Guest Peeves Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 The Supreme Court clearly said he had all the rights of a Canadian and that our government was violating them. ..and he was involved in manufacturing bombs and in a fire fight against NATO soldiers, our allies. I suggest respectfully that such might well be considered as treason? Quote
eyeball Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 ..and he was involved in manufacturing bombs and in a fire fight against NATO soldiers, our allies. I suggest respectfully that such might well be considered as treason? It might if he was an adult instead of a kid that was indoctrinated when he was a child into becoming a soldier. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
g_bambino Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 ..and he was involved in manufacturing bombs and in a fire fight against NATO soldiers, our allies. I suggest respectfully that such might well be considered as treason? Not according to our laws, it isn't. Quote
g_bambino Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 The Supreme Court clearly said he had all the rights of a Canadian... Only when dealing with Canadian officials. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 Come. Let us make bombs together. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 (edited) Only when dealing with Canadian officials. It's legal to leave Canadian minors alone to deal with foreign officials? By what statute or piece of legislation is this legal? Edited April 25, 2012 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
g_bambino Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 It's legal to leave Canadian minors alone to deal with foreign officials? That's a moot question. Once any Canadian is in another country's custody, there's nothing any Canadian government can do to force the return of that individual. Canadian law does not apply to foreign jurisdictions. Quote
cybercoma Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 (edited) Here is were i don't agree, in afghan a young boy goes through a ceramony at age 11 in which he is considered a man, in Afghan he enjoys all the laws that an adult has. He can marry, start a family, carries a wpn, and fights in any conflict he chooses.... The fact he is Canadian did not change any of that, the crimes he commited were in fact commited here in Afghan, and being 15 years old does not change that either. What does international law say about children soldiers? Does it say if they go through a ritual in their home countries that makes them adults, then it's ok to have 12 year old soldiers or militants? How does the Canadian military handle children soldiers on the battlefield? Edited April 25, 2012 by cybercoma Quote
cybercoma Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 That's a moot question. Once any Canadian is in another country's custody, there's nothing any Canadian government can do to force the return of that individual. Canadian law does not apply to foreign jurisdictions. Critics, except on here, aren't suggesting that they should. What they're suggesting is that our government has an obligation to look out for its citizens better than they did here. They would go out of their way to save and help child soldiers in Africa, but do nothing for someone with a Canadian passport who was made into a child soldier. Quote
g_bambino Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 (edited) What they're suggesting is that our government has an obligation to look out for its citizens better than they did here. That's a moralistic matter and, hence, subjective. They... do nothing for someone with a Canadian passport who was made into a child soldier. Once Khadr hit the age of fifteen, he ceased to meet the definition of a child soldier, according to both the UN and the Geneva Conventions. Not that the Canadian government would be forced to do anything, otherwise. [ed.: +] Edited April 25, 2012 by g_bambino Quote
eyeball Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 (edited) That's a moot question. Once any Canadian is in another country's custody, there's nothing any Canadian government can do to force the return of that individual. That's a pile of crap, especially in this case where the foreign government in question practically begged us to repatriate him. Canadian law does not apply to foreign jurisdictions. The law in this case applied to our own government. Edited April 25, 2012 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
g_bambino Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 (edited) That's a pile of crap. That retort of yours certainly is. Short of military invasion and overthrow of the goverment detaining the Canadian, what force do you think the Canadian government can exercise to make foreign ones obey its bidding? The law in this case applied to our own government. What law? [ed.: +] Edited April 25, 2012 by g_bambino Quote
eyeball Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 (edited) That retort of yours certainly is. The US opposed no other request from other western countries and allies to repatriate their citizens. Since when did simply our picking up a phone and doing the same thing equate to invading and overthrowing the US government? Get a grip bambino, you're sure lousy at acting stupid. What law? The Charter, ever heard of it? Edited April 25, 2012 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
g_bambino Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 (edited) The US opposed no other request from other western countries and allies to repatriate their citizens. Since when did simply our picking up a phone and doing the same thing equate to invading and overthrowing the US government? What does that have to do with laws forcing the government to do anything about Canadians, minor or otherwise, detained abroad or, if there was even such a law, the power of our government over foreign states? That was what you asked about, remember? The Charter, ever heard of it? Yea. Hence I said Canadian officials were bound by it when dealing with Canadians abroad. And you say I'm acting stupid... [ed.: link] Edited April 25, 2012 by g_bambino Quote
eyeball Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 What does that have to do with laws forcing the government to do anything about Canadians, minor or otherwise, detained abroad or, if there was even such a law, the power of our government over foreign states? That was what you asked about, remember? You tell me. You're the one who posed the ridiculous notion that our government had no recourse but to use force in this case. That is what you did, remember? And you say I'm acting stupid... I'd probably rephrase that but then you'd probably sic someone on me. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
eyeball Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 (edited) I said Canadian officials were bound by it when dealing with Canadians abroad. So did the SC. And you say I'm acting stupid...[ed.: link] ...tap tap tap. Edited April 25, 2012 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
g_bambino Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 (edited) You're the one who posed the ridiculous notion that our government had no recourse but to use force in this case. No... I asked you what, other than that obviously ridiculous notion, you thought the government could do to force the return of a Canadian in foreign custody, since, by equating my assertion that "there's nothing any Canadian government can do to force the return of that individual" with "a pile of crap", you implied you knew of at least one method. So did the SC. I know. [ed.: +, sp] Edited April 25, 2012 by g_bambino Quote
GostHacked Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 What does the Supreme court say otherwise about that he while in Afghanistan he enjoys all the laws that an adult has. He can marry, start a family, carries a wpn, and fights in any conflict he chooses.... The fact he is Canadian did not change any of that, the crimes he commited were in fact commited here in Afghan, and being 15 years old does not change that either. As with any Canadian who breaks the lawe in another country has to face the law and justice meated out by said country, being a 15 year old canadian should not change that either....But nobody has explored that opition as US forces whisped him away to face war crimes Why you always spell weapon as wpn?? This has bugged me for some time. Quote
eyeball Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 No... I asked you what, other than that obviously ridiculous notion, you thought the government could do to force the return of a Canadian in foreign custody, since, by equating my assertion that "there's nothing any Canadian government can do to force the return of that individual" with "a pile of crap", you implied you knew of at least one method. Yes, I suggested a phone call would probably suffice. I know. Finally. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
g_bambino Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 Yes, I suggested a phone call would probably suffice. That won't force anyone to do anything. Finally. ?... You responded to that post. Quote
eyeball Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 That won't force anyone to do anything. It didn't have to. ?... I can't force you to get it either. You responded to that post. I'm responding to this one too. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
g_bambino Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 It didn't have to. It did when you asked if it was legal to leave Canadian minors with foreign officials. Laws force. I can't force you to get it either.I'm responding to this one too. There are ways you can help those short-term memory issues of yours. Quote
Argus Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 Do you stand by the same rights they're entitled to as you? Immigrants? Nope. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 The Supreme Court clearly said he had all the rights of a Canadian and that our government was violating them. Another good reason to change the immigration and refugee act, and use the notwithstanding clause to keep the judges noses out of it. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted April 25, 2012 Report Posted April 25, 2012 Yea. Hence I said Canadian officials were bound by it when dealing with Canadians abroad. And here is the thing no one is actually talking about. The law says this guy is a Canadian. Canadians think otherwise. Canadians have quite deliberately turned their collective backs on him and his family, clearing stating they feel nothing in the way of kinship for them, and that they do not feel they are Canadians. Thus, they don't want them here, and don't care what happens to them elsewhere. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.