capricorn Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 I can't believe he got into Canada so quickly. All in the name of preserving Canada's reputation of being a compassionate nation. Just as Omar Khadr will be allowed to be reunited with his loving family. Seems the Harper Government can keep out some and welcome others... Whoever rules the roost gets its way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted May 5, 2012 Report Share Posted May 5, 2012 post 54 Regardless Black was approved to enter Canada, therefore his previous circumstance did not prevent him from entering to visit family. If you feel he was treated unfairly by the American justice system then start a thread revolving around this topic. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 Regardless of what our various citizenship laws or regulations state, Canadian citizenship policy has always been lenient to people who were once citizens and then lost it. False Black did not lose his citizenship.He forfeited it in order to receive a titular honour from the UK. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 Black did not lose his citizenship.He forfeited it in order to receive a titular honour from the UK. Because Chretien told the Queen not to elevate Black to the Peerage, in contradiction to the advice Tony Blair had given her. Besides Chretien's pettiness, there was no reason Black couldn't have become a baron while still a Canadian citizen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 Because Chretien told the Queen not to elevate Black to the Peerage, in contradiction to the advice Tony Blair had given her. Besides Chretien's pettiness, there was no reason Black couldn't have become a baron while still a Canadian citizen. Oh no no no!You can't pin this entirely on Cretien and turn this into a partisan political debate! This goes back almost 100yrs in Canadian history,involved several other prime ministers,is part of our succession from Britain and our independence and several other commonwealth countries have taken similar positions as Canada has. And when you consider the actual number of cases involving Canadians I would be much more inclined to believe that Blair and Black have errored. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fletch 27 Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 You are an idiot... You would have done the same.... Regardless of your leftist stripes... [quotame=WWWTT' date='05 May 2012 - 05:28 PM' timestamp='1336264087' post='792552] False Black did not lose his citizenship.He forfeited it in order to receive a titular honour from the UK. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 You are an idiot... You would have done the same.... Regardless of your leftist stripes... [quotame=WWWTT' date='05 May 2012 - 05:28 PM' timestamp='1336264087' post='792552] False Black did not lose his citizenship.He forfeited it in order to receive a titular honour from the UK. WWWTT Thats a real big "assumption" you are making. Are you aware that when you call other members here names as you have called me you can be banned or at the very least suspended? Good Luck! WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 Because Chretien told the Queen not to elevate Black to the Peerage, in contradiction to the advice Tony Blair had given her. Besides Chretien's pettiness, there was no reason Black couldn't have become a baron while still a Canadian citizen. I was under the impression it was a British rule. If it was Chretien's doing, then that's ridiculous. He should hold dual-citizenship. The only reason he was raised to that status was that he owned the newspaper, so it comes automatically with the position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 Oh no no no!You can't pin this entirely on Cretien and turn this into a partisan political debate! This goes back almost 100yrs in Canadian history,involved several other prime ministers,is part of our succession from Britain and our independence and several other commonwealth countries have taken similar positions as Canada has. And when you consider the actual number of cases involving Canadians I would be much more inclined to believe that Blair and Black have errored. WWWTT We have cabinet ministers with British citizenship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 We have cabinet ministers with British citizenship. This case is involved. Do a quick search of the 1919 Nickle resolution as I have and you'll be up to speed to debate this one. This is not about dual citizenship but about titular honours being given to Canadian citizens from other countries. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 You are an idiot... You would have done the same.... Regardless of your leftist stripes... Fletch, this isn't helpful for the conversation - just an insult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 The bottom line is Kenney, even though he says he has nothing to do with the decision, did, because he's another Harper, IF HE wanted Black to stay out he would have overruled the decison and he didn't, so he agrees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 (edited) You can't pin this entirely on Cretien and turn this into a partisan political debate! I pinned it entirely on noone. But it was a partisan, political matter. This goes back almost 100yrs in Canadian history,involved several other prime ministers,is part of our succession from Britain and our independence... Not really. It's the arbitrary choice of the sitting prime minister to allow or disallow such honours. But, his jurisdiction extends only to Canadian citizens, not British ones. Other British-Canadians received such a distinction after 1919: the Viscount Bennett, the Baron Thomson of Fleet; and still others (whether dual citizens or not) carry on hereditary Peerage titles (which Black's is not): the Baron Beaverbrook, the Marquess of Exeter, the Baron Shaughnessy. It was as a British citizen Black was receiving the honour, not as a Canadian citizen, but Chretien took it upon himself to intervene anyway. [ed.: +] Edited May 6, 2012 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 I pinned it entirely on noone. But it was a partisan, political matter. Not really. It's the arbitrary choice of the sitting prime minister to allow or disallow such honours. But, his jurisdiction extends only to Canadian citizens, not British ones. Other British-Canadians received such a distinction after 1919: the Viscount Bennett, the Baron Thomson of Fleet; and still others (whether dual citizens or not) carry on hereditary Peerage titles (which Black's is not): the Baron Beaverbrook, the Marquess of Exeter, the Baron Shaughnessy. It was as a British citizen Black was receiving the honour, not as a Canadian citizen, but Chretien took it upon himself to intervene anyway. [ed.: +] OK now first off you are using the titles given to the individuals in question which makes this hard to debate! Secondly,I believe from what I have read that there are several examples,but less an less frequent after WWII. Therefore it is not as if every Canadian sitting PM had an opportunity to weigh in on this vague topic. And there are significant differences between Black circumstance compared to others. I should point out that Cretien is from Quebec and that this happened not too long after the Quebec vote of 1995.Perhaps fear of fuelling Quebec seperation may have played some role in this.But I doubt there is enough evidence to prove any classic liberal vs conservative politics. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 (edited) I believe from what I have read that there are several examples,but less an less frequent after WWII. Likely true, but that doesn't undermine my point. But I doubt there is enough evidence to prove any classic liberal vs conservative politics. That's essentially what it was. Chretien didn't like what was written about him in Black's newspapers, so he advised the Queen not to grant Black - a British citizen - a life peerage, contrary to her British prime minister's advice. I guess the Queen didn't take it too personally, since she appointed Chretien to the Order of Merit, a rarer honour than a life peerage and a personal gift of the Queen (as opposed to honours granted on government advice), which must've earned at least a scowl of disapproval from Black. [ed.: +] Edited May 6, 2012 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 All in the name of preserving Canada's reputation of being a compassionate nation. Just as Omar Khadr will be allowed to be reunited with his loving family. While I would have been just as happyif Khadr has renounced his Canadian Citizenship as Conrad Black has... Khadr spent many many years in a Military Prison and the Harper Government has done as much as possible to try to prevent him from returning. He is coming because he is the last one on the island and the US needs a place for him to go. Conrad is fast tracked into the country and is reunited with his loving Conservative Family. Ironic since many people without a criminal record are often rejected at the border... Whoever rules the roost gets its way. Now your talkin... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 Because Chretien told the Queen not to elevate Black to the Peerage, in contradiction to the advice Tony Blair had given her. Besides Chretien's pettiness, there was no reason Black couldn't have become a baron while still a Canadian citizen. He chose his country! He chose the UK. Some people would have chosen to remain Canadian. He is a Canadian of Convenience. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 The bottom line is Kenney, even though he says he has nothing to do with the decision, did, because he's another Harper, IF HE wanted Black to stay out he would have overruled the decison and he didn't, so he agrees. U mean he could have asked Bev Oda for one of her NOTS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 I guess the Queen didn't take it too personally, since she appointed Chretien to the Order of Merit, a rarer honour than a life peerage and a personal gift of the Queen (as opposed to honours granted on government advice), which must've earned at least a scowl of disapproval from Black. [ed.: +] Good point bambino. Harper recently named Chretien to be Canada's representative to the Diamond Jubilee Trust established in honour of Queen Elizabeth. In the same vein, it can also be said that Harper doesn't take Chretien's opposition to Black's peerage appointment personally. The Diamond Jubilee Trust is chaired by former British prime minister John Major and will be managed by a board of trustees. Chretien will serve as the Canadian representative on a Commonwealth Advisory Group now being established."Former prime minister Chretien is uniquely qualified to serve as Canada's representative to the Diamond Jubilee Trust," Harper said in the news release. "Mr. Chretien is a member of the Queen's prestigious Order of Merit. His relationship with Her Majesty, which spans over 40 years, includes six official Royal Tours he hosted during his time as prime minister." http://www.vancouversun.com/news/national/Jean+Chretien+named+representative+Queen+Diamond+Jubilee+Trust/6541026/story.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 He chose his country! He chose the UK. He had already chosen the UK; he was a dual citizen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 (edited) Khadr spent many many years in a Military Prison and the Harper Government has done as much as possible to try to prevent him from returning. Just like the Liberal government before this one. Conrad is fast tracked into the country and is reunited with his loving Conservative Family. It is a myth that Black is some kind of compatriot of Harper. I've not yet read anything by Black that shows him to be any Harper cheerleader; in fact, he is a strongly outspoken opponent of the current ministry's law and justice policies. I think the only thing he's almost guaranteed to approve of is the government's embrace of pre-1967 Canadian history. Harper recently named Chretien to be Canada's representative to the Diamond Jubilee Trust established in honour of Queen Elizabeth. In the same vein, it can also be said that Harper doesn't take Chretien's opposition to Black's peerage appointment personally. Which fits with my comments above. [ed.: +] Edited May 6, 2012 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madmax Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 Just like the Liberal government before this one. Perfect... Then there is no excuse for the Harper Government to hide behind...It is a myth that Black is some kind of compatriot of Harper. I've not yet read anything by Black that shows him to be any Harper cheerleader; in fact, he is a strongly outspoken opponent of the current ministry's law and justice policies. I think the only thing he's almost guaranteed to approve of is the government's embrace of pre-1967 Canadian history. ....he is a convicted criminal... and it is a position of convenience...But anything beyond this is pure Wente...isms.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 there was no reason Black couldn't have become a baron while still a Canadian citizen. False The 1919 Nickle resolution clearly states that he can not. The Nickle resolution was also re-affirmed by Lester Pearson in 68 and Brian Mulroney in 88 WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 That's essentially what it was. Chretien didn't like what was written about him in Black's newspapers, so he advised the Queen not to grant Black - a British citizen - a life peerage, contrary to her British prime minister's advice. I guess the Queen didn't take it too personally, since she appointed Chretien to the Order of Merit, a rarer honour than a life peerage and a personal gift of the Queen (as opposed to honours granted on government advice), which must've earned at least a scowl of disapproval from Black. [ed.: +] To me it sounds like Blair and the Queen messed up here.They both must have been very embarrassed As well it sounds like you can not distinguish between honour and title.Or award vs title. WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWWTT Posted May 6, 2012 Report Share Posted May 6, 2012 In the same vein, it can also be said that Harper doesn't take Chretien's opposition to Black's peerage appointment personally. Why would Harper be upset with Cretien for upholding the law? WWWTT Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.