Repeal Standardized Passport Act

[The Casadian Empire]

Repeal “The Standardized Passport Act”

A resolution to repeal previously passed legislation

Description: Standardized Passport Act shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: The General Assembly of the World Assembly,

WHEREAS the Standardized Passport Act calls for the creation of the “Global Emigration, Security, Travel And Passport Organization”;

NOTING that the acronym of this organization is “GESTAPO”;

BELIEVING that this resolution empowers GESTAPO to gather information pertaining to individuals and passports, but fails to define limitations on this power, thus creating an unreasonably high potential for abuse and discriminatory enforcement;

APPALED that a member of the World Assembly would propose that all nations of the World Assembly be policed by and subject to oppression by an organization called GESTAPO, which is not responsible to the nations with which it interferes;

AFFIRMING that nations of the World Assembly wish to uphold the principles of liberty, freedom, and justice which are essential to all nations and are principles with which this resolution conflicts;

HEREBY repeals the Standardized Passport Act.

As the thread with the first draft was locked by moderators, stating that it would remain locked since no revisions can be made to something already submitted, this thread is for a new repeal, as the first draft was rendered illegal. The individual illegalities were identified and have been removed, and the above repeal has been submitted. I call on all nations who oppose the Standardized Passport Act to support this repeal.

[The Walden Estates]

We do hereby support this repeal and wish it to be rendered into law. The Walden Estates is concerned about the unspecified information gathering powers of the GESTAPO and do not wish our citizens to be spied on by any WA secret police. We do hereby lend our upmost support to this bill.

[Cobdenia]

We do hereby support this repeal and wish it to be rendered into law. The Walden Estates is concerned about the unspecified information gathering powers of the GESTAPO and do not wish our citizens to be spied on by any WA secret police. We do hereby lend our upmost support to this bill.

It has no information gathering powers. Zip. Nada. None. All it can do is tell you what information should be on passports. It doesn't even mandate that such information should be on a database set up by the national government - this is up to the country in question (whithin the bounds of Right to Privacy). If it doesn't mention it, it doesn't do it. And I don't think that one can repeal a resolution based upon something the resolution doesn't do (OoC: there was a ruling to such with regards the old UN resolution regarding the historic resolution UN taxation ban, which many people mistakenly thought banned the UN from taxing countries, or banning countries from taxing it's people, when in fact it banned the UN from directly taxing people - something very different)

[The Palentine]

"For God's sake, count to ten and have a popsicle! Not you old bean, I mean those other fellas.", The good but unwholesome Senator Sulla says to Sir Cyril.

[Cobdenia]

"For God's sake, count to ten and have a popsicle! Not you old bean, I mean those other fellas.", The good but unwholesome Senator Sulla says to Sir Cyril.

No worries, old chap. But I may have a ice lolly anyway.

Mmmm...ice lollies...

[The Walden Estates]

FOUNDS the Global Emigration, Security, Travel And Passport Organisation.
a) This organisation will establish minimum requirements of details to be included into passports, including but not limited to passport numbers, facial representations of the owner, name, date of birth, validity, and anti-forgery features;

This is the clause in question. If the author of the Standardized Passport Act would want to reassure WA member nations, he should have limited the number of details to a specified list.

[Urgench]

Indeed one might as well say that the statute in question required that every citizen of a WA member state suddenly start dressing in camel skin bathing suits and call themselves Noor-Ismain. The repeal must surely repeal the statute for something it actually does rather than some bizarre fantasy cooked up by the fervid mind of any crackpot who happens to wander in here.


Yours,

[Cobdenia]

FOUNDS the Global Emigration, Security, Travel And Passport Organisation.
a) This organisation will establish minimum requirements of details to be included into passports, [b]including but not limited to passport numbers, facial representations of the owner, name, date of birth, validity, and anti-forgery features;[/b]

This is the clause in question. If the author of the Standardized Passport Act would want to reassure WA member nations, he should have limited the number of details to a specified list.

That still doesn't gather ANY data - only what is to be included in passports. And for numerous reasons, a specific list is impossible.

[Urgench]

FOUNDS the Global Emigration, Security, Travel And Passport Organisation.
a) This organisation will establish minimum requirements of details to be included into passports, [b]including but not limited to passport numbers, facial representations of the owner, name, date of birth, validity, and anti-forgery features;[/b]

This is the clause in question. If the author of the Standardized Passport Act would want to reassure WA member nations, he should have limited the number of details to a specified list.

The organisation in question does not collect this information itself and it therefore could not use it for any purpose, it helps member states to standardise what information they will require that a passport bear.

It could not be clearer your Excellency.


Yours,

[The Casadian Empire]

Indeed one might as well say that the statute in question required that every citizen of a WA member state suddenly start dressing in camel skin bathing suits and call themselves Noor-Ismain. The repeal must surely repeal the statute for something it actually does rather than some bizarre fantasy cooked up by the fervid mind of any crackpot who happens to wander in here.


Yours,

This is no fantasy, it is a legitimate interpretation of the resolution, as many nations have recognized. It is a reasonable argument, and it should be considered by the World Assembly, rather than simply shot down because you read the resolution in a very narrow way, and others have properly read it to consider the true purpose and meaning of the resolution, rather than just the plain words of the resolution on their face.

Why are the supporters of this resolution so determined to prevent a repeal from reaching the floor of the WA? Is it because you are concerned that people will see through your transparent arguments and recognize this resolution for what it truly is? Are you concerned that people will actually read the forum for the debate over the resolution and see that what is now GESTAPO was once SWASTICA, and see the insults that were hurled at people who respectfully opposed this resolution, for no other reason than to engage in civil debate, and that such insults included one nation calling another nation a "fat Jew cow" and stating that the Holocaust was just the Nazis trying to make the world a better place but the Jews got in the way?

It's not that I don't see your point, its that you aren't understanding our point. And our point is that this resolution was very upsetting to a number of nations, and the nations of the WA should have the opportunity to see both sides, not just your side. This repeal and the debate over this issue should be allowed to continue, and the World Assembly should have equal opportunity to vote on this repeal, just as they had the opportunity to vote on Cobdenia's resolution. It is the only fair way to resolve our differences.

[Hiriaurtung Arororugul]

The Global Emigration, Security, Travel And Passport Organization does not collect any information, so your primary argument is patently untrue.

GESTAPO is not mentioned in the text of "Standardized Passport Act", so your use of it in the repeal is obviously a reference to the Gestapo and thus is an RL reference.

[Cobdenia]

Indeed one might as well say that the statute in question required that every citizen of a WA member state suddenly start dressing in camel skin bathing suits and call themselves Noor-Ismain. The repeal must surely repeal the statute for something it actually does rather than some bizarre fantasy cooked up by the fervid mind of any crackpot who happens to wander in here.


Yours,

This is no fantasy, it is a legitimate interpretation of the resolution, as many nations have recognized. It is a reasonable argument, and it should be considered by the World Assembly, rather than simply shot down because you read the resolution in a very narrow way, and others have properly read it to consider the true purpose and meaning of the resolution, rather than just the plain words of the resolution on their face.

In the WA, the law means what the law says. If the law says an organisation has the right to mandate that certain information be included on passports, the law means that the organisation has the right to mandate that certain information be included on passports. That is all. It's the way the WA works and always will work. If you want to repeal it, you have to find legitimate reasons that are legal under WA law

[Philimbesi]

Ah, I see your first attempt at making travel in our nations less safe by repealing a law meant to standardize travel documents failed so you decided to file another one, this time with blatant lies and fear mongering. Good show.

Also Ambassador, yet again in your arrogance, and misguided thought of yourself the perfect resolution writer, or perhaps narcissistic attempt to get your name out there as the repealler of the big bad evil passport act you've submitted another proposal, without benefit of critique or comment from your colleagues on the floor.

Further your insult the gnomes of the Global Emigration, Security, Travel And Passport Organisation, by inferring that it is possible for them to overstep their bounds when we know full well that they are dedicated public servants, who are not corruptible (trust me we've tried) they accept no bribes (again tried that) and they care not for race, color or creed. To say they are capable of oppressing us is another flat out lie.

Why are the supporters of this resolution so determined to prevent a repeal from reaching the floor of the WA?

OOC: Because it is our duty to make sure that illegal proposal aren't allowed to see the light of day, and your first repeal was in face illegal, in several ways. Don't try and make us out as some evil conspiracy against you, if what you submitted wasn't illegal we would have debated you on that topic much like we are debating you on this.

[Krioval]

This is no fantasy, it is a legitimate interpretation of the resolution, as many nations have recognized. It is a reasonable argument, and it should be considered by the World Assembly, rather than simply shot down because you read the resolution in a very narrow way, and others have properly read it to consider the true purpose and meaning of the resolution, rather than just the plain words of the resolution on their face.

As our esteemed colleagues have illustrated, the resolution can only be interpreted to do what it does. And it does not collect information or establish a "WA secret police" - the latter of which would be illegal in any case. Your Excellency is making an argument that makes no sense given the text of the resolution.

Ambassador Darvek[-kan] Tyvok
Imperial Chiefdom of Krioval

OOC:

Why are the supporters of this resolution so determined to prevent a repeal from reaching the floor of the WA? Is it because you are concerned that people will see through your transparent arguments and recognize this resolution for what it truly is? Are you concerned that people will actually read the forum for the debate over the resolution and see that what is now GESTAPO was once SWASTICA, and see the insults that were hurled at people who respectfully opposed this resolution, for no other reason than to engage in civil debate, and that such insults included one nation calling another nation a "fat Jew cow" and stating that the Holocaust was just the Nazis trying to make the world a better place but the Jews got in the way?

It's not that I don't see your point, its that you aren't understanding our point. And our point is that this resolution was very upsetting to a number of nations, and the nations of the WA should have the opportunity to see both sides, not just your side. This repeal and the debate over this issue should be allowed to continue, and the World Assembly should have equal opportunity to vote on this repeal, just as they had the opportunity to vote on Cobdenia's resolution. It is the only fair way to resolve our differences.

Utterly irrelevant, for reasons other players have pointed out. The WA does not recognize RL definitions, and the word "Gestapo" is not, in and of itself, defamatory. Further, the resolution never uses that word; perhaps it is implied, but it's no worse than when I used "HEROIN" and "COCAINE" as backronyms in model UN (and then spoke at length of the need to abandon HEROIN for COCAINE, but I digress). If you could point me to the posts in which somebody used the phrase "fat Jew cow" or in which they lauded the Holocaust, I would be most interested in seeing them. If they have been deleted, I would be more than happy to review the thread in moderation under which they were reported. I ask for this information because I do not recall seeing those phrases during the debate on "Standardised Passport Act".

Resolutions can be upsetting, though honestly, I think that a lot of people - as in players - are letting their emotional responses get the better of them. If you want to submit a repeal, it cannot contain RL references by the rules. It's been that way for years now, and it's not going to change because somebody used a series of words that, if one squints, contains a reference to Nazism. Proposals, including repeals, must conform to the WA ruleset.

[Enistopia]

We agree with this act

[Cobdenia]

OoC: Krioval; there was a troll who did use those terms in a failed flame attempt...just trying to find the mod thread. Incidentally, had not Urgench reported them before I could

[Urgench]

Indeed one might as well say that the statute in question required that every citizen of a WA member state suddenly start dressing in camel skin bathing suits and call themselves Noor-Ismain. The repeal must surely repeal the statute for something it actually does rather than some bizarre fantasy cooked up by the fervid mind of any crackpot who happens to wander in here.


Yours,

This is no fantasy, it is a legitimate interpretation of the resolution, as many nations have recognized. It is a reasonable argument, and it should be considered by the World Assembly, rather than simply shot down because you read the resolution in a very narrow way, and others have properly read it to consider the true purpose and meaning of the resolution, rather than just the plain words of the resolution on their face.

Why are the supporters of this resolution so determined to prevent a repeal from reaching the floor of the WA? Is it because you are concerned that people will see through your transparent arguments and recognize this resolution for what it truly is? Are you concerned that people will actually read the forum for the debate over the resolution and see that what is now GESTAPO was once SWASTICA, and see the insults that were hurled at people who respectfully opposed this resolution, for no other reason than to engage in civil debate, and that such insults included one nation calling another nation a "fat Jew cow" and stating that the Holocaust was just the Nazis trying to make the world a better place but the Jews got in the way?

It's not that I don't see your point, its that you aren't understanding our point. And our point is that this resolution was very upsetting to a number of nations, and the nations of the WA should have the opportunity to see both sides, not just your side. This repeal and the debate over this issue should be allowed to continue, and the World Assembly should have equal opportunity to vote on this repeal, just as they had the opportunity to vote on Cobdenia's resolution. It is the only fair way to resolve our differences.

OOC- OK since you don't seem to be addressing me in character I'll address you in kind.

First of all, those insults the "fat Jew cow" ones were reported by me, because they clearly violated the rules of conduct, and because they're extremely unpleasant and because I happen to think racial slurs like that are disgusting. I happen to know that all the supporters of Cob's resolution that I know in any capacity (including Cob himself ) would feel exactly the same. So you can quit slyly associating the supporters of Cob's resolution with a lone freak who took the opportunity to be obnoxious to another player.

Mocks Nazis, not the Holocaust, not the Jews, and certainly not those who died in the Holocaust.

Now your second point seems to be that this repeal should somehow be given a chance even though its probably illegal because the WA should be given the opportunity to debate the merits or lack of same of Cob's resolution. Firstly why on earth should the rules be bent in this way? Second the WA already had its chance to debate the merits of Cob's resolution and it voted pretty heavily for it regardless of the hysterical overreaction of some players. Thirdly WA voters almost never take much notice of debates here in the WA, they vote according to their own readings of resolutions or sometimes on the advice of debates held on offsite regional forums.

So the only reason you could want to have the rules bent for this repeal is so that you can start up the whole racism argument that the original debate was closed for or spread more patently false misinformation about the effects of the resolution and the intentions of its author.

Now again,, why on earth should the rules be bent for you to do that?

[The Casadian Empire]

Krioval,

On page 8 of the forum debating the original resolution, the following statements appear:

"In my books, the Holocaust never happened! the Germans did not mean to kill the Jews, they were trying to make the world a better place, but the Jews got in their way!"

Two posts below that, the same nation hurls the insult "self-centered Jew cow." It was my mistake for misquoting that as "fat Jew cow." "self-centered Jew cow" was the correct quotation. I would also point out that the target of this insult uses a flag with the Star of David. Unless someone is going to argue that the Jewish religion does not exist in Nation States, I think this is a terribly offensive insult.

Also, in response to an above argument, the resolution does not state the acronym GESTAPO, but that is clearly the intention of the author. The "A" in "And" is even capitalized, which is evidence of this intent. Moreover, as pointed out several times, the original acronym was SWASTICA, and the author stated on the same forum that he wished he could find a word that began with "K" so he could create an acronym with the correct spelling. I understand that these are "real world" references to you, but they are references that all nations in the debate understood relative to their effect on NAtion States. For example, people posted pictures of Gestapo uniforms and the Gestapo from the movie "Schindler's List." If different rules apply to the forums than to resolutions, so be it - but let the nations of the WA make that decision for themselves, rather than making false arguments and hurling insults at the nations who oppose this resolution. The WA is a democratic institution - let them read the Resolution and the Repeal and decide by a majority whose argument is the stronger. I will accept that result if only you would accept that my repeal is based on more than "lies."

I think the illogical cherry-picking of what real world facts come into Nation States is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. Saying that Nazis exist but none of the terrible things they did is paradoxical. Certainly, if I was to pass a resolution entitled "Jim Crow laws", everyone would understand that I was taking the name of laws used in the American South to segregate and discriminate against black Americans, even though in Nation States there was no civil rights movement or even a United States in which these atrocities occurred. I would also point out that the United Nations, the predecessor of the World Assembly, was created in 1945, after WWII and the holocaust. You may consider this irrelevant but I think it is something to consider.

All I ask is that we have a reasoned and balanced debate on these issues. If my repeal is as empty as some of you say, then surely it will not get enough delegate support or if it does, will not pass the WA. If you really think that your arguments are the winning ones, then let it come to a vote. You can then have a majority of WA nations tell me that I am wrong and you are right.

[The Walden Estates]

This just in! Reggae Artist Matisyahu officially supports this repeal.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8ULIw0Zgaw

[Cobdenia]

Krioval,

On page 8 of the forum debating the original resolution, the following statements appear:

"In my books, the Holocaust never happened! the Germans did not mean to kill the Jews, they were trying to make the world a better place, but the Jews got in their way!"

Two posts below that, the same nation hurls the insult "self-centered Jew cow." It was my mistake for misquoting that as "fat Jew cow." "self-centered Jew cow" was the correct quotation. I would also point out that the target of this insult uses a flag with the Star of David. Unless someone is going to argue that the Jewish religion does not exist in Nation States, I think this is a terribly offensive insult.

Also, in response to an above argument, the resolution does not state the acronym GESTAPO, but that is clearly the intention of the author. The "A" in "And" is even capitalized, which is evidence of this intent. Moreover, as pointed out several times, the original acronym was SWASTICA, and the author stated on the same forum that he wished he could find a word that began with "K" so he could create an acronym with the correct spelling. I understand that these are "real world" references to you, but they are references that all nations in the debate understood relative to their effect on NAtion States. For example, people posted pictures of Gestapo uniforms and the Gestapo from the movie "Schindler's List." If different rules apply to the forums than to resolutions, so be it - but let the nations of the WA make that decision for themselves, rather than making false arguments and hurling insults at the nations who oppose this resolution. The WA is a democratic institution - let them read the Resolution and the Repeal and decide by a majority whose argument is the stronger. I will accept that result if only you would accept that my repeal is based on more than "lies."

I think the illogical cherry-picking of what real world facts come into Nation States is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. Saying that Nazis exist but none of the terrible things they did is paradoxical. Certainly, if I was to pass a resolution entitled "Jim Crow laws", everyone would understand that I was taking the name of laws used in the American South to segregate and discriminate against black Americans, even though in Nation States there was no civil rights movement or even a United States in which these atrocities occurred. I would also point out that the United Nations, the predecessor of the World Assembly, was created in 1945, after WWII and the holocaust. You may consider this irrelevant but I think it is something to consider.

All I ask is that we have a reasoned and balanced debate on these issues. If my repeal is as empty as some of you say, then surely it will not get enough delegate support or if it does, will not pass the WA. If you really think that your arguments are the winning ones, then let it come to a vote. You can then have a majority of WA nations tell me that I am wrong and you are right.

OoC: We have no objection to a legal repeal based on solid evidence being debated; however as it stands it is based upon falsehoods and is illegal. Write a legal repeal, one that doesn't mention the Gestapo, or the Nazi's being bad, unfounded allegations about people you have no idea about, or the Global Emigration, Security, Transport and Passport Organisation doing something it doesn't do, and actually addresses the content of the resolution, you are perfectly free to put it up as a proposal for the delegates to vote on. The rules apply to everyone equally

[Philimbesi]

All I ask is that we have a reasoned and balanced debate on these issues. If my repeal is as empty as some of you say, then surely it will not get enough delegate support or if it does, will not pass the WA. If you really think that your arguments are the winning ones, then let it come to a vote. You can then have a majority of WA nations tell me that I am wrong and you are right.

OOC:
The problem with that is that this is a game, and in this game the Gestapo doesn't exist. If you were to bring Jim Crow Laws up, I would ask whos Jim Crow and why on earth the entire world should be against him. However come out with a resolution stating that we should segregate one race from another and I'd put it in the illegal proposals list because it violates the laws of the WA.

One thing you have never ever answered nor anyone who takes your stance on this is why you insist on thinking that the organization created by this resolution, will act in the same manor as the organization in Germany in during WWII did. When it's impossible in the game for that to happen.

No one is trying to silence your repeal, the first one was illegal, plain and simple, this one is cluegy to me because it's based on an inaccuracy, there is no retention of passport information just a decision on what information should be on the passport.

Further I'd suggest that the majority of voters ready Standardize Passport Act and sat sounds good, just as the majority of voters are going to say repeal standardized passport act... no I don't want to do that. T

[The Casadian Empire]

"Now again,, why on earth should the rules be bent for you to do that?"

The rules aren't being bent here. My first repeal was declared illegal and subsequently deleted. If this repeal is illegal, it too will be deleted, but it hasn't yet. I asked the moderators to highlight all of the clauses of my resolution that violated the rules. Without even trying to re-word those clauses and risk further violation, I simply deleted them. Thus, I deleted anything that the moderators said created a violation and I am making a good faith effort to stay within the rules. Unless this repeal is declared illegal, I ask that no one accuse me of breaking or even bending any rules. It is simply not true.

I looked at the civil HQ of one region whose delegate supports this repeal. It turns out that he did not realize the GESTAPO acronym when he originally voted for the resolution. It is for reasons such as this that the repeal should be allowed to come to a vote - the facts surrounding the resolution have changed. And as for the continuing argument that GESTAPO should not be considered offensive, that's fine -- from YOUR point of view. Clearly, a lot of people/nations are of a different opinion. And who is to say that they are wrong? Who is to say that they cannot find GESTAPO offensive? I refuse to believe that this rests with you, or any one nation. A nation is free to cast its own vote for the reasons it sees fit. I say, let them see this repeal, and cast their vote likewise. If I am wrong, the result will show that. But don't kill a resolution or a repeal because you refuse to acknowledge one nation's beliefs and interpretations - it is not democratic and it is not consistent with the purpose of the World Assembly.

Please don't take my failure to address anyone in character as an insult. I just think it is a distraction that gets in the way of debating this issue.

[Serrland]

"Now again,, why on earth should the rules be bent for you to do that?"

The rules aren't being bent here. My first repeal was declared illegal and subsequently deleted. If this repeal is illegal, it too will be deleted, but it hasn't yet. I asked the moderators to highlight all of the clauses of my resolution that violated the rules. Without even trying to re-word those clauses and risk further violation, I simply deleted them. Thus, I deleted anything that the moderators said created a violation and I am making a good faith effort to stay within the rules. Unless this repeal is declared illegal, I ask that no one accuse me of breaking or even bending any rules. It is simply not true.

I looked at the civil HQ of one region whose delegate supports this repeal. It turns out that he did not realize the GESTAPO acronym when he originally voted for the resolution. It is for reasons such as this that the repeal should be allowed to come to a vote - the facts surrounding the resolution have changed. And as for the continuing argument that GESTAPO should not be considered offensive, that's fine -- from YOUR point of view. Clearly, a lot of people/nations are of a different opinion. And who is to say that they are wrong? Who is to say that they cannot find GESTAPO offensive? I refuse to believe that this rests with you, or any one nation. A nation is free to cast its own vote for the reasons it sees fit. I say, let them see this repeal, and cast their vote likewise. If I am wrong, the result will show that. But don't kill a resolution or a repeal because you refuse to acknowledge one nation's beliefs and interpretations - it is not democratic and it is not consistent with the purpose of the World Assembly.

Please don't take my failure to address anyone in character as an insult. I just think it is a distraction that gets in the way of debating this issue.

Why is the phrase GESTAPO relevent, esteemed ambassador? I have no knowledge of what the gestapo is, what it might have done, or what it might have stood for. In fact, in the parallel reality, in which Serrland resides, there never was anything called the gestapo. We, however, find the word "result" to be offensive, as we once had a terrorist faction called R.E.S.U.L.T.

Let's repeal every resolution with the word "result" in it!

The Serri ambassador assembles a pitchfork and torch wielding mob and marches towards the nearest windmill.

[Bears Armed]

Certainly, if I was to pass a resolution entitled "Jim Crow laws", everyone would understand that I was taking the name of laws used in the American South to segregate and discriminate against black Americans, even though in Nation States there was no civil rights movement or even a United States in which these atrocities occurred.

OOC: No, why should I know that?
You do realise that NS has players from countries other than the USA, and that the minutiae of your country's history might not be known to us, right?

My WA nation votes IC rather than IC; as it happens, it actually abstained this time around -- despite approving of the resolution in general -- because its population includes one small group whose (human) ancestors arrived in Bears Armed (c.1940) as refugees from persecution by Nazis and a member of that group -- working, as established in a previous RP, in a senior position at our government's ministry for foreign affairs -- managed to persuade the minister that voting "for" would be wrong because of this apparent reference.
I personally can see that the acronym's inclusion was meant as a joke rather than as a glorification of Nazism, but considering how quite a few other people (such as noobs & other newcomers here, teachers in charge of 'class regions', or parents vetting their children's online activities...) seem likely to take it if they read the resolution carefully enough to notice this detail I think that its inclusion in the submitted draft was an (unusual) error of judgement on the part of a player whom I respect.

Having said which, if you want to repeal it then you need an argument that works IC rather than one that only works OOC...

[Hiriaurtung Arororugul]

If you're just dead set on expressing your righteous indignation you could always condemn this nation.