Adil Charkaoui wants compensation

[noahbody]

Just wondering what people think about this? My view is that Canada abided by the law at the time and he has no right to compensation. Further to that, we need to be able to deport non-citizens that don't hold Canadian values promptly. If you're associated with al Qaeda, you're on the next flight. If you're Jackie Tran, you're on the next flight.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/091014/...oui_certificate

[PocketRocket]

"We'll be organizing a huge party and everyone will be invited."

Have you received your invitation??? I haven't got mine yet. Kinda bummed about that....

Not sure what to think about the whole case.

Obviously, if the guy is indeed innocent as he claims, then he should be free, and should get some sort of compensation.

OTOH, if CISA has evidence, could it not be brought forward without jeopardizing the sources of the evidence???

If this sort of thing continues, we may have need for a different kind of justice system to deal with this sort of case, one in which evidence could be presented directly to the judge without any risk of sources being uncovered to the public. Something of that nature......

Edited October 17, 2009 by PocketRocket

[Battletoads]

Just wondering what people think about this? My view is that Canada abided by the law at the time and he has no right to compensation. Further to that, we need to be able to deport non-citizens that don't hold Canadian values promptly. If you're associated with al Qaeda, you're on the next flight. If you're Jackie Tran, you're on the next flight.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/091014/...oui_certificate

almost two years in jail and 3 years of time spent proving his innocence. Seems perfectly legitiment that someone who was innocent should get some form of reperation. Either that or give him that 5 years of his life back.

[August1991]

If Canadian taxpayers paid compensation for all the ills our bureaucrats caused, we would never work for ourselves - we would pay 100% of our income in taxes.

I am more afraid of something else: A society of moochers.

Poor, third world countries are typically dysfunctional societies of moochers - when they're not societies of the jealous. I would hate to see Canada descend to such a level: moochers and the destructive envious.

-----

Charkaoui wants compensation? Tell him no. Why? To discourage all the other moochers, and envious, who can destroy a civilized society.

IMV, justice is a question of incentives. If Canadian taxpayers compensate Charkaoui, what kind of signal does that send? I think rather that we should devise a way to punish the bureaucrats who cause these problems.

[wyly]

almost two years in jail and 3 years of time spent proving his innocence. Seems perfectly legitiment that someone who was innocent should get some form of reperation. Either that or give him that 5 years of his life back.

David Migaard got 10 million I believe for spending time in prison for a crime he did not commit? Donald Marshall was compensated, as were many others...if you have been falsely imprisoned then you should be compensated...I'm sure Milgaard would take the 23 years back if he could, instead of the 10Million...

[Battletoads]

If Canadian taxpayers paid compensation for all the ills our bureaucrats caused, we would never work for ourselves - we would pay 100% of our income in taxes.

I am more afraid of something else: A society of moochers.

Poor, third world countries are typically dysfunctional societies of moochers - when they're not societies of the jealous. I would hate to see Canada descend to such a level: moochers and the destructive envious.

-----

Charkaoui wants compensation? Tell him no. Why? To discourage all the other moochers, and envious, who can destroy a civilized society.

IMV, justice is a question of incentives. If Canadian taxpayers compensate Charkaoui, what kind of signal does that send? I think rather that we should devise a way to punish the bureaucrats who cause these problems.

So bureacrats should be able to do whatever the please with no source of compensation for someone who gets screwed by them? I'm pretty sure if that was 5 years of your life down the tube you would be sining a different tune.

And are you honestly telling me that a moocher is someone who feels they deserve something for having 5 years of their lives wasted?

[dre]

Seems like the guy got hosed and should have the right to sue for damages.

The governments claim that they withdrew the evidence because it would compromise national security has no credibility. Seems like just more of the same bullshit we hear almost constantly now... government expecting a free pass just by invoking "national security". The sad thing is a lot of idiots are happy to give it to them.

[dre]

If Canadian taxpayers paid compensation for all the ills our bureaucrats caused, we would never work for ourselves - we would pay 100% of our income in taxes.

I am more afraid of something else: A society of moochers.

Poor, third world countries are typically dysfunctional societies of moochers - when they're not societies of the jealous. I would hate to see Canada descend to such a level: moochers and the destructive envious.

-----

Charkaoui wants compensation? Tell him no. Why? To discourage all the other moochers, and envious, who can destroy a civilized society.

IMV, justice is a question of incentives. If Canadian taxpayers compensate Charkaoui, what kind of signal does that send? I think rather that we should devise a way to punish the bureaucrats who cause these problems.

If Canadian taxpayers paid compensation for all the ills our bureaucrats caused, we would never work for ourselves - we would pay 100% of our income in taxes.

It goes without saying we are accountable for the actions of our government. We pick them, empower them, and fund them.

I am more afraid of something else: A society of moochers.

That would be an excellent point... except that its not at all. This guy isnt trying to mooch hes trying to get compensation from people that HOSED him. Next.

Poor, third world countries are typically dysfunctional societies of moochers - when they're not societies of the jealous. I would hate to see Canada descend to such a level: moochers and the destructive envious.

I gotta ask... What in the ever loving fuck are you even talking about?

[Shady]

I am more afraid of something else: A society of moochers.

I agree. I've noticed a trend of Canadian immigrants claiming some type of injustice that needs to be rewarded with millions of tax payer dollars. It's seems to be a new type of lottery, come to Canada, win millions!

[myata]

Let's remember that jail has been entirely of his own choosing, and these individuals were free to move on, anytime. It'd absolutely bizzare to imagine that security services in Canada could assure faultless check and if necessary, prosecution, of every single individual in this world who'd want to show in. Certainly a country has a right to a discretion as to who is allowed in it.

The only reason the case could warrant a compensation, would be a severe violation of due process. Canada has a right to protect itself against foreigners it deems to be a risk, but it should do so in accordance with its declared principles, and the process. The process of security certificates does allow for incarceration of those deemed to be of risk, so per se it should not be grounds for compensation, only if a violation of process that resulted in it is proven. This situation is very different from wrongful conviction, because the suspect here cannot have a presumption of innocence (enforcement of it would be unrealistic and impractical) and has a choice to leave Canada's jurisdiction at any time.

[Hydraboss]

Let's remember that jail has been entirely of his own choosing, and these individuals were free to move on, anytime. It'd absolutely bizzare to imagine that security services in Canada could assure faultless check and if necessary, prosecution, of every single individual in this world who'd want to show in. Certainly a country has a right to a discretion as to who is allowed in it.

The only reason the case could warrant a compensation, would be a severe violation of due process. Canada has a right to protect itself against foreigners it deems to be a risk, but it should do so in accordance with its declared principles, and the process. The process of security certificates does allow for incarceration of those deemed to be of risk, so per se it should not be grounds for compensation, only if a violation of process that resulted in it is proven. This situation is very different from wrongful conviction, because the suspect here cannot have a presumption of innocence (enforcement of it would be unrealistic and impractical) and has a choice to leave Canada's jurisdiction at any time.

Well put.

For those of us from Alberta, she means:

The guy was not thrown in prison against his will. He should have no grounds to sue Canada because we are not responsible to prove he is innocent. He is responsible for that.

Pound salt moocher.

[Battletoads]

Well put.

For those of us from Alberta, she means:

The guy was not thrown in prison against his will. He should have no grounds to sue Canada because we are not responsible to prove he is innocent. He is responsible for that.

Pound salt moocher.

He was responsible to prove his innocence?

Think about that one for awhile.

Edited October 20, 2009 by Battletoads

[g_bambino]

Further to that, we need to be able to deport non-citizens that don't hold Canadian values promptly.

What, exactly, are "Canadian values"? It would seem to me that values are impermanent and personal, not fixed by the state into dictated conformity.

[g_bambino]

He was responsible to prove his innocence?

Think about that one for awhile.

That was my reaction as well.

[myata]

He was responsible to prove his innocence?

All would be immigrants are responsible to prove that they don't pose risk to the country they apply to stay in. If it was the other way around, and we would have to prove a court case against an unwanted immigrant, we would be demanding of our police and other services to prosecuty individuals, by strict standards of justice, from anywhere in the world. That's sheer lunacy. It would (and could) never happen, simply because Canada has no jurisdiction outside its borders. It cannot collect evidence, interview witnesses, etc. So, demanding Canada to present court quality evidence against unwanted immigrants would be equivalent, by all practical means, to the right of free, unrestricted admission, for anybody and from anywhere in the world.

I'm not necessarily in favour of this security sertificate thing created out of 9/11 mess, but it's clear that every country would need a process to deal with unwanted immigrants, inlcuding those who wouldn't leave of their own will.

Edited October 20, 2009 by myata

[Hydraboss]

/\

|

|

|

You were saying?

He was responsible to prove his innocence?

Think about that one for awhile.

[madmax]

Charkaoui wants compensation? Tell him no. Why? To discourage all the other moochers, and envious, who can destroy a civilized society.

The day you are prepared to spend 2 years in jail, have your name turned to mud and know that it was 100% the error of the government, is the day I want to see when you say you would not want compensation for your troubles.

Good lord, Business receives compensation when the government tears up a sidewalk.

[madmax]

Charkaoui wants compensation? Tell him no. Why? To discourage all the other moochers, and envious, who can destroy a civilized society.

IMV, justice is a question of incentives. If Canadian taxpayers compensate Charkaoui, what kind of signal does that send? I think rather that we should devise a way to punish the bureaucrats who cause these problems.

OTOH have we got Brian Mulroney to pay back that money he got from the Federal Government for merely slurring his good name. How much was that????

[Battletoads]

All would be immigrants are responsible to prove that they don't pose risk to the country they apply to stay in. If it was the other way around, and we would have to prove a court case against an unwanted immigrant, we would be demanding of our police and other services to prosecuty individuals, by strict standards of justice, from anywhere in the world. That's sheer lunacy. It would (and could) never happen, simply because Canada has no jurisdiction outside its borders. It cannot collect evidence, interview witnesses, etc. So, demanding Canada to present court quality evidence against unwanted immigrants would be equivalent, by all practical means, to the right of free, unrestricted admission, for anybody and from anywhere in the world.

I'm not necessarily in favour of this security sertificate thing created out of 9/11 mess, but it's clear that every country would need a process to deal with unwanted immigrants, inlcuding those who wouldn't leave of their own will.

There is a pretty clear cut difference between denying someone entry/deporting them and accusing them of a crime and jaling them.

[Keepitsimple]

This case, like most others should be simple.....we are simply trying to ask someone to go back to where they came from - or somewhere else....because we do not want them. But we can't because they claim that they will be tortured. Why would they be tortured? Because they are bad people. So we are stuck with them. They are always free to leave Canada and in fact encouraged to do so. So is it better for them to be detained or monitored than go back home to face what they claim is torture? That's a choice that they make. The media never talk about this choice. Do we pay them a dime? No.

Edited October 21, 2009 by Keepitsimple

[myata]

There is a pretty clear cut difference between denying someone entry/deporting them and accusing them of a crime and jaling them.

Indeed, as many already pointed out, he was jailed only because he refused to leave of his own will. But OK, let's hear some positive ideas, so:

1. Somebody knocks on our door;

2. We look and we find, to the best of our knowledge that we could have, that we don't want them here.

What should be done? Should they be allowed in anyways? Or should we demand from our law enforcement to prove cases against somebody who lived on the other end of the world, often in lawless and unruly places?

3. We ask them to move on, and they wouldn't. They insist on staying claiming any number of reasons.

What should be done? Should we just let them go free? What would be the meaning of that security check, that lets people in, freely, whether they pass or not? And how likely would be others, like them, to follow the suit?

[lictor616]

Just wondering what people think about this? My view is that Canada abided by the law at the time and he has no right to compensation. Further to that, we need to be able to deport non-citizens that don't hold Canadian values promptly. If you're associated with al Qaeda, you're on the next flight. If you're Jackie Tran, you're on the next flight.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/091014/...oui_certificate

of course! he isn't a white canadian... he is part of our sacrosanct minority races.... we should give him everything he wants for god's sake! Haven't these poor dears suffered enough! They have to live in the decadence of Canada WITHOUT sharia law... i mean... really we should give every muslim 20 000$ cash to compensate for our racist, xenophobic evil society.

remeber everyone... diversity is our strength,diversity is our strength,diversity is our strength,diversity is our strength,diversity is our strength,diversity is our strength,diversity is our strength,diversity is our strength,diversity is our strength, diversity is our strength, diversity is our strength, diversity is our strength, diversity is our strengthdiversity is our strength

if we repeat this mantra long enough eventually it will become true.

[Oleg Bach]

Me too, I want some of that compensation stuff.