[jdobbin]

http://www.theglobea...article1299943/

Quote

The final electronic shackle binding a man accused of terrorism to federal supervision was cut Thursday, leaving in tatters the government's security-certificate system for detaining foreigners believed to be a threat.

“It's official,” Adil Charkaoui said as he clutched an order issued abruptly by Federal Court Judge Danièle Tremblay-Lamer that lifted all remaining bail conditions on him. “I've been waiting on this for six years.”

Held under a security certificate as an al-Qaeda suspect since 2003, the Montreal schoolteacher from Morocco was given back his liberty after the Crown withdrew much of its evidence in a bid to keep it secret. The federal lawyers pleaded with the judge to leave some bail conditions in place while they seek to appeal orders to disclose the information.

It was hard to see how any court could continue without Habeus Corpus.

Evidence eventually has to be presented.

[August1991]

This decision changed nothing since Adil Charkaoui was free to leave Canada at any time. He is not an immigrant to Canada nor a citizen. We should have deported Charkaoui years ago but instead, we gave him the chance to stay in Canada - but in a Canadian prison.

IMV, as a result of this decision, we should simply deport him.

There are 6 billion people in the world. We 30 million Canadians cannot protect all - and it is arbitrary justice to protect those who manage to come to Canada. Between Charkaoui and others, I think that we should choose others.

----

These security certificates were created naively to help people like Adil Charkaoui. It gave Canada a way to allow such people to stay in Canada rather than deport them, to a beheading.

What should Canada do with foreign criminals who come here as visitors and don't want to leave? Deport them to a beheading in their home country?

Child molesters and drug traffickers from Iran live in Canada but we don't deport them - because if we did, the Iranian regime would shoot them. So, we allow them to live in Canada. Under what conditions?

This decision will harm possibly good foreign people. In the future, the federal government will simply deport them, rather than give them a chance to stay in Canada - under a certificate.

The Left is so stupid sometimes. The Left understands feelings; the Right understands incentives.

This post has been edited by August1991: 24 September 2009 - 09:34 PM

[jdobbin]

August1991, on Sep 24 2009, 11:38 PM, said:

The Left is so stupid sometimes. The Left understands feelings; the Right understands incentives.

Try to get a grip. The right should be in support of one of the oldest principles of justice. It is Habeus Corpus. To not support it means you are letting your feelings sway you rather than evidence. And in this case, evidence is being withheld.

[wyly]

August1991, on Sep 24 2009, 10:38 PM, said:

----

These security certificates were created naively to help people like Adil Charkaoui. It gave Canada a way to allow such people to stay in Canada rather than deport them, to a beheading.

What should Canada do with foreign criminals who come here as visitors and don't want to leave? Deport them to a beheading in their home country?

Child molesters and drug traffickers from Iran live in Canada but we don't deport them - because if we did, the Iranian regime would shoot them. So, we allow them to live in Canada. Under what conditions?

This decision will harm possibly good foreign people. In the future, the federal government will simply deport them, rather than give them a chance to stay in Canada - under a certificate.

The Left is so stupid sometimes. The Left understands feelings; the Right understands incentives.

there is always a question of a fair trial for those you send back and sentences out of line for the crime(stoning for adultry)....then there are trumped up charges for political reasons how do you the charges are real or politically motivated?...

[wyly]

jdobbin, on Sep 24 2009, 10:54 PM, said:

Try to get a grip. The right should be in support of one of the oldest principles of justice. It is Habeus Corpus. To not support it means you are letting your feelings sway you rather than evidence. And in this case, evidence is being withheld.

yup, in the last 10-15 years the Canadian justice system despite all it's checks and balances has supplied us with a long list of falsely accused being released from long prison terms...do I have any faith in the Iranian justice system, nope...Zahra Kazemi, canadian juornalist charged with being a spy and murdered in prison...

[August1991]

jdobbin, on Sep 25 2009, 12:54 AM, said:

Try to get a grip. The right should be in support of one of the oldest principles of justice. It is Habeus Corpus.

There are six billion people in the world. Should Canadian taxpayers guarantee habeus corpus for all six billion?

If a foreign criminal manages to arrive in Canada, should we pay for her/his defence?

----

Adil Charkaoui is not a Canadian citizen, nor a permanent resident. Under normal circumstances, like many before him, he would be deported - put on the next plane out of Canada.

By our generosity, rather than deport him, we allowed Charkaoui to stay in Canada - but in prison.

With this Supreme Court decision, what happens next? Are we talking feelings or incentives?

[jdobbin]

August1991, on Sep 25 2009, 12:05 AM, said:

There are six billion people in the world. Should Canadian taxpayers guarantee habeus corpus for all six billion?

No, just anyone in Canada. Is that so hard to do?

Quote

If a foreign criminal manages to arrive in Canada, should we pay for her/his defence?

We don't allow criminals into Canada and if they do get in they can be deported for lying on their application.

Quote

Adil Charkaoui is not a Canadian citizen, nor a permanent resident. Under normal circumstances, like many before him, he would be deported - put on the next plane out of Canada.

By our generosity, rather than deport him, we allowed Charkaoui to stay in Canada - but in prison.

With this Supreme Court decision, what happens next? Are we talking feelings or incentives?

Habeus corpus is not generosity. It is a principle that protects all of us.

[August1991]

jdobbin, on Sep 25 2009, 01:15 AM, said:

No, just anyone in Canada. Is that so hard to do?

You get to Canada - and others will pay your lawyer.

What kind of incentive/justice is that? (Dobbin, I reckon that you live in Winnipeg - not Athens.)

jdobbin, on Sep 25 2009, 01:15 AM, said:

We don't allow criminals into Canada and if they do get in they can be deported for lying on their application.

Dobbin, how naive are you? The fact is that some immigrants arrive with criminal records and worse, some continue their criminal activity.

All things considered, I could live with this. New world, new page, etc.

But what do we do with people who are dishonest liars? Deport them? To countries that will torture them?

jdobbin, on Sep 25 2009, 01:15 AM, said:

Habeus corpus is not generosity. It is a principle that protects all of us.

All six billion of us?

Justice is not cheap - should Canadians pay for the justice of everyone in the world?

[eyeball]

August1991, on Sep 24 2009, 10:05 PM, said:

With this Supreme Court decision, what happens next? Are we talking feelings or incentives?

Princples.

[eyeball]

August1991, on Sep 24 2009, 10:26 PM, said:

You get to Canada - and others will pay your lawyer.

What kind of incentive/justice is that? (Dobbin, I reckon that you live in Winnipeg - not Athens.)

Dobbin, how naive are you? The fact is that some immigrants arrive with criminal records and worse, some continue their criminal activity.

All things considered, I could live with this. New world, new page, etc.

But what do we do with people who are dishonest liars? Deport them? To countries that will torture them?

All six billion of us?

Justice is not cheap - should Canadians pay for the justice of everyone in the world?

Everyone who makes it here.

[jdobbin]

August1991, on Sep 25 2009, 12:26 AM, said:

You get to Canada - and others will pay your lawyer.

What kind of incentive/justice is that? (Dobbin, I reckon that you live in Winnipeg - not Athens.)

I suppose if you have that little faith in justice that you should support the government acting without legal restraint at all.

Quote

Dobbin, how naive are you? The fact is that some immigrants arrive with criminal records and worse, some continue their criminal activity.

And you want to hold people while keeping evidence hidden or not presenting it? I don't understand you. Do you really want the government to act in secret? Are you that naive that you think the government should be able to do things without presenting them publicly?

If there is a case, present the facts. Is that so hard to do? Are you saying that facts are not needed? Are you saying evidence is not needed? Are you saying that the accused is not allowed to see evidence?


All things considered, I could live with this. New world, new page, etc.

But what do we do with people who are dishonest liars? Deport them? To countries that will torture them?

Quote

All six billion of us?

Justice is not cheap - should Canadians pay for the justice of everyone in the world?

Everyone in Canada.

I can't believe you are in support of arbitrary action on the part of the state. Even if your contention is that they should be only be used in an emergency, you have to have some indication as to when evidence will be presented.

I take it you supported the War Measures Act initiated by Trudeau. That was a suspension of Habeus Corpus.

[Wild Bill]

jdobbin, on Sep 25 2009, 02:02 AM, said:

I suppose if you have that little faith in justice that you should support the government acting without legal restraint at all.



And you want to hold people while keeping evidence hidden or not presenting it? I don't understand you. Do you really want the government to act in secret? Are you that naive that you think the government should be able to do things without presenting them publicly?

If there is a case, present the facts. Is that so hard to do? Are you saying that facts are not needed? Are you saying evidence is not needed? Are you saying that the accused is not allowed to see evidence?


All things considered, I could live with this. New world, new page, etc.

But what do we do with people who are dishonest liars? Deport them? To countries that will torture them?



Everyone in Canada.

I can't believe you are in support of arbitrary action on the part of the state. Even if your contention is that they should be only be used in an emergency, you have to have some indication as to when evidence will be presented.

I take it you supported the War Measures Act initiated by Trudeau. That was a suspension of Habeus Corpus.

Fascinating. You've just posted an elegant explanation of why terrorism is so difficult to fight!

One side breaks any and all rules. The other is hog-tied by them. One side does what it wants with impunity.

The other dies, but with principles intact!

You are entitled to your idealism. I'm more concerned with protecting my family. I don't see your view as a positive means to achieve that.

Just another reason why I can never vote for the Left - simple fear for survival!

[waldo]

Wild Bill, on Sep 25 2009, 05:10 AM, said:

One side breaks any and all rules. The other is hog-tied by them. One side does what it wants with impunity.

The other dies, but with principles intact!

Disclosing evidence! What an absolute astounding "hog-tying" concept - if there's proof - show it!

[jdobbin]

Wild Bill, on Sep 25 2009, 08:10 AM, said:

Just another reason why I can never vote for the Left - simple fear for survival!

The reason I can't vote for the right is because they are the ones who will hoist a rope over a branch and hang someone because ultimately, they don't believe in things like evidence, trials, juries and judges.

The problem with this is that lynch mobs are often wrong.

[Keepitsimple]

jdobbin, on Sep 25 2009, 10:33 AM, said:

The reason I can't vote for the right is because they are the ones who will hoist a rope over a branch and hang someone because ultimately, they don't believe in things like evidence, trials, juries and judges.

The problem with this is that lynch mobs are often wrong.

All we ever wanted to do was deport the guy. He's not a Canadian citizen. Why didn't he want to go back to Morocco? Why do we not have the right to request someone to leave? It's not like we boot people out left and right - we are likely the most generous country in the world in welcoming newcomers.