Law prof claims Tory candidate told him to renounce his heritage over citizenship law

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
58,058
8,327
113
Washington DC
Ubaka Ogbogu recently greeted Edmonton Centre Conservative candidate James Cumming on his doorstep, and was eager to talk about the Strengthening Canadian Citizenship Act, or Bill C-24.

I understand that, to a law professor, C-24 is real important, but I think most folks'd be more concerned about Conservative candidate James cumming on his doorstep.

That's sick.
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
So in other words, a Conservative Government could possibly try to pass legislation prohibiting dual citizenship.
 

Corduroy

Senate Member
Feb 9, 2011
6,670
2
36
Vancouver, BC
So in other words, a Conservative Government could possibly try to pass legislation prohibiting dual citizenship.

Then they wouldn't be able to revoke the citizenship of naturalized citizens. The Conservative government would love the power revoke anyone's citizenship but you can't legally make a person stateless. Keeping dual citizenship allows them to use their second-class citizen law.
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
So in other words, a Conservative Government could possibly try to pass legislation prohibiting dual citizenship.


So, in other words, the title of the OP and article are bullshyte.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
He said, she said... Yawn.

Besides, you want to move to Canada, be Canadian. Don't want to be Canadian, get the fukk out.

I'd like to be Canadian but I can't understand what the hell it is anymore.

Then they wouldn't be able to revoke the citizenship of naturalized citizens. The Conservative government would love the power revoke anyone's citizenship but you can't legally make a person stateless. Keeping dual citizenship allows them to use their second-class citizen law.

I was thinking about that while I read the article, the revokation of a natural born Canadian I mean. Would that be similar to exile? Can a Canadian be exiled I wonder?
 

gerryh

Time Out
Nov 21, 2004
25,756
295
83
I just used the same title as the CBC. So I guess the CBC is just a bullshyte broadcaster.


I guess so, and I guess you are one that further disseminates that bullshyte. Which is not unusual.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
So in other words, a Conservative Government could possibly try to pass legislation prohibiting dual citizenship.

As it should be. You want to live in Canada be a Canadian.

I'd like to be Canadian but I can't understand what the hell it is anymore.



I was thinking about that while I read the article, the revokation of a natural born Canadian I mean. Would that be similar to exile? Can a Canadian be exiled I wonder?

Ever hear of Ontario? You could be forced to live there.
 

Corduroy

Senate Member
Feb 9, 2011
6,670
2
36
Vancouver, BC
I'd like to be Canadian but I can't understand what the hell it is anymore.



I was thinking about that while I read the article, the revokation of a natural born Canadian I mean. Would that be similar to exile? Can a Canadian be exiled I wonder?

Exile to where? If you have dual citizenship, they can revoke your Canadian citizenship and send you to the country of your other citizenship. If you only have Canadian citizenship where can they send you? Who'd take you? Maybe Harper can negotiate a lucrative trade deal with some third world kleptocracy.

But when it comes to dual citizens, it's the opposite of the argument for Guantanamo Bay. The Americans say that even though they have no evidence to convict many of their detainees, they can't release them because they'd just go back to their home countries and join terrorist groups. In Canada we send them back because we have evidence, and in fact convictions, of terrorism. It doesn't make sense.

I think the only explanation is that it's not so much about fighting terrorism as it's their visceral disdain for basic legal rights. Both the US and Canada's actions contradict each other logically if you think the goal is fighting terrorism, but make perfect sense when you realize they just want to arbitrarily make legal decisions without having to deal with the messy business of the rule of law. They want themselves at the top of the power pyramid not rights.