Bill C-6: Senate stage

[admontreal]

You do realize that there are canadian born that have dual citizenship. So if they commit terrorism, they should lose their Canadian citizenship.

And please knock if off with the "if it terrorism today, traffic fine tomorrow" BS. That is pure rhetorical nonsense. If you want to live in your paranoid life, that's your business. But don't try to enforce your nonsense opinion as fact.

You are entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to your fact.

No they shouldn't lose it. Sometimes you can't decide about your dual citizenship and you can never decide about your origins. So deciding who loses a citizenship because of their origin is THE rhetorical nonsense by excellence. And by calling me a paranoid you are trying to enforce your BS opinion as a fact. You give no argument and state the same thing that we have been hearing from the conservatives.

So no, I won't knock it off, Stephen Harper said during the campaign that he 'would look at other options' regarding citizenship revocation, beyond terrorism. That's where my path to traffic tickets starts.

I respectfully responded to an opinion, with some color I admit, but I didn't call the member by any name nor mocked his opinion. Please take your aggressivity elsewhere when you don't agree.

 

[screech339]

No they shouldn't lose it. Sometimes you can't decide about your dual citizenship and you can never decide about your origins. So deciding who loses a citizenship because of their origin is THE rhetorical nonsense by excellence. And by calling me a paranoid you are trying to enforce your BS opinion as a fact. You give no argument and state the same thing that we have been hearing from the conservatives.

So no, I won't knock it off, Stephen Harper said during the campaign that he 'would look at other options' regarding citizenship revocation, beyond terrorism. That's where my path to traffic tickets starts.

I respectfully responded to an opinion, with some color I admit, but I didn't call the member by any name nor mocked his opinion. Please take your aggressivity elsewhere when you don't agree.

Funny that you removed my note about Trudeau admiring China and Castro. No remark about that eh? I am very concerned about Trudeau turning Canada into a regime like them much like his father did with NEP and his spending that spiraled Canada's economy into a hole and interfering with provincial's jurisdiction.

But I got to say, equating serious charges like "terrorism" to "traffic fines" is pretty sad comparison. I wouldn't mind "adding other options" that has very serious crimes like "beheading" for example.

 

[Shmak2017]

Any update yet on today`s process

 

[punk]

Use this tool to contact your senators. It takes less than a min

https://e-activist.com/page/3989/action/1

 

[admontreal]

Funny that you removed my note about Trudeau admiring China and Castro. No remark about that eh? I am very concerned about Trudeau turning Canada into a regime like them much like his father did with NEP and his spending that spiraled Canada's economy into a hole.

I didn't see it when I responded. But you're right, I have no remark.
My opinion is that he is after all a politician and sometimes you have to play against some principles for Canada's economic and geopolitical interests. China is a major player (and with the USA taking a domestic virage they will be even more major) and you can't disrespect them when it's not worth it. What they are doing in their country is their business. Regarding Cuba I am not familiar so I can't comment, but I guess that some favors were traded and that's where we land. It was the same with Harper and it would have been the same with Mulcair or Layton.

 

[dpenabill]

The President-elect of the United States recently suggested that Americans should lose their U.S. citizenship for burning an American Flag, despite two U.S. Supreme Court decisions which conclusively rule that even imposing a fine is unconstitutional.

To channel that great American statesman (not) Sarah Palin, who could see Russia from her home in Alaska (not really), when I lived just a km or so from my current home, when the weather was right I really could see the U.S., well, the higher peaks on an uninhabited island, a park, on the United States side of the border. Not far enough away so far as I can tell.

Canada will feel more secure, to my view, when Section 10(2) in the Citizenship Act is formally, officially repealed, as is currently proposed in Bill C-6. The threat to a people's freedom is often greater from within than from without, and typically from those who are exploiting fear to gain power. Harper's game was as transparent as his governing was not. Good riddance, good riddance to both, to Harper and to Section 10(2) in the Citizenship Act.

Now all it will take is for the Senate to do its duty and pass this legislation.

 

[malaspinace]

Funny that you removed my note about Trudeau admiring China and Castro. No remark about that eh? I am very concerned about Trudeau turning Canada into a regime like them much like his father did with NEP and his spending that spiraled Canada's economy into a hole and interfering with provincial's jurisdiction.

But I got to say, equating serious charges like "terrorism" to "traffic fines" is pretty sad comparison. I wouldn't mind "adding other options" that has very serious crimes like "beheading" for example.

For serious crimes we need to apply serious punishments. but you need treat people equally. If you won't do that, you should start to think in taxes. Why people born in Canada and naturalized people pay taxes equally?

 

[screech339]

For serious crimes we need to apply serious punishments. but you need treat people equally. If you won't do that, you should start to think in taxes. Why people born in Canada and naturalized people pay taxes equally?

Yes, stripping citizenship from people who committed citizenship fraud and spying for foreign countries is okay, both of which has not killed a single person and yet those who killed scores of innocent people in the name of terrorism get to keep it. Hmmm. I guess that makes a lot of sense and logic to a Liberal.

I guess people's lives are not that important to the Liberals. We can see that in Trudeau's admiration for China and Cuba dictatorship.

 

[malaspinace]

Yes, stripping citizenship from people who committed citizenship fraud and spying for foreign countries is okay, both of which has not killed a single person and yet those who killed scores of innocent people in the name of terrorism get to keep it. Hmmm. I guess that makes a lot of sense and logic to a Liberal.

It easy, you need to create laws according to the reality. So, if you think that anyone with those characteristics can become Canadian Citizen, you need to reform the eligibility law. But once you became citizen you need to be treated as every citizen.

 

[screech339]

It easy, you need to create laws according to the reality. So, if you think that anyone with those characteristics can become Canadian Citizen, you need to reform the eligibility law. But once you became citizen you need to be treated as every citizen.

Are you saying that killing people in the name of terrorism is not as bad as a citizenship fraud or spying?

You do realize that spying are "charges" made after you obtain citizenship. You seem to think the spying occurred before obtaining citizenship. Again nothing to do with eligibility rules.

Why is it okay for a dual caught and convicted of spying after obtaining citizenship to lose citizenship but not a terrorist.

 

[HSD]

Hi all

Could someone please help me with my situation.Under the current rule I will fulfill my 4/6 residency requirements on Jan 15 2018.Do I have to wait till I have lived in Canada for 183 days in 2018 to apply for my citizenship or will I be eligible to apply on 15 Jan?beacuse if I will be then I don't have to worry too much about bill c6 coming to force.(except the intent to live clause) beacuse it will take another year anyways.But if I have to wait till mid 2018 then in my case the sooner bill c6 becomes a law the better.

 

[admontreal]

Are you saying that killing people in the name of terrorism is not as bad as a citizenship fraud or spying?

You do realize that spying are "charges" made after you obtain citizenship. You seem to think the spying occurred before obtaining citizenship. Again nothing to do with eligibility rules.

Why is it okay for a dual caught and convicted of spying after obtaining citizenship to lose citizenship but not a terrorist.

No offense, but I invite you to read the law C-24 and the bill C-6 carefully because you seem to be mixing up a lot of concepts.
After C-6 and before C-24, a Canadian caught and convicted for spying or treason would go to jail as the Criminal law states, whether he or she is Dual or not.
With C-24, if he/she is a Dual, he would be deported after his prison sentence. It's an additional punishment that is not justified and unfair. Because if he wasn't a dual, he would stay in Canada.
Regarding Fraud that occured BEFORE citizenship, it's very simple, the person was NEVER a citizen and all we do is revoking it because it was never true in the first place. So yes it's okay to punish a fraudster.
Nobody on the Revoke side seems to understand this nuance and keep mixing up concepts and notions that are very delicate and sensitive. Which is not fair.

And screech339, you said you were not against additional "options", what if we have a more zealous person in charge who thinks that a serious traffic fine is as serious as betraying your country ? Remember the saying: 'He that steals a pin will steal an ox'
I know it is sad and ridiculous to compare the offenses now but a year ago a lot of people were saying it's ridiculous to picture Donald Trump at the Whitehouse.

 

[screech339]

No offense, but I invite you to read the law C-24 and the bill C-6 carefully because you seem to be mixing up a lot of concepts.
After C-6 and before C-24, a Canadian caught and convicted for spying or treason would go to jail as the Criminal law states, whether he or she is Dual or not.
With C-24, if he/she is a Dual, he would be deported after his prison sentence. It's an additional punishment that is not justified and unfair. Because if he wasn't a dual, he would stay in Canada.
Regarding Fraud that occured BEFORE citizenship, it's very simple, the person was NEVER a citizen and all we do is revoking it because it was never true in the first place. So yes it's okay to punish a fraudster.
Nobody on the Revoke side seems to understand this nuance and keep mixing up concepts and notions that are very delicate and sensitive. Which is not fair.

And screech339, you said you were not against additional "options", what if we have a more zealous person in charge who thinks that a serious traffic fine is as serious as betraying your country ? Remember the saying: 'He that will steals a pin will steal an ox'
I know it is sad and ridiculous to compare he offenses now but a year ago a lot of people were saying it's ridiculous to picture Donald Trump at the Whitehouse.

The day PM officially signs royal ascent to adding a pathetic conviction like traffic fines to the list, then "I'll have to move out of Canada" like the Americans wanting to move to Canada after the Trump election.

 

[admontreal]

The day PM officially signs royal ascent to adding a pathetic conviction like traffic fines to the list, then "I'll have to move out of Canada" like the Americans wanting to move to Canada after the Trump election.

No please stay ! Who will vote for the Conservatives then ?? Just kidding

 

[screech339]

No please stay ! Who will vote for the Conservatives then ?? Just kidding

According to you a conservative would add the "traffic fines" to the list. I would safely say that I move out of canada if the conservative added it to list. Knowing the conservatives would not do something stupid like that. They use common sense and logic. Unlike the liberals, they could in theory add it to the list since those convicted with traffic fines didn't kill anyone.