Canada's No Fly List...

[shortlived]

And me such a freedom loving guy, too. According to the article, it wasn't just an Islamist website. It was a website used by militant Islamists and Al Qaeda.

I hope they make him walk. I wouldn't let him on Greyhound either.

Aluakbar, so is facebook, youtube and google. See the problem.

Big commercial sites doing this is AOK yet some small site isn't.

Also where is the proof? Where are the al qaeda people that were arrested, where are the islamists?

Anyone can go on a webite and post as al qaeda or islamists, obviously government agents at some point must have been on the site, and likely posting as islamists, how do we know this wasn't all just a setup? Point is there are no charges, he didn't do anything illegal, no crime was committed so why is the guy being prevented from flying?

The internet is full of Al Qaeda videos, also being an islamist is in no way a crime. As far as Al Qaeda, were there any arrests? I havn't seen info indicating those statements are true.

In no way does hosting links to videos on your website make you a flight risk. It is a preposterous association.

Oh look Charles Anthony is a flight risk, quick go find the RCMP so they can ban him for life from going on airplanes!

Oh no look I'm a Islamist Terrorist now...

it is absurd.

that does not deserve a lifetime flight ban.

Edited March 31, 2013 by shortlived

[Guest American Woman]

Flying is a freedom, mobility rights are in the charter.

"Mobility" and "flying" are not synonymous. But here's the thing - for argument's sake, since you won't let it go, say you do have the right to fly; it doesn't mean someone else has to let you on their plane. People can buy their own plane, take flying lessons, and exercise their "rights" - and fly to their heart's content.

[shortlived]

I understand where you are coming from. You can work with the law or disregard it either way the law may not disregard you.

You know being a criminal is not a crime, and there are circumstances where law abiding citizens need to break the law where life is in danger.

I'm not saying show up to the airport with a captains hat and expect security to wave you through to a 747, but yes by commercial law citizens need to be given equal access to services, if they are discriminated against it is illegal.

Now bear in mind the courts and government are corrupt and pander to corporate interests since it is a corporatist state but people are suppose to be protected against discrimination due to age, race, sex, religion etc.. and have equal access to services enjoyed by other members of the public.

Personally I do think businesses should have the right to service a specific clientele of their choice, however, I don't think Canada should provide for that. I thought as a society Canada had grown beyond its rascist past.

Denial of good, service, facility or accommodation

5. It is a discriminatory practice in the provision of goods, services, facilities or accommodation customarily available to the general public

• (a) to deny, or to deny access to, any such good, service, facility or accommodation to any individual, or

• (b) to differentiate adversely in relation to any individual,

on a prohibited ground of discrimination.

• 1976-77, c. 33, s. 5.

Edited March 31, 2013 by shortlived

[Guest American Woman]

Denial for no reason other than race et al is discrimination. Denial of specific individuals for a valid reason is not. In other words, if a minority is refused service because he is a minority, it is discrimination. If that same minority is refused service because he makes a joke about a bomb, it's not discrimination.

[shortlived]

Denial for no reason other than race et al is discrimination. Denial of specific individuals for a valid reason is not. In other words, if a minority is refused service because he is a minority, it is discrimination. If that same minority is refused service because he makes a joke about a bomb, it's not discrimination.

Ok so why is this guy on a no fly list that was made to prevent immediate threats to airline security from flying?

There has been no evidence that indicates he was or is a threat to airline security.

Edited March 31, 2013 by shortlived

[Guest American Woman]

Ok so why is this guy on a no fly list that was made to prevent immediate threats to airline security from flying?

There has been no evidence that indicates he was or is a threat to airline security.

You think the public has access to all of that information? Furthermore, you don't get to make that call. I don't think I'm a threat just because I make a joke about bombs at an airport, but security is going to see it differently.

[shortlived]

You think the public has access to all of that information? Furthermore, you don't get to make that call. I don't think I'm a threat just because I make a joke about bombs at an airport, but security is going to see it differently.

Yes the public should have access to all that information.

I do get to make the call just like everyone else can make that call.

Making a joke about a bomb in an airport isn't something airport security will put you on a no fly list for. If they know it is a joke.

None the less, yes if you put people on a no fly list, the public should be informed why people are on that no fly list and not given access to court to be removed from that list, where no grounds for them being deemed an immediate risk to flight security is provided.

Maybe in the US but not in Canada, it isn't acceptable to abuse people up here, atleast as far as I'm concerned. Abusive totalitarian government cannot be accepted. My opinion matters to me, and that is all that matters. Anyone supporting abuse unreasonably can go to hell because that is where they are trying to take us.

Edited March 31, 2013 by shortlived

[Guest American Woman]

No, it's not your call. You can have an opinion, but it's not your call. Not by a long shot. It's the call of those in authority. Even in Canada, where "as far as [you're] concerned" changes nothing.

[GostHacked]

Peoples facebook pages are private,

Ahahahahahahahahahh .. private .. right.

[shortlived]

No, it's not your call. You can have an opinion, but it's not your call. Not by a long shot. It's the call of those in authority. Even in Canada, where "as far as [you're] concerned" changes nothing.

Wrong. It is my call you do not usurp my personal choice. I am my authority. Pander to your police state, its not mine I believe in freedom and reason. I will be subject to no rule but just rule, not tyranny and oppression. I am the executive, if others see a breach of state that will be up to martial remedy or the courts, but no I am not flawed in my determination, and I am free to make my own decisions. Every individual has that opportunity. A society of mindless zombies is not a free society, and is unconstitutional in Canada.

Maybe in America but we here are free. Now you can return to your regularly scheduled propaganda funded by your fascist police state masters.

Edited April 4, 2013 by shortlived

[Guest American Woman]

Ummm. Sorry. But you have no say whatsoever as to who does or doesn't go on Canada's "no fly" list. That's a fact. Like it or not.

[shortlived]

Ummm. Sorry. But you have no say whatsoever as to who does or doesn't go on Canada's "no fly" list. That's a fact. Like it or not.

Wrong again. Who the hell are you?

Why don't you keep your comments to America, and shut up about Canada, you are spilling over bad ethics where it doesn't belong.

America has f---ed up Canada more than enough for you to chime in.

And yes I do.

You are trying to cast me as little man when that is not the case. I have both capacity and the will to insure the safety and security of people if required. I am not impotent to communicate my concerns.

It is very sad that a once proud america has been turned into incapable sheep, and now you are here trying to export it.

Fact is yes I can effect the no fly list. Fact is you don't know what the hell you are talking about, shall we move on.

You position is limiting freedom so your position is wrong.

Edited April 4, 2013 by shortlived

[Guest American Woman]

Wrong again. Who the hell are you?

Why don't you keep your comments to America, and shut up about Canada, you are spilling over bad ethics where it doesn't belong.

America has f---ed up Canada more than enough for you to chime in.

And yes I do.

You are trying to cast me as little man when that is not the case. I have both capacity and the will to insure the safety and security of people if required. I am not impotent to communicate my concerns.

You can "communicate your concerns" until the cows come home; you still have no say as to who is or isn't on the no-fly list. Your input isn't a determining factor. Edited April 4, 2013 by American Woman

[shortlived]

You can "communicate your concerns" until the cows come home; you still have no say as to who is or isn't on the no-fly list. Your input isn't a determining factor.

No it is my determining factor as it applies to my actions. Neither you nor I can say with any truth what will determine others choice in enforcing a no fly list. None the less the basis is "immediacy" and to return to this point it was used wrongly and continues to be used contrary to the law.

There was no immediate threat, none proven, no charges, there remains no charges, the person has not had a security certificate issued against them. it is total BS and abuse of a statutory instrument, contrary to the law.

It in effect is denying an individuals right to mobility and RETURN... he is not a Canadian citizen and foreign individuals by international law have the right of return to their country of origin, which Canada has denied by improperly assigning him to a no fly list that is suppose to be used for immediate air security threats, which no evidence exists indicating him as an air security threat.

Anyone with an IQ over 70 should see that.

US is a hypocritical state, it comes on saying we export freedom and democracy meanwhile in Canada and elsewhere it is limiting freedoms through its own abuses of process forced on other countries through extortion and blackmail. All as a means of owning other countries economies. Its export amounts to export of slavery not freedom.

The point in all this is, Al Talebanni was wrongly put on a no fly list intended for immediate security threats to aircraft security. He at no point poised any threat to air security by being a passenger, especially under enhanced scrutiny and security checks. No bomb, no weapons, nothing.. it was a political attack wrongly applied for political reasons not security reasons.

These political attacks are wholely wrong and an abuse of process, which should not occur in a country that allows political, ethnic and cultural freedoms. There was and is no legal basis to deny him the ability to fly, it is a political abuse.

Edited April 4, 2013 by shortlived

[guyser]

You are trying to cast me as little man when that is not the case.

Naw, your girlfriend is doing that.

Fact is yes I can effect the no fly list.

No one said you didnt effect it. You can get on it quite easily. Its not that hard.

But once on it....have fun. Nothing much you can do to get off it in a timely fashion.

And know what? No one is under any obligation to inform you beforehand that you are on it. Just show up at the airport with your bags.....and then you'll find out.

Edited April 4, 2013 by guyser

[shortlived]

Naw, your girlfriend is doing that.No one said you didnt effect it. You can get on it quite easily. Its not that hard.

But once on it....have fun. Nothing much you can do to get off it in a timely fashion.

And know what? No one is under any obligation to inform you beforehand that you are on it. Just show up at the airport with your bags.....and then you'll find out.

Nice flame, got anything intelligent to say?

bring marshmellows.

if you don't get my meaning. go to hell, people like you ruin the world.

Edited April 4, 2013 by shortlived

[guyser]

Nice flame, got anything intelligent to say?

Why bother? Nothing you have said was, figured Id keep up with the idiocy of this thread.

You havent the slightest idea what you write. Your view of the constitution, the charter and other legal matters seem to have come from nowhere.

The no fly list does not violate any of your rights, since the right to fly is not enshrined anywhere but in the Delusional guide to Canada's Charter....did you author it?

[shortlived]

Why bother? Nothing you have said was, figured Id keep up with the idiocy of this thread.

You havent the slightest idea what you write. Your view of the constitution, the charter and other legal matters seem to have come from nowhere.

The no fly list does not violate any of your rights, since the right to fly is not enshrined anywhere but in the Delusional guide to Canada's Charter....did you author it?

ok I've established your views suck, is there anything else we should gain from this communication?

the no fly list violates Canadian mobility rights, that is the ability to enter and leave Canada.

you have no clue what you are talking about.

the abuse is clear because there was no immediate threat and no charges laid against the guy, it is extrajudicial political punishment, which is unCanadian. it is cruel and unusual punishment without even breaking the law.

The law of return is an international right, and my ability to enter and leave Canada, in Canada forcing me to be a Canadian citizen by law is violating my right to enter or leave Canada.

you are just plain out of touch and in denial, or corrupt and just wrong as a person in your views.

It is a violation of personal liberties, and a nuisance by denying the common rights of Canadians outside the bounds of the law. Deprivation of rights including commercial rights and international rights such as right of return, is a criminal and political motivated undertaking, and is criminal and wrong.

Why exactly does this "Terrorist threat" still have a valid visa, still in the country allowed to walk around, still allowed on other transport services, still allowed in public buildings, denied the right to go back to his home country, and denied access to the courts.

It is a crock of it.

You are being asinine in actually trying to condone what has occurred.

It is a bloody abuse.

Edited April 4, 2013 by shortlived

[guyser]

ok I've established your views suck, is there anything else we should gain from this communication?

Other than I, and others who have tried, are right.

That would be one thing to gain from this communication.

the no fly list violates Canadian mobility rights, that is the ability to enter and leave Canada.

LOL.

Nope, you couldnt be more wrong. One on the no fly list still can leave Canada. There are ships, canoes, sailboats, windsurfers (its a long way to hold on to Europe tho) peddle boats, paddle boards,personal watercrafts (Sea Doos and Jet Skis)....hell, you could swim ! Get a drysuit though. Both the Atl and Pac are cold oceans.

Hey, you could even walk in winter to Russia. Nyet on the fly thing though.

you have no clue what you are talking about.

If thats correct, why are you the only one wrong in this thread?

It is a bloody abuse.

Yes, your drivel is quite abusive and it is drivel. There....we agree.

Anyhow buttercup......

Heres the relevant section, perhaps you could read it and point out where you have the right to fly, ergo meaning the no fly list violates your rights?

It should be fun if nothing else.

Mobility Rights

Marginal note:Mobility of citizens

6. (1) Every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada.

Marginal note:Rights to move and gain livelihood

(2) Every citizen of Canada and every person who has the status of a permanent resident of Canada has the right

(a) to move to and take up residence in any province; and

( to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province.

Marginal note:Limitation

(3) The rights specified in subsection (2) are subject to

(a) any laws or practices of general application in force in a province other than those that discriminate among persons primarily on the basis of province of present or previous residence; and

( any laws providing for reasonable residency requirements as a qualification for the receipt of publicly provided social services.

[shortlived]

Other than I, and others who have tried, are right.

That would be one thing to gain from this communication.

LOL.

Nope, you couldnt be more wrong. One on the no fly list still can leave Canada. There are ships, canoes, sailboats, windsurfers (its a long way to hold on to Europe tho) peddle boats, paddle boards,personal watercrafts (Sea Doos and Jet Skis)....hell, you could swim ! Get a drysuit though. Both the Atl and Pac are cold oceans.

Hey, you could even walk in winter to Russia. Nyet on the fly thing though.

Dude if I want to walk out of Canada I can, you do not determine my mode of transport. it is a violation, you cannot say my mobility rights are restricted to boats or walking, you are being absurd. All forms of mobility are granted under that right there are no exclusions.

Likewise the right of return is an international right, which is being denied to the guy.

You clearly don't understand the principles of Canadian and international mobility rights.

The term right of return refers to a principle of international law, codified in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Canada has ratified those agreements.

Article 12 guarantees freedom of movement, including the right of persons to choose their residence and to leave a country

Article 12

2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those

which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (ordre

public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with

the other rights recognized in the present Covenant.

Any liberties deprived must be given access to the court, which is not being done, as he was denied and he need to pay to have access to the courts to protect his liberty of movement. There should not needs to pay to protect ones liberties guaranteed under international law. There has been no evidence presented that indicates he is an immediate threat to aircraft security. Where is the evidence. There is only a loose political association which was within his legal rights. How is him leaving Canada on a plane a threat to national security, public order, or heath, morals or others freedoms? this is a clear abuse on politically motivated grounds.

There was no legal provision as there is no evidence of an "immediate" threat to aircraft security.

Article 12 was and is being breached. This has turned into a "we want to deprive this person of their right to fly" not this person poses a risk to the safety of the aircraft.

That is why it is abuse, it is to prevent them the ability to fly, not to protect the aircraft. That is why it is an abuse, and illegal.

People who have him on that list need to be charged and asked, is this guy on that list because he hosted a website 5 years ago that people posted videos on that you didn't like, or do you think he is going to blow up the plane? I have the hunch it will be the first one not the second. That first one isn't grounds to deny flight because it doesn't represent an immediate threat.

Edited April 4, 2013 by shortlived

[guyser]

Dude if I want to walk out of Canada I can, you do not determine my mode of transport.

Ok, but dont try to fly if you are on the No Fly list.

it is a violation, you cannot say my mobility rights are restricted to boats or walking, you are being absurd. All forms of mobility are granted under that right there are no exclusions.

Likewise the right of return is an international right, which is being denied to the guy.

You clearly don't understand the principles of Canadian and international mobility rights.

As figured by me and many others, you do not know what you are talking about.

Do yourself (and us) a favour and point out where it says your rights are violated for being on the list?

We know you cant, but humour is black that way.

[guyser]

I see you edited and added some wiki shtuff.

Good for you, can you point out where you have a right to get on an airplane?

Do so and we will all shut up.

Dont do so and you shut up?

Fair?

[shortlived]

Ok, but dont try to fly if you are on the No Fly list.As figured by me and many others, you do not know what you are talking about.

I fly a couple times a year and there has been no problem with this. Only the US has been a bitch over made up reasons saying I intend to live and work in the US which couldn't be further from the truth. The federal government forced me to stay for close to a month and offered me work, which occured because they used the basis of me trying to live and work in the US as a means to deny me entry while travelling home from Mexico through the US. None the less I flew as recently as January which went smoothly even though my passport was stolen. None the less, someone less intelligent then you would be needed to believe me to be a risk to aircraft security. I'm the one who is usually placed near the emergency exit by the airline.

Do yourself (and us) a favour and point out where it says your rights are violated for being on the list?

The absence of grounds to put me on the list. It is an indictable offence. It is creating a nuisance. I have the right to enter or leave Canada, as well as the ability to take up residence in any province in Canada. You can't deny me the right to travel outside of court order, and there are no grounds to deny my liberties. It is illegal to deny liberties extra-judicially It violates my common law rights. I have equal access to enjoy liberties Canadians enjoy, any attempt to stop those liberties is an indictable offence.

180. Common nuisance

180. (1) Every one who commits a common nuisance and thereby

(a) endangers the lives, safety or health of the public, or

(b causes physical injury to any person,

is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.

Definition

(2) For the purposes of this section, every one commits a common nuisance who does an unlawful act or fails to discharge a legal duty and thereby

(a) endangers the lives, safety, health, property or comfort of the public; or

(b obstructs the public in the exercise or enjoyment of any right that is common to all the subjects of Her Majesty in Canada.

R.S., c. C-34, s. 176.

1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right

to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence.

2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own.

1. All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any

criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be

entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal

established by law.

Edited April 4, 2013 by shortlived

[guyser]

I fly a couple times a year and there has been no problem with this. Only the US has been a bitch over made up reasons saying I intend to live and work in the US which couldn't be further from the truth. The federal government forced me to stay for close to a month and offered me work, which occured because they used the basis of me trying to live and work in the US as a means to deny me entry while travelling home from Mexico through the US. None the less I flew as recently as January which went smoothly even though my passport was stolen. None the less, someone less intelligent then you would be needed to believe me to be a risk to aircraft security. I'm the one who is usually placed near the emergency exit by the airline.

Cool story bro.

Irrelevant, and frankly not believable, but thats for another day.

The absence of grounds to put me on the list. It is an indictable offence.

So, a nuisance huh?

Ok, show us where they (the folks who put you on the No Fly List) endangered the lives , safety, or health of the public for putting you on said list.

[shortlived]

Cool story bro.

Irrelevant, and frankly not believable, but thats for another day.

So, a nuisance huh?

Ok, show us where they (the folks who put you on the No Fly List) endangered the lives , safety, or health of the public for putting you on said list.

I'm not on the Canadian no fly list. My travel is largely for health and safety reasons denial of my ability to travel damages my health and safety. None the less it is a clear violation of my right to enter and leave Canada.

You are being obtuse.

Money is property also

property or comfort of the public;

there is no doubt a restriction on public comfort by removing their mobility.

It is a nuisance. Anyone should be able to see that.

Edited April 4, 2013 by shortlived