Jump to content

Judge hands refugee 44th conviction, asks why he has not been deported


CdnFox

Recommended Posts

On 11/13/2023 at 9:49 PM, CdnFox said:

Mohammed Al-Samaneh, a 32-year-old man who came to Canada as a Syrian refugee, has 44 convictions for multiple violent crimes such as assault and forcible confinement. Al-Samaneh had been placed on the National Flagging System, which identifies high-risk, violent criminals. 

I wonder how many anti-Semitic "hate crimes" he has committed (graffiti etc counts as a 'hate crime') and how many of them are assumed to be from 'supremacrackas' for the purposes of using bogus stats to create racial division from the PMO...

This reminds me of the guy who immigrated here to commit terrorist attacks but couldn't have his citizenship stripped. Now there's a terrorist running around with a Cdn passport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

I wonder how many anti-Semitic "hate crimes" he has committed (graffiti etc counts as a 'hate crime') and how many of them are assumed to be from 'supremacrackas' for the purposes of using bogus stats to create racial division from the PMO...

This reminds me of the guy who immigrated here to commit terrorist attacks but couldn't have his citizenship stripped. Now there's a terrorist running around with a Cdn passport.

Jump off your horse and read the statement "44 convictions for multiple violent crimes such as assault and forcible confinement."

Lots of people that come here for a few minutes and then go back to live.

Canadian Jewish people they have interviewed is they have lived in Israel for 15 years. Arabs said they have lived in Gaza for 20 years.

We all know how many Hong Kong people that got Canadian citizenship before it returned to Chinese control in 1997 and then never even lived in Canada (but bought lots of property)

We allow dual citizenship so, we should be prepared for the consequences.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

Jump off your horse and read the statement "44 convictions for multiple violent crimes such as assault and forcible confinement."

Lots of people that come here for a few minutes and then go back to live.

Canadian Jewish people they have interviewed is they have lived in Israel for 15 years. Arabs said they have lived in Gaza for 20 years.

We all know how many Hong Kong people that got Canadian citizenship before it returned to Chinese control in 1997 and then never even lived in Canada (but bought lots of property)

We allow dual citizenship so, we should be prepared for the consequences.

That is a confusing mishmash of statements I don't think this has anything to do with dual citizenship, as such. It has to do with bringing people over and then not holding them to any kind of responsibility or behaviour. We should deport anyone who comes here as soon as they commit a criminal act. But our deportation system is broken, just like our legal system. There are numerous cases of it taking many years to deport someone as they and their government-paid lawyers try one appeal after another, deliberately stretching things out as long as possible. The cost is enormous, but no one seems to care about that. The burden is 100% on the state and 0% on the accused and convicted person. 

And even if everyone agrees he should be booted out I believe our policy is we don't deport people to war zones. We DID deport people to Syria, Somalia, Haiti and other such places under Harper, but I don't believe we do anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

That is a confusing mishmash of statements I don't think this has anything to do with dual citizenship, as such. It has to do with bringing people over and then not holding them to any kind of responsibility or behaviour. We should deport anyone who comes here as soon as they commit a criminal act. But our deportation system is broken, just like our legal system. There are numerous cases of it taking many years to deport someone as they and their government-paid lawyers try one appeal after another, deliberately stretching things out as long as possible. The cost is enormous, but no one seems to care about that. The burden is 100% on the state and 0% on the accused and convicted person. 

And even if everyone agrees he should be booted out I believe our policy is we don't deport people to war zones. We DID deport people to Syria, Somalia, Haiti and other such places under Harper, but I don't believe we do anymore.

What it has to do with is citizenship for convenience.

Come to Canada, get citizenship and move back.20 years later there is a war and the cry to Canada to help them. It happened before with conflict in Lebanon and now with Gaza and eve Israelies expecting Canada to come their aid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

What it has to do with is citizenship for convenience.

No, not really. That certainly exists. Far too many people come here to work having no intention of becoming Canadians. They earn enough to improve their lifestyle back home and then return there, coming back only when they're endangered or need healthcare or education for their kids. And they contribute as little to the taxman as they possibly can, hiding their money overseas.

But this is not that.

22 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Come to Canada, get citizenship and move back.20 years later there is a war and the cry to Canada to help them. It happened before with conflict in Lebanon and now with Gaza and eve Israelies expecting Canada to come their aid.

Yes. We could do something about that by, for example, removing automatic citizenship to children born here to birth tourists. Not to mention giving interviews and personality tests to prospective immigrants.

But not under this government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

No, not really. That certainly exists. Far too many people come here to work having no intention of becoming Canadians. They earn enough to improve their lifestyle back home and then return there, coming back only when they're endangered or need healthcare or education for their kids. And they contribute as little to the taxman as they possibly can, hiding their money overseas.

But this is not that.

Yes. We could do something about that by, for example, removing automatic citizenship to children born here to birth tourists. Not to mention giving interviews and personality tests to prospective immigrants.

But not under this government.

I( am talking about, as I said before, citizenship for convenience than going back to their home country and live there until trouble starts then get Canada to bail them out...as is happening now.

Nit under any government in the past either.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/15/2023 at 2:06 PM, herbie said:

He has an arab sounding name so he must be guilty of anti-semitic hate crimes.

and that's not racist thinking at all...

As a staunch liberal activist, I'm obviously not "racist" towards anyone. I just have to point out that, if he has 44 convictions for violent crimes, and none of them were against dhimmis, then he is risking the wrath. You know what I'm sayin'? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Automatic citizenship without restrictions for non residents born in Canada is an America's thing going back to when all countries in the Americas wanted immigrants. Except for Pakistan and a couple of African countries  no one else allows it. 

It's time we stopped it as well.

We spent a small fortune hauling "Canadians" out of Lebanon during the war in 2006.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/15/2023 at 4:14 PM, ExFlyer said:

Jump off your horse and read the statement "44 convictions for multiple violent crimes such as assault and forcible confinement."

Lots of people that come here for a few minutes and then go back to live.

Canadian Jewish people they have interviewed is they have lived in Israel for 15 years. Arabs said they have lived in Gaza for 20 years.

We all know how many Hong Kong people that got Canadian citizenship before it returned to Chinese control in 1997 and then never even lived in Canada (but bought lots of property)

We allow dual citizenship so, we should be prepared for the consequences.

300,000. But remember in Trudeau land a criminal is a victim to.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Aristides said:

Automatic citizenship without restrictions for non residents born in Canada is an America's thing going back to when all countries in the Americas wanted immigrants. Except for Pakistan and a couple of African countries  no one else allows it. 

It's time we stopped it as well.

We spent a small fortune hauling "Canadians" out of Lebanon during the war in 2006.

It's more like it goes back to a time when people came here by boat. There was no such thing as birth tourism. Anyone coming here was almost certainly not going home anytime soon. That, obviously has changed. We should change, as well. None of our European peers give out citizenship just because someone is born there. They do it according to who the parents are.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, herbie said:

Yeah, I know what you're sayin'
and you said it, you didn't just think it.

It's impossible for him to have been convicted of violent crimes 40+ times without a single one being considered a "hate crime" by our mamby-pamby definition of it. Even a piece of graffiti or an epithet is a hate crime now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

It's impossible for him to have been convicted of violent crimes 40+ times without a single one being considered a "hate crime" by our mamby-pamby definition of it. Even a piece of graffiti or an epithet is a hate crime now. 

It is if they were all against white people

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

It is if they were all against white people

Yup. Hate crime usually only means "we suspect a cracker did it"...

This was 'not a hate crime'... Native woman yelled "I hate white people!" and punched a random woman in the face

This was treated as a 'hate crime'... Just graffiti on a wall.

Quote

The incident is being treated as a suspected hate-motivated offence, according to police

I don't mind if they want to make that a hate crime, because it definitely is, but:

  • then it always needs to be a hate crime, even when it happens to a church
  • all hate crimes of a more serious nature also need to be treated as hate crimes
  • our gov't shouldn't be pretending that all unsolved 'graffiti hate crimes' were committed by white people
  • when the gov't cites the number of hate crimes they should break that down into "violent", "harassment", and "grafitti" if they're gonna include graffiti as a hate crime. There's a big difference, just like with "sexual assault". 
Edited by WestCanMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

It's impossible for him to have been convicted of violent crimes 40+ times without a single one being considered a "hate crime" by our mamby-pamby definition of it. Even a piece of graffiti or an epithet is a hate crime now.

Just keep proving it to us. No wonder you like Trump, he can't STFU and blurts out stuff for the world to see. And thinks that's "winningt".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Cannot blame Trudeau for Canada immigration policies from decades ago. Immigration has been problematic since Pearson days.

Not blaming him for that, just the liberal view that a criminal is a victim too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, PIK said:

Not blaming him for that, just the liberal view that a criminal is a victim too.

Here is the problem i have with all of this, Justin has 10 years under his belt, he is the man in charge of the entire country....In the military we use to say ignorance is no excuse...meaning just becasue you did not know about a thing under your command does not mean your not responsible for it...And the last point just becasue he did not draft the legislation or policy does not mean he is not responsible for it...once he is sworn in he takes responsibility for everything...he can no longer use the excuse i did not do that... or under the conservative government it was much worse...both are cope outs...cheap  ones at that definitely not the makings of a good leader. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,752
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Dorai
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Venandi earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • CrazyCanuck89 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • CDN1 went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • DUI_Offender went up a rank
      Proficient
    • CrazyCanuck89 went up a rank
      Apprentice
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...