torontosm said:
Again, I fail to see what the issue is. The Senator tweeted: "Cdn Senate currently debating Bill C6 which will restore citizenship to convicted terrorists such as ringleader of Toronto 18. Good policy?" What exactly is unprofessional in that tweet? And, despite what you have conjectured in your own mind, there is absolutely NO reference to white Canadians vs. other Canadians. And finally, are you upset that the Senator is asking the public for their thoughts? I thought that is exactly what a democracy was all about.
Sorry, I was referring to another tweet where she said that 'A Canadian is not a Canadian, ....'. Starting a tweet with such a stupid and non-sensical statement is everything but professional.
Technically, Zakaria Amara should never have lost his citizenship, he is a Canadian terrorist that should be dealt with by Canada. You can't pick and choose who is Canadian enough and who is not and I am not really in the mood of arguing again about this terrorist citizenship revocation thing. You will always camp in your position because of your beliefs and it will be the same for me. And that's the way it is.
I agree with you, there's (on paper), no reference to White versus non-White Canadians in this law but in the facts that's absolutely the case. When the Harper government tried to enforce this clause they did that on people with arab-origin (Amara) or pakistani-origin (Gaya- who was born in Canada by the way). I never heard any reference to revoking the citizenship of a white canadian-born terrorist fighting for ISIS (after all they could be eligible for Irish or British citizenship as well if you dig enough). So please don't give me that argument that all Canadians were treated the same way by C-24. It's simply not true.
I don't think the main function of the Senate and the Supreme Court involves listening to the public.Regarding the Senate, these Senators were appointed (and not elected) to use their experience and their knowledge to assess Canadian laws. You want to listen to the People ? You go to the House of commons, to townhalls, to the city hall, to the media. Democracy is about listening to the People, you are right, but again, protecting our rights and values is about looking at the facts against the core foundations of our country.So no, a Supreme Court judge doesn't care about the will of the Canadians, he cares about the Law and its interpretation.
That's called Balance of Power, and that's how we can differentiate ourselves from totalitarian regimes elsewhere in the world.