Re: John Bickmore asking for help with a very difficult problem

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

"Scott" <hendricks_scott@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:2a89a30f-955d-457a-8709-7bbcc758fc90@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> John, I'm not sure I'm following you. You say you were born on a US
> Army base in the US. But, were you the child of citizens of some
> other country?

If he was born on a US Army base meaning in this country then he is
automatically a US citizen. If he were born of US citizens in any other
country he would be a US citizen.

On May 1, 2:24 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Scott" <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2a89a30f-955d-457a-8709-7bbcc758fc90@p25g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > John, I'm not sure I'm following you.  You say you were born on a US
> > Army base in the US.  But, were you the child of citizens of some
> > other country?
>
> If he was born on a US Army base meaning in this country then he is
> automatically a US citizen. If he were born of US citizens in any other
> country he would be a US citizen.

Not necessarily. If he were born to parents of another nationality
who were in the US illegally, then he would not necessarily be a
citizen. That particular issue is still in limbo before the courts.

It's probably not relevant, of course, because I'm pretty positive
that John is a US citizen, but that didn't stop you from nitpicking
about it.

The real point of my message, the one you conveniently ignored because
not even you could find something to argue about, was that the
government can't force HIM to leave if HE is a citizen.

"Scott" <hendricks_scott@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cbc92e1b-4cbc-4d53-9702-3dd99b4324b3@w74g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> If he were born to parents of another nationality
> who were in the US illegally, then he would not necessarily be a
> citizen. That particular issue is still in limbo before the courts.

Sorry but you are incorrect. Any child born in the USA to legal or illegal
parents is a US citizen by birthright. The case before the courts has to do
with whether or not you can throw the parents out of the country after the
child is born.

> The real point of my message, the one you conveniently ignored because
> not even you could find something to argue about, was that the
> government can't force HIM to leave if HE is a citizen.

And you seem to be unaware that John appears to be saying that he isn't
going to stay here with his wife somewhere else.

On May 1, 4:20 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Scott" <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:cbc92e1b-4cbc-4d53-9702-3dd99b4324b3@w74g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
>
> >  If he were born to parents of another nationality
> > who were in the US illegally, then he would not necessarily be a
> > citizen.  That particular issue is still in limbo before the courts.
>
> Sorry but you are incorrect. Any child born in the USA to legal or illegal
> parents is a US citizen by birthright. The case before the courts has to do
> with whether or not you can throw the parents out of the country after the
> child is born.
>
> > The real point of my message, the one you conveniently ignored because
> > not even you could find something to argue about, was that the
> > government can't force HIM to leave if HE is a citizen.
>
> And you seem to be unaware that John appears to be saying that he isn't
> going to stay here with his wife somewhere else.

No, I didn't miss that point at all.

"Scott" <hendricks_scott@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:248419be-f4e5-4cf0-8f9f-d15d2faadc13@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
On May 1, 4:20 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> > And you seem to be unaware that John appears to be saying that he isn't
> > going to stay here with his wife somewhere else.
>
> No, I didn't miss that point at all.

Ahh, then all of that printing suggesting that JOHN doesn't have to go meant
exactly what?

On May 1, 5:42 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
> "Scott" <hendricks_sc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:248419be-f4e5-4cf0-8f9f-d15d2faadc13@d1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> On May 1, 4:20 pm, "Tom Kunich" <cyclintom@yahoo. com> wrote:
>
> > > And you seem to be unaware that John appears to be saying that he isn't
> > > going to stay here with his wife somewhere else.
>
> > No, I didn't miss that point at all.
>
> Ahh, then all of that printing suggesting that JOHN doesn't have to go meant
> exactly what?

Surely someone of your massive intellect can tell the difference
between deciding to go because his wife was deported vs. having the
govt. ordering HIM to go??? When I said the govt. couldn't order him
to go, I meant just that. Only you would think for a minute that it
meant anything other than that. Of course he'll go with his wife/
kids.