The sad case of Conrad Black

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Max Webster


I agree with the pinheads screwing with his rights part, but and a BIG BUT he gave up his citizenship to become an British citizen. No big deal. If thats your wish, then fine.

What gets under my skin, is now that faces possible jail time he wants to be a Canadian citizen again.

I have no sympathy for him whatsoever.

Is Conrad some kind of hero in Alberta. Because he took on Ottawa and told the liberals to eff off.

No. He is an unpopular person who the principle has to apply to if it is to be hoped to be available for more deserving cases.

The fact that he is unpopular makes it all the more important how we treat him.

[Max Webster]

Why is it important how we treat him in particular?

[notyoueither]

Are we ruled by mobs, or laws and principles?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Are we ruled by mobs, or laws and principles?

Black's papers appear to preach to the first and he routinely seems to ignore the second and have none of the third.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by notyoueither

Yelling isn't going to make points. Try rereading my postion. Here, I'll help...

I don't give a fig what the consequences of acknowledging a person's birthright are. It is a human right, IMO.

And you repeatedly used the "stateless" argument to justify the notion that citizenship of the nation of your birth is a human right.

I don't want pin heads in the government and beaureacracy being able to screw with his right (IMO) to his citizenship.

What you apparently fail to comprehend is that "citizenship" is an invention of government. It is theirs to confer as they wish.

Now nations that have come together with International law, you can choose to rely on this. Which Imran, a lawyer don't you know, has refuted.

If you want a good example why, try reading about the Canadians who were denied their citizenship between 1949 and 1977 because the governments first forgot about them and then refused to fix the problem for people born before 1977. It was the case of children born in Canada to Canadian parents who lost their Canadian citizenship without their consent when their parents emigrated to other countries.

Strawman. This is bureacracy, it was shameless, but it was eventually fixed, only with the help of the media embarassing the bureacrats.

You dodged my question about renouncing citizenship.

Citizenship should be something of value. It is also a 2-way street. You have rights, you have responsibilities.

It is not something you should be allowed to change like a pair of socks.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking

What you apparently fail to comprehend is that "citizenship" is an invention of government. It is theirs to confer as they wish.

Now nations that have come together with International law, you can choose to rely on this. Which Imran, a lawyer don't you know, has refuted.

What you apparently fail to comprehend, is that you and I differ on certain issues to do with citizenship. Is that OK with you, or do we want to geta good spitting match going?

I must admit though, that your view of government 'owning' citizenship and doling it out to us plebes as they see fit is quite an interesting view, for a fascist.

Strawman. This is bureacracy, it was shameless, but it was eventually fixed, only with the help of the media embarassing the bureacrats.

It's an example of why citizenship should not be treated like drivers' licences. Citizenship is a right, not a priviledge.

You dodged my question about renouncing citizenship.

Citizenship should be something of value. It is also a 2-way street. You have rights, you have responsibilities.

It is not something you should be allowed to change like a pair of socks.

No, I didn't. I said that someone should be able to claim their birthright, and I don't care if that is 'too easy'.

People should be the ones with rights and options, not states. I'm not saying that immigration to a new country should be a snap. I am saying that immigrating to the nation of your birth should be.

[Imran Siddiqui]

your view of government 'owning' citizenship and doling it out to us plebes as they see fit is quite an interesting view, for a fascist

If the truth is considered "fascist" to you.

Citizenship is a right, not a priviledge.

Rights are owned by government as well, to be doled out to its residents and/or citizens.

You can commence calling me a fascist now .

I am saying that immigrating to the nation of your birth should be.

Why? Why does your nation of birth have any specialness whatsoever?

[notyoueither]

Because citizenship is a human right, and it's not a big leap from there to thinking of citizenship as a birthright.

Go ahead and emigrate if you wish, and can find someone to take you. But a person should always be assured of one place that they have a right to go to. Nation of birth is the easiest solution to a lot of problems.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Because citizenship is a human right, and it's not a big leap from there to thinking of citizenship as a birthright.

And if you've given up your citizenship, then you've given up any such 'birthright'. What, now you want it to be an inalienable right as well?!

Nation of birth is the easiest solution to a lot of problems.

Not when the person has rejected that country of birth and only wants back in for a softer punishment (for example).

Send him back to the country he is a citizen of. If there is none, go to the last country he had citizenship in. I see that to be as good as any measure.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Because citizenship is a human right, and it's not a big leap from there to thinking of citizenship as a birthright.

And if you've given up your citizenship, then you've given up any such 'birthright'. What, now you want it to be an inalienable right as well?!

Yes.

Nation of birth is the easiest solution to a lot of problems.

Not when the person has rejected that country of birth and only wants back in for a softer punishment (for example).

Send him back to the country he is a citizen of. If there is none, go to the last country he had citizenship in. I see that to be as good as any measure.

This is the worst possible case to use to argue for my POV. That is why I think it should be argued.

Going back to the OP, what I took offence to was the attitude of the bureacracy and legal system that Black would have to go through the same process as any other immigrant. Given some of the **** pulled on people by the GoC wrt citizenship in the past, I find the idea offensive. I would prefer that the GoC accept that we recognise Canadian citizenship as a birthright and put an end to the tinkering by the pols and the manipulating by the bureaucrats.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I would prefer that the GoC accept that we recognise Canadian citizenship as a birthright and put an end to the tinkering by the pols and the manipulating by the bureaucrats.

Obviously they've disagreed and so have most of the countries out there. Rather than feel injustice has been done, I feel justice has been very nicely given out.

To Hell with Black and his schemes.

[KrazyHorse]

We didn't strip him of citizenship. He stripped himself of citizenship. He's made in his bed. Now he'll lie in it.

Giving up my Canadian citizenship is not something I will ever do. Not for any reason I can imagine. Certainly not so I can take on some ridiculous British title. **** him.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


We didn't strip him of citizenship. He stripped himself of citizenship. He's made in his bed. Now he'll lie in it.

Giving up my Canadian citizenship is not something I will ever do. Not for any reason I can imagine. Certainly not so I can take on some ridiculous British title. **** him.

Hmm, the Earl of Equus Dementus??

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by notyoueither

Imran says: And if you've given up your citizenship, then you've given up any such 'birthright'. What, now you want it to be an inalienable right as well?!

nye replies:

Yes.

You want to deny Black the right of giving up his citizenship ?

Egad sir, you Fascist !

[SpencerH]

Without knowing the details, it looks like Chretien was just being a jealous *****. Why should Black have been blocked from recieving a peerage? Canadians can be knighted, why cant they be peers?

As for his Canadian citizenship, he renounced it. He can apply to have it reinstated and if there are no impediments it'll happen. AFAIK they cant deny him because of quotas etc since he was born in Montreal but they can make him wait while the court cases are ongoing.