The sad case of Conrad Black

[Max Webster]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris
Errr... he "renounced" it because there was the threat of procedures. Had he been left alone by Chretien's personal vendetta, this would be a non-issue right now.

What procedures?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
How was he harassed, BTW?

Some sort of note of protest was probably passed to the British government or Her Majesty the Queen which objected to the creation of a Canadian peer.

[Max Webster]

Is becoming a knight some kind of ego/flash/pomp and cermony crap for people of wealth, fame and power.

So the idiots liberals siad no you cant become a knight and stay a canadian.

Black siad up yours and siad i dont want to be canadian

He became an english citizen and a knight.

If you want to give the middle finger to liberals, fine. But dont renounce your canadian citizenship over becoming a stupid knight.

[KrazyHorse]

Even funnier, the Canadian government had no power to do anything other than protest. They would have found it impossible to actually strip him of his citizenship, had the British government gone through with it.

He's just a ****wit who decided to thumb his nose at Canada in general.

**** him.

[Imran Siddiqui]

KH is totally correct here, btw. There is nothing in the UN Charter that forces Canada to take Black back. Black's nationality is of the United Kingdom and thus is not stateless. There is no, absolutely none, rule that says the country of your birth has to take you back.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Some sort of note of protest was probably passed to the British government or Her Majesty the Queen which objected to the creation of a Canadian peer.

If that's harassment, I've got a long list of people to sue.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


You're already wrong, as I've demonstrated. Nobody recognizes the right to return to the land of your birth as a fundamental human right. Otherwise we would be forced to grant Canadian citizenship to anybody born in Canada. WHICH WE DON'T.

There are conventions on citizenship, and parents travelling are covered. Usually you get the citizenship of your parents as if you were born where they come from.

For the rest, you are wrong I believe, but it will have to wait for a time for me to do more digging.

And could you please get me some sort of reference which shows that the commission of a crime by a naturalised Canadian citizen would be accepted as a legitimate reason to strip him of his Canadian citizenship?

Perhaps an oops. I could have sworn I've read of it in criminal cases, but all I've found so far involves Nazi war criminals and trumped up charges of lying in applying for citizenship (one had his citizenship stripped, but then reinstated when it was demonstrated he was never asked about it, so he hadn't lied; another was deported to Holland where he'd been convicted of collaboration).

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Last Conformist

If that's harassment, I've got a long list of people to sue.

No ****.

[joncha]

Poor Conrad. He's so oppressed.

[Max Webster]

The only reason he wants his Canadian citizenship back is because he rather spend his possible jail time in some cushy canadian jail.

I say no. Send him to a texas jail. Spread those cheeks conrad.

[KrazyHorse]

If a person is born with citizenship in country A, moves to country B, takes citizenship in country B, renounces citizenship in country A due to some legal requirement of either country A or B, then is stripped of citizenship in country B because it's revealed that he lied in his application, then in my opinion country A must take him back because his renouncement was based on a false assumption of his legal situation (i.e. that he had legitimate citizenship in country B). Stripping him of citizenship in country B is simply a case of correcting a legal error. He never had citizenship in country B to begin with, thus he couldn't repudiate his citizenship in country A.

Conrad Black is a bona fide citizen of Britain. As such, he was free to repudiate his Canadian citizenship. He cannot then repudiate his British citizenship (since this would leave him stateless) without having first found himself some other country which grants him citizenship.

At no point in all this can Canada be forced to take him back.

[Max Webster]

If he is an English citizen why doesn't try to apply to spend his term in an English Jail.

Or they as harsh as US jails and not as wimpy as Canadian jails?

[KrazyHorse]

I don't know about that. It could be that the US and Britain don't have the same sort of bilateral agreement as that between the US and Canada whereby citizens can apply to serve jail time in their home country's prisons.

[KrazyHorse]

I wonder how many US citizens actually apply to spend jail time in a US prison if the option to stay in a Canadian prison is open to them...

[Max Webster]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
I wonder how many US citizens actually apply to spend jail time in a US prison if the option to stay in a Canadian prison is open to them...

That would be an interesting stat to find out. I don't imagine too many.

We give one of our biggest killers Bernardo a nice little cozy cell with TV and other luxurious what nots.

He lives better than many homeless on the streets of Toronto.