I seldom opine about global affairs since I have no specialized knowledge in the field. On the other hand, as a citizen in a democratic society, I feel eligible to comment and put my thoughts out into the free marketplace of ideas.
A recurrent concern among government officials is the risk that citizens will go to war zones or train with terrorist groups, then return to our borders and plot acts of terrorism. Many countries have an estimate of how many people have left to engage in war. According to the linked article in the Néw York Times, governments are trying to discourage their citizens from joining Al Queda or the Islamic State.
For what it is worth, which may not be much, I think we are taking the wrong approach. We should not stop those who want to leave. We should give them fair warning that if they join a terrorist group abroad, they will lose their passport and not be allowed to return.
Call it the hasta la vista policy.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
“…since I have no specialized knowledge in the field…”
Startling to see a qualifier like this on an educational policy blog. Could you imagine one of our policymakers saying something like this?!
Interesting thoughts, Diane.
LikeLike
Ohio Algebra teacher. Not many of the TV talking heads know much about foreign policy.
LikeLike
These talking heads have become only news readers…or ill informed pundits regurgitating what was said by others…little critical thought and analysis by the traditional news media. They all interview the same “experts” and stick with the party line. No Eric Severied, no Murrow, nor Huntley/Brinkley, etc., any more.
I like your suggestion Diane…makes so much common sense. If these radicalized Islamists choose to leave, do not let them back in (would have prevented the Boston bombing)…even better, don’t let them in the first place.
Wish France would also have done that. The European countries with the biggest problems with radical Islamists populations such as France and Russia, and even England, let them enter illegally for decades to be the cheap laborers. Many of these crossed the Mediterannean illegally when the could not find work in North Africa, and settled in the slums of the European ports…gradually moving north to infiltrate most of these countries.
Sound familiar??? The Western borders states of the US does much the same, but then we deport babies and children from Central America who need our asylum, and those older students who only know American language and customs, the Dreamers.
However,we let in endless (close to 3000) unknown Middle Eastern men on green cards who Fetullah Guilen claims he needs to teach math and science in his charter schools since, he says, there are no good American math and science teachers for hire….and these imported men who may be be ‘sleepers’ are paid for by the American taxpayer. Why does our government allow this?
Imam Fetullah Gulen is, according to many Turks, the most powerful person influencing the Middle East, and his goal to be the Sharia Turkish leader seems near. The Turks who comment online (always to my articles and others) feel he has control of the Turkish army and the police force, all done on the billions he has made in America, mainly through his charter schools, but also other businesses. Yet Americans generally know nothing about him.
Sharon Higgins, please add to this. And if anyone wants more info on this insidious situation, please read about it at SharonHiggins.com.
LikeLike
correction…Sharon Higgins is not at the above email address. Suggest googling her as the expert on the Gulen Movement, not the listed photographer.
LikeLike
Or, Hasta la visa
LikeLike
I like that…
LikeLike
Too many reporters and their editors know very little about almost anything—because they are media people and are given an assignment doesn’t mean they know anything about the issue or topic they are covering. They get the assignment with a deadline that could be hours away. That’s it. In those few hours, today’s reporters will do most of their research on the internet and never leave the office. Then they rush the draft to turn it in on time to their editor before the next assignment and the next deadline.
Most reporters are writers and nothing else—not teachers, elected representatives or scientists. My BA is in journalism and while earning that degree, there were no classes about education, politics, etc. The only classes were about the media, writing, magazine/newspaper production, etc.
LikeLike
We could even put a line on the customs declaration form that says:
“I have joined a terrorist group. YES NO (Circle one)”
LikeLike
LOL.
LikeLike
LOL! There is a small problem with your proposal and that is the due process provisions of the Bill of Rights. Tagging one’s passport for their return to be questioned, now would be legal.
I wonder if we could get Arnold Schwarzenegger to do the public service commercial? Hasta la VISA, baby!
LikeLike
Great idea, Diane.
Steve, is Aahnolt stchtill allowed in Kah-li-for-niiia? :oD
LikeLike
Austrian Arnie is a citizen and is still trying to get our law changed so he can run for Prez.
LikeLike
I seem to recall that if one fights for another country,mtheir citizenship can be taken away. The was a question before we entered WW II when people went to fly for the RAF.
LikeLike
I assume (and hope) middle-schoolers aren’t forced to read this story anymore.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Without_a_Country
LikeLike
Peter Smyth, You’re right. There is no clarity on this issue. It affected me personally, and other members of my family. We’re “west coasters”, living up and down the coast in both the U.S. and Canada. My mom was born in the U.S., and most of her sibs were born in Canada. I was born in Canada, and my sibs were born in the U.S. Why this impacts me is that despite having a U.S. born mother who never renounced citizenship, I’m a naturalized citizen. My mother served in the RCAF during WWII. When I was 4, my family moved to the US. The debate amongst officials was quite interesting. It was decided, to be on the safe side, I should go through the naturalization process. I was told about 17 years ago, by embassy official in Barcelona, that the thinking on this changes over time. At that point, they thought I would easily qualify for dual citizenship. However, since I have never wanted to run for president, it seemed a moot point. I think there would be room to legislate under what conditions a U.S. citizen could lose citizenship when fight for a foreign entity.
LikeLike
Many leave and travel to countries that might be “suspect”, then travel back roads to areas were such training exist, so it is really hard to know where they’ve been and what they’ve been doing. So it’s not as simple as you think. There are sleeper cells all over the world.
LikeLike
Here’s the problem…. Your suggestion would allow the ‘official’ government to determine the ‘terrorist’ list. Nelson Mandela, you will recall, was (according to the US) a terrorist. On the other hand, the Neo-Nazis in Ukraine are not. We did not declare Gandhi a terrorist back in the day, but we most certainly would at this period of our history.
I once spent some time lobbying (as a retired teacher and a ‘volunteer’) in my state’s capital. I developed personal ties with many legislators over 5 years in an effort to push just a small loophole that might allow more accountability by big timber for the damage they created. As a retired teacher, I had the time. The loophole passed (after YEARS of effort and personal expense), but I needed to get many influential Republicans on board, and neutralize folks such as the Farm Bureau and the State Chamber of Commerce (not an easy task that, of course, involved developing personal relationships, as well as pulling the occasional wool over the eyes of the Chamber which, I think, remains blinded to the ramifications to this day… the lobbyist being pretty arrogant and lazy).
I can remember one particular legislator who kept wanting to engage me on the ‘dangers of Eco-terrorism’. He wanted my support of his bill (labeling people who poured sugar into the gas tank of a timber company tractor as ‘terrorists’). Naturally, I demurred, stating that wasn’t my area of expertise, and I really didn’t understand the issue (even though I DID). In the end, he voted for the loophole (one of the stipulations was that I would ‘retire’ from lobbying, which I did. I considered that a supreme compliment to the power of an unpaid citizen lobbyist, willing to spend three days a year for years to do the work, make the presentations in committee, meet people on their own terms (visited a powerful young Republican leader [now Speaker] on his ranch, 150 miles from the Capital, where he gave me a tour and we shared some moonshine from his private stash and bonded. I still like this guy, and wish I were active so we could talk some more, but I don’t have the money to continue and, I’m getting pretty old, so stamina is an issue].
Anyway, (after my self-serving digression) my point was to alert you to my suspicion of the use of the word (or ‘concept’) of ‘terrorism’, I’m not so sure I would agree with your suggestion. “Terrorism” is a very fluid word. IMO, there are many American citizens who join the Israeli military. They engage in terrorism by killing civilians (Israel defines Palestinians as “combatants” even if they are children). They directly terrorize an entire population in order to subdue them, to make them compliant. They help kill thousands in order to seize the land that the inhabitants have lived on for centuries, and , yet, they would be exempt from your edict.
How about… Anyone that leaves the country to fight under foreign leadership loses US citizenship. Period!
LikeLike
Oops, I meant “three days WEEK” in my lobbying schedule. Can’t we get an ‘edit’ option?
Three days a year does nothing. No way to engage and build the necessary relationships on that schedule. If you expect (as retired teachers) to have any impact, at least three days a week is mandatory. After all, you will be in competition with people who are paid handsomely to be in the capital every single day the Legislature is in session. AND, the job involves building relationships with other lobbyists (most on six-figure payrolls) as well.
LikeLike
To John Wund:
Thanks for a sharing of your own experience and a sincere warning.
According to all stories of my acquaintances who lived in a dangerous zone (= a crossed area where two opposite ideologies have influences over innocent citizens.). They were harassed and labelled by both extremists. As a result, they and their family members are eventually harmed and killed by the bad conscience in authority (= no humanity) until they must escape to live in a safer city.
I hope that the majority of educators acknowledges the harassment of different groups of mafia to all innocent owners of any small shops for protection money. Therefore, we must critically examine and define the background (= tenure track and due process are needed) of all accusers and their loved ones, before we label them as terrorists.
The utmost important aspect of financial, and emotional support from any individual, or organization to evidently harm or to intentionally kill any innocent citizens regardless of reasons, must be considered as a severe CRIME against civility. As a result, this individual or organization shall be exiled to where they belong for life because they do not deserve to live in civilized society. Back2basic
LikeLike