post, I had just now re-read my own post (which I don't remember writing and when I got to the end was surprised to see my signature.) But, as I was reading it, I frowned and said aloud, "Weren't BOTH Rhodesia's British?" (Especially because of the name, Rhodes). So, I have no idea what I was thinking when I wrote those words, that is, if you'd call that "thinking". My bad. KM -- (-:alohacyberian:-) At my website view over 3,600 live cameras or visit NASA, the Vatican, the Smithsonian, the Louvre, CIA, FBI, and NBA, the White House, Academy Awards, 200 language translators! Visit Hawaii, Israel and more at: http://keith.martin.home.att.net/ |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
"Sir" Allen Stanford
"Jochen Kriegerowski" wrote in message
... "Zane" schrieb it seems apparent that quite a few Europeans get US citizenship just for tax purposes You must be very careful which citizenships you have: You wouldn't want to end up paying taxes to two countries, do you? There are other reasons to be careful of what citizenship a person acquires. I once knew a fellow, whom at the behest of a prince, applied to obtain citizenship in Saudi Arabia where he worked. He decided to move to the United States, but, for a period of time, the Saudi government refused to allow him to leave (he had been a citizen of France), saying his services were needed there. KM -- (-:alohacyberian:-) At my website view over 3,600 live cameras or visit NASA, the Vatican, the Smithsonian, the Louvre, CIA, FBI, and NBA, the White House, Academy Awards, 200 language translators! Visit Hawaii, Israel and more at: http://keith.martin.home.att.net/ |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
"Sir" Allen Stanford
"Alohacyberian" wrote in message ... "Sharx35" wrote in message news:7Xqol.14350$PH1.2830@edtnps82... "Alohacyberian" wrote in message ... "Calif Bill" wrote in message m... Rhodesia no longer exists. In those days there was Southern Rhodesia and Northern Rhodesia, neither of which were independent. Southern Rhodesia is no longer a Portuguese colony and is now Zimbabwe. So there was no such Both Northern Rhodesia AND Southern Rhodesia used to be British colonies. Portugal's sphere of colonization in Africa included Mozambique, Angola, the enclave of Cabinda and Portuguese Guinea. LOL! Yes, before I opened your post, I had just now re-read my own post (which I don't remember writing and when I got to the end was surprised to see my signature.) But, as I was reading it, I frowned and said aloud, "Weren't BOTH Rhodesia's British?" (Especially because of the name, Rhodes). So, I have no idea what I was thinking when I wrote those words, that is, if you'd call that "thinking". My bad. KM Hell, it's a minor oversight. Geography was my "minor", though. -- (-:alohacyberian:-) At my website view over 3,600 live cameras or visit NASA, the Vatican, the Smithsonian, the Louvre, CIA, FBI, and NBA, the White House, Academy Awards, 200 language translators! Visit Hawaii, Israel and more at: http://keith.martin.home.att.net/ |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
"Sir" Allen Stanford
On Feb 23, 3:37*pm, "James Silverton"
wrote: *wrote *on Mon, 23 Feb 2009 12:13:35 -0800 (PST): On Feb 21, 8:28 am, "James Silverton" wrote: *Mike *wrote *on Sat, 21 Feb 2009 12:35:46 +0000: Calif Bill wrote: *I think the naturalized citizens have to give up the previous citizenship. But lots of Americans still hold dual citizenship via birth. *Former neighbors daughter was born while he was working for Bectal in Rhodesia. She still has Rhodesian or what ever it is call now, citizenship. How does a naturalized citizen like me give up his previous citizenship and still possess dual citizenship, which I do? It seems a contradiction in terms since the oath I took on becoming a citizen said " I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen" The US can't force the other country to "let go" and as of now, US law requires nothing else be done. So despite oaths, one can *effectively* be a dual citizen as I and others have maintained. Yes. The State Department acknowledges that some naturalized citizens do end up keeping their original citizenships because their original countries' nationality laws continue to view the person as still being a citizen the original country. They are, of course, expected to also obey whatever laws apply to US citizens, such as entering the US on a US passport. This sometimes means that the person must travel with both a US passport and his original country's passport. At one time, voting in an election or serving in the armed forces of another country was considered as invalidating US citizenship but such does not seem to be the case now. Voting in a foreign election has been removed from one of the potential causes of loss of US citizenship. Serving in a foreign military CAN cause loss of US citizenship IF done with the intention of relinquishing US citizenship. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"liberalism" to "socialism" to "communism": The "end" justifies the "means" in America | PJ O'Donovan[_1_] | Europe | 5 | February 24th, 2007 04:57 PM |