Terrorism against Chinese targets

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
You are being disingenuous if you don't think knowing the Turkish national anthem's name or how to sing it is valid information in this case if they claim they are Turkish citizens. That's common sense to everyone else. :rolleyes:

I agree it's common sense, but i think brumby is more asking whether not knowing the turkish anthem's name or how to sing it was the only definitive "test" of whether they were turkish nationals or not, in court.

E.g.: did they also examine other documents such as their passports to fully positively ID them as fake, etc.


For the sake of non-legal discussion, obviously this particular kernel of information is relevant and common sense, but in a court of law, being able to name and/or sing one's national anthem should not really be a valid test of their actual citizenship without any other supporting documents to implicate them.
 

vincent

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
I agree it's common sense, but i think brumby is more asking whether not knowing the turkish anthem's name or how to sing it was the only definitive "test" of whether they were turkish nationals or not, in court.

E.g.: did they also examine other documents such as their passports to fully positively ID them as fake, etc.


For the sake of non-legal discussion, obviously this particular kernel of information is relevant and common sense, but in a court of law, being able to name and/or sing one's national anthem should not really be a valid test of their actual citizenship without any other supporting documents to implicate them.

The issue is that China is accusing Turkey government provided the passports to Chinese citizens for the purpose of getting them to Turkey. How else can you prove those terrorists are not Turkish citizens, if the passports were issued by the Turkish government? I moved to Canada at a young age, but i still remember the name of the Chinese anthem and still can sing the first few lines.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
The issue is that China is accusing Turkey government provided the passports to Chinese citizens for the purpose of getting them to Turkey. How else can you prove those terrorists are not Turkish citizens, if the passports were issued by the Turkish government? I moved to Canada at a young age, but i still remember the name of the Chinese anthem and still can sing the first few lines.

I don't disagree with you in terms of common sense, however I imagine there should be more effective means of disproving them in a court of law than a national anthem farce.
 

Brumby

Major
I agree it's common sense, but i think brumby is more asking whether not knowing the turkish anthem's name or how to sing it was the only definitive "test" of whether they were turkish nationals or not, in court.

Thanks Bltizo. You read my mind.

You are being disingenuous if you don't think knowing the Turkish national anthem's name or how to sing it is valid information in this case if they claim they are Turkish citizens. That's common sense to everyone else.

What is common sense to you may not be common sense to another. You may say that they are unpatriotic but hardly a reasonable test to determine nationality because in my view it fails the "beyond reasonable doubt test". It is simply a subjective means rather than an objective test. In a court of law, due process demands a higher standard of proof than mere common sense. What exactly is common sense?

Look, those chaps might be guilty but establishing nationality on the basis of whether they know the national anthem is laughable if true. If that is the legal standard to establish a case, I pray that I would not be subject to such an arbitrary process ever in a court of law.
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Thanks Bltizo. You read my mind.



What is common sense to you may not be common sense to another. You may say that they are unpatriotic but hardly a reasonable test to determine nationality because in my view it fails the "beyond reasonable doubt test". It is simply a subjective means rather than an objective test. In a court of law, due process demands a higher standard of proof than mere common sense. What exactly is common sense?

Look, those chaps might be guilty but establishing nationality on the basis of whether they know the national anthem is laughable if true. If that is the legal standard to establish a case, I pray that I would not be subject to such an arbitrary process ever in a court of law.


Based on the last page or so of posts, I don't think I've seen anyone has stated in black and white that not knowing the turkish national anthem's name or singing it should be the only piece of "evidence" to implicate them in a court of law... apart from maybe vincent in his most recent reply but I'm not sure if he's serious.

I'd also like to point out that the article doesn't claim that being unable to name/sing the turkish national anthem was the only metric they used for assessing their citizenship status, it just seems like the article mentioned it because it is probably the most "common sense" test that a reader could understand.


In other words, if no one here is seriously claiming that the national anthem test is sufficient as the only legal standard to assess for citizenship, and given that the article doesn't claim the national anthem test was the only method for determining their status, then I think the entire focus on the validity of the test becomes moot.

However in the realm of real life and common sense, being unable to either sing or even name one's own national anthem is definitely not a good look and is definitely enough to earn derision and skepticism for them claiming to be turkish citizens... and I think that kind of common sense is what jaybird and shen were talking about.
 
Last edited:

JsCh

Junior Member
The following news
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

from the same news source also mentioned the test of nationality, the part that is of particularly interest,
During cross-examination, prosecutor Nana Riana aggressively questioned the nationality of the men, who could not correctly state the birthdates given on their passports or to police.

“Would you tell me your birthday?” Nana asked defendant Ahmet Mahmud.

“Istanbul, July 9, 1987,” he answered.

“On the police investigation report, you said Jan. 10, 1995 in Turkestan,” she replied.

“What about your birthday?” Nana asked co-defendant Abdullah, alias Altinci Bayram.

“Istanbul, April 20, 1986.”

“It is stated May 10 on the passport. How come someone has different birthdays?” grilled Nana.
 

vincent

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Moderator - World Affairs
I don't disagree with you in terms of common sense, however I imagine there should be more effective means of disproving them in a court of law than a national anthem farce.

Let's not deviate from the main topic, which is whether Turkey is supporting terrorism by issuing real passports to Uighurs who may committed acts of terrorism in China and abroad or not. We are not in a court of law to determine these men's national identities by reviewing convincing evidences.

Common sense said these terrorists are Chinese nationals who were issued legitimate passports by the Turkish government, and this is not an isolated incident. Recent case in Thailand support that. Can someone tell me why 200+ related "Turkish citizens", not part of a tour, all went to Thailand at the same time?
 

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Let's not deviate from the main topic, which is whether Turkey is supporting terrorism by issuing real passports to Uighurs who may committed acts of terrorism in China and abroad or not. We are not in a court of law to determine these men's national identities by reviewing convincing evidences.

Common sense said these terrorists are Chinese nationals who were issued legitimate passports by the Turkish government, and this is not an isolated incident. Recent case in Thailand support that. Can someone tell me why 200+ related "Turkish citizens", not part of a tour, all went to Thailand at the same time?

Hey, I don't necessarily disagree with you, I'm just pointing out that the point of contention between brumby vs others was whether the specific "national anthem test" was sufficient in a court of law.

Once that's out of the way and acknowledged by all parties then it's easier for everyone to discuss the actual topic knowing it's in the context of common sense.
 
Top