• Hi Guest: Welcome to TRIBE, Toronto's largest and longest running online community. If you'd like to post here, or reply to existing posts on TRIBE, you first have to register on the forum. You can register with your facebook ID or with an email address. Join us!

Canadian Liberal Party

Mondieu

TRIBE Member
same exact way of posting....can't even scrounge up enough brain cells to hide it.
Perhaps off the thread topic but - important, nonetheless.

There are plenty of Sallys in this world but there’s only one who’s consistently known to post 8 hours of 80s and 90s tunes in a row, starting at 1am on a weekend night.

Stay tuned to the “What are you listening to?” thread tonight! Thoughts and prayers, we hear some more Phil Collins.

Dress appropriately, kids. With Sally at the helm, you never know when you might get Rick-Rolled! ;)
 

wickedken

TRIBE Member
Here's another chance for the Trudeau administration to showcase its humanitarian ideals. The "Jihadi Jack" terrorist is actually also a Canadian citizen, and now that the UK has stripped it's part of the dual-citizenship, what will Trudeau do? It's said that he was a "child terrorist" since he was 18 went he willingly went over, something JJ admits was foolhardy.

 

Mondieu

TRIBE Member
Here's another chance for the Trudeau administration to showcase its humanitarian ideals. The "Jihadi Jack" terrorist is actually also a Canadian citizen, and now that the UK has stripped it's part of the dual-citizenship, what will Trudeau do? It's said that he was a "child terrorist" since he was 18 went he willingly went over, something JJ admits was foolhardy.

Canadians born on Canadian soil cannot be stripped of their citizenship. Apparently Britain doesn’t have the same tradition, as Jihadi Jack was born there.

In Canada, we do have the ability to strip those who came here, applied and were granted citizenship of their standing. The law changed in 1977 and here’s some practical info on the statute...


Unless some fraud occurred in the application process, a person granted Canadian citizenship retains said status, regardless of their actions post-acceptance.

The question, if the Libs ‘could’ revoke would be, “should they?”. A stateless individual lives in a kind of no-man’s-land where s/he can simply become invisible. Not a part of me thinks that Trudeau’s government should strip this individual of his citizenship. He should be held to account - via the multitude of laws that are presently on the books. If those don’t suffice, they should be updated and amended through parliamentary process.

We pick and choose when they come here. Once they’re here, they’re here. It’s ok to disagree with the process and the law. ...but we don’t change them on a case by case basis.

One set of rules for EVERY Canadian.
 

wickedken

TRIBE Member
Canadians born on Canadian soil cannot be stripped of their citizenship....

We pick and choose when they come here. Once they’re here, they’re here. It’s ok to disagree with the process and the law. ...but we don’t change them on a case by case basis.

One set of rules for EVERY Canadian.
What's the likelihood of John McCallum ( ex-ambassador to China ) visiting you if you were jailed over there? Do you think you could transfer a billion dollars out of country and not report it to CRA like a well known family did? The phrase "One set of rules..." reminds me of that story about the farm and the pigs... Animal Farm!
 
Last edited:

Mondieu

TRIBE Member
Could be. What's the likelihood of John McCallum ( ex-ambassador to China ) visiting you if you were jailed over there? Do you think you could transfer a billion dollars out of country and not report it to CRA like a well known family did? The phrase "One set of rules..." reminds me of that story about the farm and the pigs... Animal Farm!
I can guarantee you that the chances of an “ex-embassdor” of any stripe, visiting me would be NIL.

...and your obfuscation on the rest, including the Orwell reference has me at loss. Please expand.
 

wickedken

TRIBE Member
I can guarantee you that the chances of an “ex-embassdor” of any stripe, visiting me would be NIL.

...and your obfuscation on the rest, including the Orwell reference has me at loss. Please expand.
You want to promote the view that there's "One set of rules for EVERY Canadian." Is this what you think happens?

Edit: more specifically, do you think the Trudeau government considers JJ to be Canadian? I think JJ needs a Trudeau-intervention more than the Saudi woman who barricaded herself in her hotel room in Bangkok to avoid going back to Saudi Arabia. JJ is in a Kurdish prison held captive by his former enemy.
 
Last edited:

Mondieu

TRIBE Member
You want to promote the view that there's "One set of rules for EVERY Canadian." Is this what you think happens?
100%. ...and it’s not promotion. I don’t need to “promote” it. It’s basic fucking FACT. You’d have to be talking out your ass without a clue as to how our law works to argue or suggest any different. These are fundamentals ...and they work VERY well, in most instances.

Laws, in Canada are based on the Constitution (ratified - 1867) and ALL laws must also stand the test of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (ratified - 1982). Those are the basics you should note before asking ANYONE about their fucking opinion on specific cases.

See Section 15 of the 1982 Charter -
(1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, inparticular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

You follow? Also please read back to the part of my previous post where I CLEARLY stated that YOU don’t have to like it. ;)
 
Last edited:

wickedken

TRIBE Member
100%. ...and it’s not promotion. I don’t need to “promote” it. It’s basic fucking FACT. You’d have to be talking out your ass without a clue as to how our law works to argue or suggest any different.

Laws, in Canada are based on the Constitution (1867) and ALL laws must also stand the rest of the R&F Charter (1982). Those are the basics you should note before asking ANYONE about their fucking opinion on specific cases.

See Section 15 of the 1982 Charter -
(1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, inparticular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

You follow? Also please read back to the part of my previous post where I CLEARLY stated that YOU don’t have to like it.
The SkyTV piece editorial was essentially to beg the Canadian government to take this guy in, and I think they should! Not just because he's a Canadian citizen but because he went on the Extreme Adventure Grand Tour after school and became a child soldier.

 

Mondieu

TRIBE Member
Now, Ken - please also read the info I provided (linked in previous post) about the law - as it stands - on dual-citizenship for non-native Canadians. I don’t have a shred of empathy for Jihadi Jack’s life choices, at this point. ...but I have a fierce support for democratically determined, codified law, flawed as it may be.

We do things through a process and have often paid a cost for such tortoise-speed reaction to action. Doesn’t change the facts that the basic tenets cover how we deal with things. Not should it.

Growing pains suck and often become the focus of politicking, rather than legal solutions to real problems. ...especially when you’re dealing with a bunch of fucking knee-jerk toddlers who don’t have the basic knowledge to offer anything except emotional pap, in a conversation about the law.
 

Mondieu

TRIBE Member
The SkyTV piece editorial was essentially to beg the Canadian government to take this guy in, and I think they should! Not just because he's a Canadian citizen but because he went on the Extreme Adventure Grand Tour after school and became a child soldier.

I don’t disagree. ...but THAT is just my opinion. It has no bearing on what the law says. That’s exactly what I’ve read had happened. Same for Kahdr.

Nobody likes the fact that that Kahdr got millions from Canadian tax-payers. ...but they’d be better off blaming old Dead-eyes Harper for that settlement. He’s the one that broke Canadian, codified law, defied the Charter and made said settlement necessary. If that had gone to court, the monetary award could have been ten-fold.

Of course, one would have to have a basic knowledge of the foundations of Canadian law to grasp such a concept. ...and THAT’S not something readily found amongst the lippy, keyboard-warrior twats on the internet. ;)
 
Last edited:

wickedken

TRIBE Member
I don’t disagree. ...but THAT is just my opinion. It has no bearing on what the law says. That’s exactly what I’ve read had happened. Same for Kahdr.

Nobody likes the fact that that Kahdr got millions from Canadian tax-payers. ...but they’d be better off blaming old Dead-eyes Harper for that settlement. He’s the one that broke Canadian, codified law, defied the Charter and made said settlement necessary. If that had gone to court, the monetary award could have been ten-fold.

Of course, one would have to have a basic knowledge of the foundations of Canadian law to grasp such a concept. ...and THAT’S not something readily found amongst the lippy, keyboard-warrior twats on the internet.
Canada should repatriate JJ using the same moral grounds as with the Thailand hotel Saudi woman, and also considering he was a child soldier like Khadr. Additionally JJ should come to Canada for the best possible start of a new life far from where he was radicalized.

Khadr costs? seriously?
 
Last edited:

Mondieu

TRIBE Member
Canada should repatriate JJ using the same moral grounds as with the Thailand hotel Saudi woman, and also considering he was a child soldier like Khadr. Additionally JJ should come to Canada for the best possible start of a new life far from where he was radicalized.

Khadr costs? seriously?
^ 100% truth.

...and even if they’re radicalized here - through the Internet or other means - and then go “there”. The same rules apply, if we’ve accepted them as Canadian citizens.

You’re spot-on and in my wheelhouse with that post, me lad!
 
Last edited:

Bernnie Federko

TRIBE Member
Is someone able to link me with JJ's child soldier background? I had no idea his situation has similarlities to Khadr. My understanding was that he went to Syria after being radicalized as a young adult.
 

Mondieu

TRIBE Member
Is someone able to link me with JJ's child soldier background? I had no idea his situation has similarlities to Khadr. My understanding was that he went to Syria after being radicalized as a young adult.
He wasn’t a child soldier, in the same right as Kahdr but he converted to Islam at 16 and was well radicalized before he hunkered down with the neck-beard throat-cutters. Doesn’t look like his parents had a problem with any of it, either...

 

Bernnie Federko

TRIBE Member
That's a much, much different ballpark & league than Khadr IMHO.

One was bred in the bone by family, the other left it to strike out on his own in opposition from it.
 
Last edited:

Mondieu

TRIBE Member
That's a much, much different ballpark & league than Khadr IMHO.

One was bred in the bone by family, the other left it to strike out on his own in opposition from it.
Yup. Completely different animal. ...but it doesn’t change a thing as far as his Canadian citizenship goes. The law is the law.
 
Top