Author Topic Options
Offline

Newbie

Profile
Posts: 1
PostPosted: Fri Feb 23, 2007 10:21 am
 


<strong>Written By:</strong> jensonj
<strong>Date:</strong> 2007-02-23 09:21:39
<a href="/article/82139667-top-court-rules-against-security-certificates">Article Link</a>

Critics have long denounced the certificates, which can lead to deportation of non-citizens on the basis of secret intelligence presented to a Federal Court judge at closed-door hearings.

Those who fight the allegations can spend years in jail while the case works its way through the legal system. In the end, they can sometimes face removal to countries with a track record of torture.

The system was challenged on constitutional grounds by three men from Morocco, Syria and Algeria — all alleged by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service to have ties to al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. All deny any such ties.

<a href="http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/02/23/security-certificate.html">http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/02/23/security-certificate.html</a>


Offline

Junior Member

Profile
Posts: 52
PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 1:27 am
 


Well If Harper had a majority, I am sure he would invoke the "Notwithstanding" clause.

I am glad the court ruled this way but it should of been immediate not in one year.


Offline

Forum Junkie

Profile
Posts: 643
PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 8:36 am
 


no1import,

"I am glad the court ruled this way but it should of been immediate not in one year."

I agree. Trash this law and IF another one is to be written take as long as it needs to get it right.

Tiptoeing to do the right thing.

---
"And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music." Friedrich Nietzsche


Offline

Forum Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1443
PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 8:54 am
 


The headline should have been that the supreme court refuses to require enforcement of the law. The supreme court has shown that it is totally corrupt, the vote was 9 to zero. They gave the government one year to change the law that it is breaking and one year to continue breaking the law that they have determined is being broken.


Offline

Newbie

Profile
Posts: 1
PostPosted: Sat Feb 24, 2007 8:58 am
 


What does this say about our judicial system that it had to be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada to determine what we non knowledgeable Canadians new with out a law degree.

---
Perception is two thirds of what we perceive reality to be.

Difficult decisions are a privilege of rank.


Offline

Forum Super Elite

Profile
Posts: 2044
PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:14 pm
 


"They gave the government one year to change the law that it is breaking and one year to continue breaking the law that they have determined is being broken."

Effectively this is an admission that government gang members of are above the law, since no one who was resposible for breaking the law is going to jail, yet had anyone else done this, they would be serving hard time for it. We're talking about very serious crimes here - kidnapping is a major criminal offense.


Offline

Forum Super Elite

Profile
Posts: 2044
PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:25 pm
 


"What does this say about our judicial system that it had to be appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada to determine what we non knowledgeable Canadians new with out a law degree."

Keep in mind that the Charter says in clause 1 that we have no rights at all unless the supreme court says so. In fact, there's at least 2 other ways for the Charter to be rendered completely meanigless. The Charter is in fact an elaborate hoax considering how it was written. The claim that we have "guaranteed rights and freedoms" is an all out lie and its true purpose is to fool us into agreeing with a mechanism whereby our rights and freedoms may be *taken away* rather than gauranteed.

Now, if you take away the 3 methods for effectively rendering the Charter as a meanignless bit of paper, the Charter suddenly becomes a reasonably good document that would affirm the rights that we should have, and anyone who could read would have been able to tell you that the government was breaking the law in this case.

This who did break the law should be tossed in prison for at least 25 years to life, yet all of those responsible are walking free AND the people who are illegally in prison are still in prison!


Offline

Forum Super Elite

Profile
Posts: 2044
PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:36 pm
 


One more thing about this,

Notice that members of the government get to pass illegal laws at will no matter how obviously illegal their laws may be, and government officials get to enforce their illegal laws until the Supreme court finally decides that an illegal law is indeed illegal. This nonsense gives those in the government a free hand for at least 10 years to do as they please, and when found to be breaking the law, there's absolutely no consequences for their illegal actions. If someone who was wronged sues "the government" they sue ONLY the tax payer who had nothing at all to do with the crimes, while letting the perps get away with it completely.


Offline

CKA Elite

Profile
Posts: 3540
PostPosted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 3:58 pm
 


Thrown in prison...<br />
Now there's a flawed concept if there ever was one.<br />
One of the biggest scams of out time is the prison system with its high recidivism* rates supported from tax revenues. <br />
isolate from society those who go against society to be sure, but make the criminals pay for their own keep via commercial endevours.<br />
<br />
rehabilitation efforts have been proven by the recidivism rates to not be efficient. <br />
*<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism</a><br />
<p>---<br> [juris ignorantia est cum jus nostrum ignoramus]<br />
<br />
it is ignorance of the law when we do not know our own rights" <br />
<br />
lex ferenda



"When I tell the truth, it is not for the sake of convincing those who do not know it, but for the sake of defending those that do."

William Blake

"To acquire knowledge, one must study;
but to acquire wisdom, one must observe."


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests




All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Vive Le Canada.ca. Powered by © phpBB.