Search results

That is completely false. According to the current law, that can be any court whatsoever, including say the North Korean courts. Then a minister is allowed to interpret that court's decision based on Canadian laws. There's is no requirement for Canadian courts to participate. P.s. I encourage...

I've just provided you with a proof. What you're saying is what should be in the law, but it is not what it is in the law (C-24). That is why it's a bad law. The whole thing is about there is no Canadian court of law involved. Only a minister and his/her decision. In theory, a person stripped...

This is what Canadian Bar has to say on the subject: 'The definition of terrorism is often grounded in the political context. In many countries, one side of a conflict will frame the other side as terrorism. This has been particularly true for most national liberation movements. Nelson Mandela...

This response is amazing... Did you actually read the statement you are responding to? This assumption of yours 'Remember the conviction must meet Canadian law to justify stripping citizenship.' is false. And it's precisely explained why it's false in the comment you are replying to. It's...

There are two very recent examples of how Harper Government abuses laws. First is Mike Duffy appointment as PEI senator, second is Mark Nadon appointment to represent Quebec. Now why do you think a minister cannot stretch a DUI conviction to a terrorism? According to C-24, the burden to prove...

Did you ever live in the totalitarian/authoritarian country? Do you know what the phrase 'abusing the law' means? If not, I'll explain to you. If a minister has a wish to do something, which is technically illegal but can possibly be fit into a very stretched understanding of a law, (s)he could...

This does not look like a respectful discussion to me. I hope, people capable to analyze facts got the argument about vagueness. Idiot or not, a minister can strip someone of their citizenship without a court ruling on this specific matter. Which is not a due process. Period. That's a short...

What you're writing here is correct in principle. Unfortunately, it's a wishful thinking, since none of these is clearly written in C-24. I.e., there is nothing clearly stated in the law to protect a citizen from an imaginable 'idiot' you are talking about. That is exactly why the law is vague...

The vague part is related to the nature of conviction, i.e. some one may call DUI a terrorism. Would this law apply? The second point of vagueness comes from the fact that you may be convicted by some phony puppet court (think Egypt and Fahmy case).

Please, get your facts straight. There was a significant drop in the relative numbers under Cons, especially if you factor in the provincial nominees (to which Federal Government has little influence). Plus as I've mentioned multiple times, this is by far not about the numbers, and also it's...

If you've missed today's news: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-alexander-refugee-crisis-1.3213869 I hope, Chris Alexander is now done as a politician. Hopefully, other members of Cons' Immigration committee, such as Costas Menegakis, would also be held accountable. In any...

Well, MPs and lawyers are not the same thing. You go to lawyer when you need an advise or you may have a case. You to MP when there is a federal level political issue. The mere fact that MPs need to be involved so frequently in the immigration matters means that the system is not working. Now...

Funny part is how Conservatives increase citizenship fees by 5 times and... cut CIC staff at the very same moment and... make promises of better service. I guess that goes to the incompetence bucket...

The exceptions are in hundreds of thousands people. I wouldn't call it 'some'. There is lots of proof on this forum (of course Cons are trying to hide this data, so it's not so easy to get it from official sources). That is exactly what it is, which is destroying legit immigration. A simple...

Thanks for the math. BTW, if you take the averages it would be way less than 20% increase in absolute immigration numbers. I'd say something close to 5%.

Look, do you believe Harper's account on sen. Mike Duffy or sen. Pamela Wallin? Would you believe his government on other issues? Now, even if you look at your own link carefully, you would see that the immigration was at flat line during Harper. If you factor in provincial nominees and...

How do you know that? Cons' propaganda? CIC also tells us that everyone should get citizenship applications processed within 24 months, and yet we have people on this forum waiting since 2012. As you know, long-form Census has been 'killed' by the Harper government a while ago, so there can be...

Probably because Harper is destroying immigration... and citizenship as an institution. BTW, there are plenty of other threads in this forum. No need to comment on each single one :)

This subject (C-24 and different parts of it) was discussed here to death in various other threads. So it may be a little of a waste of time to repeat all pro et contra here, as they are well known. There are few things I'd like to point out related to this topic though: 1. The vote on C-24...

BTW, Liberals have started the Petition promising to repeal parts of C-24: https://www.liberal.ca/petitions/second-class/ And here is the NDP official statement (though this one is from more than a year ago): http://www.ndp.ca/news/ndp-calls-changes-to-bill-c-24