[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Jacob]

True to a point, but CC is particularly hard to get a read on.  In comparison your politics are seem much more straight-forward.

My take on CC's ideology:

- He's suspicious of socialists, less so on ideological grounds (not that he is keen on socialism though) and more so from a suspicion that they're gormless.
- He's mindful of his own interests, but is perfectly willing to put it second for the good of the polity.
- He places a high priority on good stewardship of the economy.
- He also places a high priority on what I'd call the "Canadian ideal of tolerance" (though others would disagree with that term) - let people do what they want and be whom they want to be as long as they harm no one and generally conform to the charter of rights and freedoms. So, weed smoking or wearing a niqab or speaking French - it's all good.
- Ultimately, however, he's more concerned about pragmatic outcomes when dealing with any given issue (hence the support for managed injection sites for heroin users and support for a rational land-claims settlement process etc).
- He also places a high deal of value on personal and institutional integrity, good processes, and the rule of law.

Seems pretty coherent to me... assuming, of course, I got the correct read

[Jacob]

Something someone recently brought up to me - given Israel's right of return Canadian Jews can now have their citizenship revoked if they're convicted of terrorism even if they have no attachment whatsoever to Israel and their families have lived in Canada for generations.

[Barrister]

Something someone recently brought up to me - given Israel's right of return Canadian Jews can now have their citizenship revoked if they're convicted of terrorism even if they have no attachment whatsoever to Israel and their families have lived in Canada for generations.

That doesn't sound right to me.  I think the law specifies having dual citizenship, not merely being eligible for dual citizenship.

[crazy canuck]

True to a point, but CC is particularly hard to get a read on.  In comparison your politics are seem much more straight-forward.

My take on CC's ideology:

- He's suspicious of socialists, less so on ideological grounds (not that he is keen on socialism though) and more so from a suspicion that they're gormless.
- He's mindful of his own interests, but is perfectly willing to put it second for the good of the polity.
- He places a high priority on good stewardship of the economy.
- He also places a high priority on what I'd call the "Canadian ideal of tolerance" (though others would disagree with that term) - let people do what they want and be whom they want to be as long as they harm no one and generally conform to the charter of rights and freedoms. So, weed smoking or wearing a niqab or speaking French - it's all good.
- Ultimately, however, he's more concerned about pragmatic outcomes when dealing with any given issue (hence the support for managed injection sites for heroin users and support for a rational land-claims settlement process etc).
- He also places a high deal of value on personal and institutional integrity, good processes, and the rule of law.

Seems pretty coherent to me... assuming, of course, I got the correct read

After discussing politics for the last decade or more here, I suppose it should be no surprise that we would have a good sense of eachother's views.   

[crazy canuck]

Something someone recently brought up to me - given Israel's right of return Canadian Jews can now have their citizenship revoked if they're convicted of terrorism even if they have no attachment whatsoever to Israel and their families have lived in Canada for generations.

That doesn't sound right to me.  I think the law specifies having dual citizenship, not merely being eligible for dual citizenship.

Unfortunately you are mistaken.

In fact in the latest case of citizenship revocation there is less of a connection then the Jewish right of return.

According to Ottawa's strange logic, that means Saad's parents could be considered to have been Pakistani at the time of his birth (even though they weren't) and that therefore their son is a citizen of Pakistan.


In documents filed with federal court, Gaya says he is not a Pakistani citizen and has never applied for citizenship from that country.


But that doesn't matter. Under its new law, the Conservative government does not have to prove Gaya is the citizen of another country. He has to prove to Immigration Minister Chris Alexander that he is not.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/10/03/conservatives-move-to-revoke-citizenship-from-home-grown-canadian-walkom.html

[Valmy]

Something someone recently brought up to me - given Israel's right of return Canadian Jews can now have their citizenship revoked if they're convicted of terrorism even if they have no attachment whatsoever to Israel and their families have lived in Canada for generations.

Man I never thought I could feel so bad for a mass murderer.

[crazy canuck]

Something someone recently brought up to me - given Israel's right of return Canadian Jews can now have their citizenship revoked if they're convicted of terrorism even if they have no attachment whatsoever to Israel and their families have lived in Canada for generations.

Man I never thought I could feel so bad for a mass murderer.

I don't think it is a question of feelings.  I think he should be punished to the full extent of our criminal law, within Canada.  He is after all a Canadian citizen.  He was born here and he was never a citizen of any other country.  This is exactly the sort of cynical mean spirited politics I object to.

[Valmy]

I don't think it is a question of feelings.  I think he should be punished to the full extent of our criminal law, within Canada.  He is after all a Canadian citizen.  He was born here and he was never a citizen of any other country.  This is exactly the sort of cynical mean spirited politics I object to.

It just feels so pointless. Canadians being convicted of terrorism is such a rare thing, I mean there could not be more than a dozen cases in all history. And I guess your answer is cynical pandering.

[Jacob]

Something someone recently brought up to me - given Israel's right of return Canadian Jews can now have their citizenship revoked if they're convicted of terrorism even if they have no attachment whatsoever to Israel and their families have lived in Canada for generations.

Man I never thought I could feel so bad for a mass murderer.

What makes you so confident that terrorism charges will only ever be brought against mass murderers?

This is from earlier this year: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/anti-petroleum-movement-a-growing-security-threat-to-canada-rcmp-say/article23019252/

The RCMP has labelled the "anti-petroleum" movement as a growing and violent threat to Canada's security, raising fears among environmentalists that they face increased surveillance, and possibly worse, under the Harper government's new terrorism legislation.

In highly charged language that reflects the government's hostility toward environmental activists, an RCMP intelligence assessment warns that foreign-funded groups are bent on blocking oil sands expansion and pipeline construction, and that the extremists in the movement are willing to resort to violence.

"There is a growing, highly organized and well-financed anti-Canada petroleum movement that consists of peaceful activists, militants and violent extremists who are opposed to society's reliance on fossil fuels," concludes the report which is stamped "protected/Canadian eyes only" and is dated Jan. 24, 2014. The report was obtained by Greenpeace.

"If violent environmental extremists engage in unlawful activity, it jeopardizes the health and safety of its participants, the general public and the natural environment."

The government has tabled Bill C-51, which provides greater power to the security agencies to collect information on and disrupt the activities of suspected terrorist groups. While Prime Minister Stephen Harper has identified the threat as violent extremists motivated by radical Islamic views, the legislation would also expand the ability of government agencies to infiltrate environmental groups on the suspicion that they are promoting civil disobedience or other criminal acts to oppose resource projects.

The legislation identifies "activity that undermines the security of Canada" as anything that interferes with the economic or financial stability of Canada or with the country's critical infrastructure, though it excludes lawful protest or dissent. And it allows the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service to take measures to reduce what it perceives to be threats to the security of Canada.

The British Columbia Civil Liberties Association has already launched challenges to the RCMP complaints commission and the Security Intelligence Review Committee – which oversees the Canadian Security Intelligence Service – over alleged surveillance of groups opposed to the construction of the proposed Northern Gateway pipeline in B.C.

"These kind of cases involving environmental groups – or anti-petroleum groups as the RCMP likes to frame them – are really the sharp end of the stick in terms of Bill C-51," said Paul Champ, a civil liberties lawyer who is handling the BCCLA complaints. "With respect to Bill C-51, I and other groups have real concerns it is going to target not just terrorists who are involved in criminal activity, but people who are protesting against different Canadian government policies."

[crazy canuck]

And I guess your answer is cynical pandering.

Exactly.  There was no need for this law. Worse still there was no need for the exercise of this law during the election.  The ironic part is that I, and probably most Canadians had forgotten it was even on the books.  The Conservatives choose to do this during the election for political gain.  It was a decision that could have been made after the election.

As GF reminds me, we will wait to see whether the politics of cynicism will win out.

[Fireblade]

So.. who's going to win?

[Barrister]

So.. who's going to win?

Polls point to a narrow Liberal win.

[Valmy]

So.. who's going to win?

[Fireblade]

So.. who's going to win?

Polls point to a narrow Liberal win.

Fucking libtards bringing their goddamn liberalism to Canada. 

So there's no chance for the NDP? What happened to them? I thought they were leading in the polls a few weeks ago.

[crazy canuck]

So.. who's going to win?

Polls point to a narrow Liberal win.

Fucking libtards bringing their goddamn liberalism to Canada. 

So there's no chance for the NDP? What happened to them? I thought they were leading in the polls a few weeks ago.

That is going to be a question debated within the NDP for a long time.