Politician wants Schwarzenegger to lose citizenship

Lord Zentei · Post by **Lord Zentei** » 2005-01-22 03:08pm

What say you?

Linky

Politician wants Schwarzenegger to lose citizenship

California governor 'not worthy' to be Austrian

Saturday, January 22, 2005 Posted: 12:38 PM EST (1738 GMT)

VIENNA, Austria (AP) -- California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger should be stripped of citizenship in his native Austria for approving the execution of a convicted killer, a leading Austrian politician said Saturday.

Peter Pilz, a top official with the environmentalist Green Party, said the Austria-born Schwarzenegger no longer is worthy of citizenship in his homeland because he broke the law by clearing Donald Beardslee's execution on Wednesday.

Capital punishment is illegal here, and Schwarzenegger -- who holds dual U.S.-Austrian nationality -- should be stripped of his Austrian passport for "heavily damaging the reputation of the republic," Pilz said.

He told Austrian media he sent the Interior Ministry a letter formally requesting that the government begin the process of terminating Schwarzenegger's citizenship.

"Schwarzenegger is possibly the most prominent Austrian abroad, and he shapes the picture of Austria," Pilz said.

"I don't want that picture shaped by someone who commits state murder. That does not correspond to the political culture of this country."

Calls to the Interior Ministry seeking comment went unanswered Saturday.

It appeared unlikely that the Greens, a leftist opposition party which holds just a handful of seats in parliament, would persuade Austria's conservative government to revoke Schwarzenegger's citizenship.

Rarely, if ever, has Austria taken the extraordinary step of stripping someone of citizenship. Not even Kurt Waldheim, the former Austrian president and U.N. secretary-general linked to Nazi war crimes, had his citizenship revoked.

Beardslee, 61, convicted of killing two women over a drug deal almost a quarter-century ago, became the first inmate put to death by California three years when he was given a lethal injection at San Quentin State Prison.

The execution came hours after Schwarzenegger rejected a clemency petition seeking to commute the death sentence to life without parole, and the California Supreme Court rejected two last-minute appeals.

In Vienna, it triggered a small but spirited protest outside the U.S. Embassy.

The backlash against Schwarzenegger underscores how he has lost popularity in his homeland over his support for the death penalty. Most Austrians -- and many other Europeans -- abhor capital punishment as cruel and inhumane.

In a straw vote held earlier in the week in the western province of Upper Austria, fewer than 25 percent said they considered Schwarzenegger fit to run the province.

It was a stark difference from six months ago, when Austria's post office giddily issued a new "Arnie" stamp and Austrian newspaper commentators urged Americans to amend the constitution to let foreign-born citizens like Schwarzenegger run for president.

Pilz's Green Party has been especially riled by the governor's pro-death penalty stance.

In the southern city of Graz, near Schwarzenegger's birthplace, the Greens have led a drive to rename Schwarzenegger Stadium, a 15,350-seat soccer venue, because he supports capital punishment.

Schwarzenegger was born in 1947 in the village of Thal just outside Graz, where he began his bodybuilding career.

He emigrated to the United States in 1968 and became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 1984, but has retained his Austrian citizenship.

Pilz insists there are sufficient legal grounds to strip Schwarzenegger of that citizenship: specifically, a clause in Austria's nationality law stipulating that citizenship can be revoked if an Austrian "in the service of another country substantially damages the interests or reputation of the republic by his or her behavior."

"Capital punishment is unacceptable in Austria and in Europe, and no Austrian citizen may take part in it or arrange it," he said.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2005-01-22 03:13pm

Just an insect making noise. Arnold is actually still pretty popular in Austria, he even has his own stamp.

Tinkerbell · Post by **Tinkerbell** » 2005-01-22 03:17pm

"Schwarzenegger is possibly the most prominent Austrian abroad, and he shapes the picture of Austria," Pilz said.

"I don't want that picture shaped by someone who commits state murder. That does not correspond to the political culture of this country."

We don't kick out public figureheads that make us look bad. And trust me, if we could, there would be a shitload gone. I still don't see that as reasonable though.

Post by **Mr Bean** » 2005-01-22 03:20pm

I think that either Austira will get the Death penlity back and/or They vote this smuck out of office, but thats wishful thinking

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2005-01-22 03:38pm

how can a country stip a natural born citizen of citizenship for actions taken abroad? Typical green party nuctacse.

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » 2005-01-22 03:39pm

"Remember Austria, ven I promised not to keel anybody? ......... I lied!"

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2005-01-22 03:39pm

Arnold has been making Austria look bad abroad? I don't think anybody aside from that guy and his cronies (all inside the country) ever made that connection.

Julhelm · Post by **Julhelm** » 2005-01-22 03:40pm

Peter Pilz, a top official with the environmentalist Green Party

Says it all really. The green party alone are reason enough as to why we should reinstate capital punishment as well as concentration camps for disidents in Europe, that bunch of fucking over-wintered flower power '68 hippie rejects.

AMX · Post by **AMX** » 2005-01-22 04:32pm

Col. Crackpot wrote:how can a country stip a natural born citizen of citizenship for actions taken abroad? Typical green party nuctacse.

Babelfished and slightly edited:

The Austrian nationality loses by extraction, who stands in the service of a foreign state and damages substantially the interests or the reputation of the Republic of Austria by his behavior.

Just what it says in the article, too.

Julhelm wrote:Says it all really. The green party alone are reason enough as to why we should reinstate capital punishment as well as concentration camps for disidents in Europe, that bunch of fucking over-wintered flower power '68 hippie rejects.

Don't go confuse the Austrian Greens with their international brethren.
While ours are still nutcases, they at least have a better grasp of a working education policy than their "concurrence" (which doesn't mean much, BTW).

Interesting tidbit:

Rarely, if ever, has Austria taken the extraordinary step of stripping someone of citizenship. Not even Kurt Waldheim, the former Austrian president and U.N. secretary-general linked to Nazi war crimes, had his citizenship revoked.

Because he was innocent, you stupid crackheads!

The backlash against Schwarzenegger underscores how he has lost popularity in his homeland over his support for the death penalty. Most Austrians -- and many other Europeans -- abhor capital punishment as cruel and inhumane.

Not to forget: unnecessary.
Except possibly in very rare and unusual cases... but that's off-topic, and I wouldn't want to discuss that with you ... people... anyway.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2005-01-22 04:39pm

The general American attitude toward capital punishment revolts me: It tends to be "We're better than you, and we'll be even better with you gone."

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2005-01-22 04:43pm

Is there anything wrong with that view? Do you maintain that the United States would be a better place if Timothy McVeigh were still around?

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2005-01-22 04:58pm

Joe wrote:Is there anything wrong with that view? Do you maintain that the United States would be a better place if Timothy McVeigh were still around?

Would it make any difference if he was?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2005-01-22 05:05pm

Would it make any difference if he was?

Yes, without his execution there would have been no resolution (however minor) for the families of his victims that wanted to see him dead. Plus his execution perpetuates a sense of justice in our society, that our most heinous criminals will be punished greatest extent possible for their crimes.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2005-01-22 05:14pm

Joe wrote:
Would it make any difference if he was?
Yes, without his execution there would have been no resolution (however minor) for the families of his victims that wanted to see him dead.

So fucking what? The families (at least the members of the families who wanted the death penalty) get a sense of satisfaction. And we may never really know what caused McVeigh to do what he did, or how to prevent it in the future. An ounce of sweat saves a gallon of blood.

Plus his execution perpetuates a sense of justice in our society, that our most heinous criminals will be punished greatest extent possible for their crimes.

And being locked away for the rest of your days doesn't?

The Kernel · Post by **The Kernel** » 2005-01-22 05:16pm

Joe wrote: Yes, without his execution there would have been no resolution (however minor) for the families of his victims that wanted to see him dead.

Ahhh, so we must satisfy their need for blood? Sorry, but they aren't entitled to that.

Plus his execution perpetuates a sense of justice in our society, that our most heinous criminals will be punished greatest extent possible for their crimes.

Plenty of other civilized nations manage to have justice just fine without the death penalty.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2005-01-22 05:16pm

The question logically comes up, what about those countries that have - either de jure or de facto - abolished the death penalty? Clearly, they have murderers who must be punished. What, then, makes the judicial needs of the United States (which has the death penalty) differ from those of Canada (which does not), for example?

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2005-01-22 05:28pm

Isn't this the same Green Party leader who got the austrian Lauftwaffen ace dumped into a pauper's cemetary?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2005-01-22 05:29pm

So fucking what? The families (at least the members of the families who wanted the death penalty) get a sense of satisfaction. And we may never really know what caused McVeigh to do what he did, or how to prevent it in the future. An ounce of sweat saves a gallon of blood.

Actually, McVeigh isn't really a tough nuy to crack. He read a lot of anti-government shit, got involved with lots of anti-government groups, and eventually became convinced that the U.S. government was so evil that he had to attack it and kill a lot of people to make a statement. It doesn't get much deeper than that.

If you want to argue that certain serial killers and the like should be kept alive for psychological study of this sort, then I would agree with you. However, I still wouldn't rule out the death penalty for them after their minds had been fully picked.

However, that's besides the point; execution of convicted criminals can bring the loved ones of the victim some measure of psychological comfort. If society can give these families at least some closure by killing a heinous criminal, I don't see why it shouldn't.

And being locked away for the rest of your days doesn't?

We're talking about subjective assessments of justice here. For many Americans, myself included, execution is the ultimate form of retribution against violent crimes, moreso than lifetime imprisonment, and the perception of justice is important.

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2005-01-22 05:37pm

Joe wrote:We're talking about subjective assessments of justice here. For many Americans, myself included, execution is the ultimate form of retribution against violent crimes, moreso than lifetime imprisonment, and the perception of justice is important.

Retribution is not the same as justice, though, and the perception of justice is not the same as the real thing.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2005-01-22 05:38pm

Ahhh, so we must satisfy their need for blood? Sorry, but they aren't entitled to that.

Of all the anti-death penalty arguments this one is the most disgusting and quite frankly I'm shocked that the people who want to abolish capital punishment have decided to run with it. Who the hell do you think you are to sit there and self-righteously proclaim that a grieving family member who wants the murderer of his or her loved one dead is an asshole for wanting revenge? Where do you get off telling these people that they're not entitled to the small measure of mental closure that executing the asshole who stole their loved ones can potentially bring? Even if they're not, you have no right to accuse them to being bloodthirsty just because they want what they perceive to be justice.

Plenty of other civilized nations manage to have justice just fine without the death penalty.

Whether true or not that is not really relevant to whether the U.S. should have the death penalty or not.

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2005-01-22 05:40pm

Retribution is not the same as justice, though, and the perception of justice is not the same as the real thing.

What is "the real thing"? Is there some objective, empirically verifiable and non-arbitary system of justice out there that I'm just missing?

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2005-01-22 05:40pm

The Kernel wrote:Ahhh, so we must satisfy their need for blood? Sorry, but they aren't entitled to that.

As a society we are obligated to care for those who have suffered in the past. Do you not agree?

Plenty of other civilized nations manage to have justice just fine without the death penalty.

Totally irrelevant, since one of the purposes of punishment is to uphold community standards. It doesn't matter if someone else's community doesn't agree with what's going on.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2005-01-22 05:41pm

Joe wrote:
Ahhh, so we must satisfy their need for blood? Sorry, but they aren't entitled to that.
Of all the anti-death penalty arguments this one is the most disgusting and quite frankly I'm shocked that the people who want to abolish capital punishment have decided to run with it. Who the hell do you think you are to sit there and self-righteously proclaim that a grieving family member who wants the murderer of his or her loved one dead is an asshole for wanting revenge? Where do you get off telling these people that they're not entitled to the small measure of mental closure that executing the asshole who stole their loved ones can potentially bring? Even if they're not, you have no right to accuse them to being bloodthirsty just because they want what they perceive to be justice.

Plenty of other civilized nations manage to have justice just fine without the death penalty.
Whether true or not that is not really relevant to whether the U.S. should have the death penalty or not.

Actually Joe that's from former Justice Holmes, comparison between hangings and the Galdiatorial games of anchient rome. The fact that the folks who have tailgates out side the prisons, are still htere does lend creedence to that accusation.

Luzifer's right hand · Post by **Luzifer's right hand** » 2005-01-22 05:45pm

Capital punishment is a hot iron here in Austria, I doubt you could even find a handful of parliamentarians here which would support it.

The main problem with capital punishment is imho that too often innocents die for crimes that did no commit.
You can free innocents when new evidence is found, to revitalise dead people is a little bit harder.

Yeah most of the greens in Austria are nutcases and Pilz is just does such things because he loves to see his face in the papers imho, however they are imho better than the other parties.

The SPÖ showed 30 years long that they are unfit to rule and their current leader is a complete moron(He suggested that theres is no need for grades in schools and other moronic things).
The ÖVP is just interested in power and nothing else.
The FPÖ showed that they are unfit to rule during the last years(They lost more than 10% during the lost poll).

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2005-01-22 05:45pm

Joe wrote:
Plenty of other civilized nations manage to have justice just fine without the death penalty.
Whether true or not that is not really relevant to whether the U.S. should have the death penalty or not.

It is perfectly relevant. Not only is the United States not particularly unique among western nations (sorry, right-wing motherfuckers, it's the truth and if you don't like it, too bad), the constitutions of many nations that have abolished capital punishment are explicitly based on ours. Not only that, many American states have abolished the death penalty, with minimal negative effects (if any effect at all) on the murder rate in those states. So unless you can demonstrate that the death penalty is a net social good, there is no compelling need for it.