• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Canadian General Election (OT) - #elxn42: October 19, 2015

Status
Not open for further replies.

Alavard

Member
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/saad-gaya-citizenship-revocation-terrorism-1.3253043

So... we've gone from revoking the citizenship of an immigrant for a terror offense to revoking the citizenship of someone born in Canada for a terror offense in less than a week.

What's next? Well:

"The Conservative leader did not shut the door to the idea of revoking the citizenship of dual nationals who commit other types of crime.

"We can look at options in the future," Harper said as he went on to defend the new provisions. "



This is insanity.
 

jstripes

Banned
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/saad-gaya-citizenship-revocation-terrorism-1.3253043

So... we've gone from revoking the citizenship of an immigrant for a terror offense to revoking the citizenship of someone born in Canada for a terror offense in less than a week.

What's next? Well:

"The Conservative leader did not shut the door to the idea of revoking the citizenship of dual nationals who commit other types of crime.

"We can look at options in the future," Harper said as he went on to defend the new provisions. "



This is insanity.
That Aussie twit they brought in to run their campaign really knows which divisive buttons to push, doesn't he?

Can we temporarily suspend relations with Australia over this?
 

lupinko

Member
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/saad-gaya-citizenship-revocation-terrorism-1.3253043

So... we've gone from revoking the citizenship of an immigrant for a terror offense to revoking the citizenship of someone born in Canada for a terror offense in less than a week.

What's next? Well:

"The Conservative leader did not shut the door to the idea of revoking the citizenship of dual nationals who commit other types of crime.

"We can look at options in the future," Harper said as he went on to defend the new provisions. "



This is insanity.

C-24 everybody!

By the way, the term terrorist also extends to activists who question or protest Harper's environmental policies. Basically with C-51 and C-24, if you hold dual citizenship or can get another citizenship by way of parent regardless if you were born in Canada, Harper can revoke your citizenship.

So don't think it's just being used right now to target people from the Middle East or the Indian subcontinent.
 

Razorskin

----- ------
A lot of them are affiliated with this church:

CentreBell.jpg

1/2 of that picture is soon to be condos.
 

mo60

Member
See tons of NDP signs and Liberal signs here. Hell, there is an NDP sign on my front lawn. But maybe because it is a Conservative riding those parties put a bit more effort.


Very doubtful it would be a majority. Conservative minority seems likely to me.

Yep. The Liberals and the NDP are both strong enough to keep the conservatives at a minority this time.I don't either party will collapse to much anymore to result in a conservative majority again.
 
C-24 everybody!

By the way, the term terrorist also extends to activists who question or protest Harper's environmental policies. Basically with C-51 and C-24, if you hold dual citizenship or can get another citizenship by way of parent regardless if you were born in Canada, Harper can revoke your citizenship.

So don't think it's just being used right now to target people from the Middle East or the Indian subcontinent.

It is pretty scary, and the law is completely fucked... sure lets export all of our criminals to another country, that's totally good for diplomatic relations. I'm sure those other countries will accept them with opened arms and I'm completely sure that wont come to bite us in the ass later down the line.

I'm sure if somebody wanted, they could hit me under C-24 for dual citizenship even if I don't hold one myself. My Grandmother is from the states and holds Dual Citizenship with Canada, my Dad got his through her way before I was born and despite my father never having lived in the states (which makes me ineligible for American Citizenship) I'm sure if someone wanted they could hit me on the ground that I could possibly, potentially get another citizenship through my father.
 

lupinko

Member
It is pretty scary, and the law is completely fucked... sure lets export all of our criminals to another country, that's totally good for diplomatic relations. I'm sure those other countries will accept them with opened arms and I'm completely sure that wont come to bite us in the ass later down the line.

I'm sure if somebody wanted, they could hit me under C-24 for dual citizenship even if I don't hold one myself. My Grandmother is from the states and holds Dual Citizenship with Canada, my Dad got his through her way before I was born and despite my father never having lived in the states (which makes me ineligible for American Citizenship) I'm sure if someone wanted they could hit me on the ground that I could possibly, potentially get another citizenship through my father.


Yeah that's the thing, in the example quoted, the Conservatives are claiming that guy's parents went back to get Pakistani citizenship (Pakistan allows dual citizenship with some countries iirc), but while his parents went for it, he didn't. And while I would have to check how Pakistan works, there are many countries that are similar to Pakistan that former nationals can reclaim their citizenship but if they were not nationals at the time of their children's birth, then their citizenship would not transfer over, and there is no retroactivity.

Again, I would need to see how Pakistan does it, but if they follow the same standards as other countries like the Philippines, then Harper and friends are just making up their own bullshit interpretation of another country's laws.

And yeah, if you are deemed a threat to Canada's economic interests, you are a terrorist too! That's also in C-51, so while C-51 in tandem with C-24 is only doing the racist bit, with Harper's comments he is directing Canada to a facist authoritarian police state.
 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/saad-gaya-citizenship-revocation-terrorism-1.3253043

So... we've gone from revoking the citizenship of an immigrant for a terror offense to revoking the citizenship of someone born in Canada for a terror offense in less than a week.

What's next? Well:

"The Conservative leader did not shut the door to the idea of revoking the citizenship of dual nationals who commit other types of crime.

"We can look at options in the future," Harper said as he went on to defend the new provisions. "



This is insanity.

what next is that Harper is going to paint Trudeau and Mulcair is terrorist lovers.
 

lupinko

Member
LOL. Quebec has the biggest proportion of atheists in Canada

yeah you have a some that are still Catholic religiously or culturally but compared to Ontario or Alberta? Alberta has a huge amount of protestants, evangelicals. Ontario has tons of minorities who are more religious

Ontario is the Province where there is a huge pushback against sex-ed in schools due to religious beliefs, not Quebec

Don't forget that under the constitution, Ontario has public Catholic school. It's the only place in the world that allows that. I recall reading that Alberta has something similar but not at the same level for Protestant schools.
 

Divvy

Canadians burned my passport
Don't forget that under the constitution, Ontario has public Catholic school. It's the only place in the world that allows that. I recall reading that Alberta has something similar but not at the same level for Protestant schools.

While I would like for them to not exist, they are barely religious. None of my friends that went to those schools even took religion classes, and most students were certainly not Catholic.
 

lupinko

Member
While I would like for them to not exist, they are barely religious. None of my friends that went to those schools even took religion classes, and most students were certainly not Catholic.

I know, I used to go to Catholic public school in Ontario and some of my classmates weren't even Catholic.

Even though I am Catholic myself, the Ontario Catholic Public School system is basically a general public school, from what I can compare when I did the rest of public school in secular BC.

Although, I did read that a few years back, uniforms were now mandatory instead of optional for Ontario Public Catholic schools.
 

Boogie

Member
C-24 everybody!

By the way, the term terrorist also extends to activists who question or protest Harper's environmental policies. Basically with C-51 and C-24, if you hold dual citizenship or can get another citizenship by way of parent regardless if you were born in Canada, Harper can revoke your citizenship.

So don't think it's just being used right now to target people from the Middle East or the Indian subcontinent.

No it doesn't.
 

lupinko

Member
Okay, so Australia unfortunately has a similar law to C-24 and they actually had a similiar incident to the recent ones in Canada.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34423984

A 15-year-old British boy who plotted to behead police officers at an Anzac Day parade in Australia has been sentenced to life.

The Blackburn teen, who the judge ruled will remain anonymous due to his age, will serve at least five years in custody for inciting terrorism.

He sent thousands of online messages to an alleged Australian jihadist, and was planning "a massacre", the court heard.

He is believed to be the youngest Briton guilty of a terror offence.

The plot to murder a number of police officers at the parade in Melbourne earlier this year would "in all probability" have succeeded had British police not cracked the boy's phone and alerted Australian police, the court had heard.

Deported? Nope. Instead, life in prison, which is the correct answer.

Sure, this is sorta racist already because you can use the "he's white card" and the ones in Canada are brown. But unlike Australia, Harper has already gone on record to using C-24 (in tandem with C-51) to its fullest potential. So right now it's discriminatory towards race and religion, but soon he'll do expand it to environmentalists and anyone else that opposes him.

Remember under C-51, you are a terrorist if Ottawa thinks you are, which is pretty much the being a threat to Canada's economic interests and policies. Dual-citizen or have the path to it, even if you don't actually have a path to it? No problem, if Harper and friends just think it says what they think it means, they will deport your ass.

Harper is not even trying to imitate Bush Jr. or Putin, this is already Hitler in the making folks.

Don't under estimate this slippery slope.
 
I just thought today, how awesome it would be if Mulcair and Trudeau decided to put on a black mask during the inevitable niqab portion of the French debate.

A little bit of humorous theatrics could go a long way.
 

Boogie

Member
Okay, so Australia unfortunately has a similar law to C-24 and they actually had a similiar incident to the recent ones in Canada.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34423984



Deported? Nope. Instead, life in prison, which is the correct answer.

Sure, this is sorta racist already because you can use the "he's white card" and the ones in Canada are brown. But unlike Australia, Harper has already gone on record to using C-24 (in tandem with C-51) to its fullest potential. So right now it's discriminatory towards race and religion, but soon he'll do expand it to environmentalists and anyone else that opposes him.

Remember under C-51, you are a terrorist if Ottawa thinks you are, which is pretty much the being a threat to Canada's economic interests and policies. Dual-citizen or have the path to it, even if you don't actually have a path to it? No problem, if Harper and friends just think it says what they think it means, they will deport your ass.

Harper is not even trying to imitate Bush Jr. or Putin, this is already Hitler in the making folks.

Don't under estimate this slippery slope.

Stop it. Tinfoil hattery at it's worst.


Here is where citizenship may be revoked under C-24:

The Minister may revoke a person’s citizenship if the person, before or after the coming into force of this subsection and while the person was a citizen,

(a) was convicted under section 47 of the Criminal Code of treason and sentenced to imprisonment for life or was convicted of high treason under that section;

(b) was convicted of a terrorism offence as defined in section 2 of the Criminal Code — or an offence outside Canada that, if committed in Canada, would constitute a terrorism offence as defined in that section — and sentenced to at least five years of imprisonment;

(c) was convicted of an offence under any of sections 73 to 76 of the National Defence Act and sentenced to imprisonment for life because the person acted traitorously;

(d) was convicted of an offence under section 78 of the National Defence Act and sentenced to imprisonment for life;

(e) was convicted of an offence under section 130 of the National Defence Act in respect of an act or omission that is punishable under section 47 of theCriminal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life;

(f) was convicted under the National Defence Act of a terrorism offence as defined in subsection 2(1) of that Act and sentenced to at least five years of imprisonment;

(g) was convicted of an offence described in section 16 or 17 of the Security of Information Act and sentenced to imprisonment for life; or

(h) was convicted of an offence under section 130 of the National Defence Act in respect of an act or omission that is punishable under section 16 or 17 of the Security of Information Act and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

Now let's focus on B) there alone, rather than dig into all of those sections of the National Defence Act:

terrorism offence” means

(a) an offence under any of sections 83.02 to 83.04 or 83.18 to 83.23,
(b) an indictable offence under this or any other Act of Parliament committed for the benefit of, at the direction of or in association with a terrorist group,
(c) an indictable offence under this or any other Act of Parliament where the act or omission constituting the offence also constitutes a terrorist activity, or
(d) a conspiracy or an attempt to commit, or being an accessory after the fact in relation to, or any counselling in relation to, an offence referred to in paragraph (a), (b) or (c);

“terrorist activity” has the same meaning as in subsection 83.01(1);

“terrorist group” has the same meaning as in subsection 83.01(1);


Then on to Section 83 of the Criminal Code:

“terrorist activity” means

(a) an act or omission that is committed in or outside Canada and that, if committed in Canada, is one of the following offences:
(i) the offences referred to in subsection 7(2) that implement the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, signed at The Hague on December 16, 1970,
(ii) the offences referred to in subsection 7(2) that implement the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, signed at Montreal on September 23, 1971,
(iii) the offences referred to in subsection 7(3) that implement the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 14, 1973,
(iv) the offences referred to in subsection 7(3.1) that implement the International Convention against the Taking of Hostages, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 17, 1979,
(v) the offences referred to in subsection 7(2.21) that implement the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, done at Vienna and New York on March 3, 1980, as amended by the Amendment to the Convention on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material, done at Vienna on July 8, 2005 and the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism, done at New York on September 14, 2005,
(vi) the offences referred to in subsection 7(2) that implement the Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving International Civil Aviation, supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, signed at Montreal on February 24, 1988,
(vii) the offences referred to in subsection 7(2.1) that implement the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation, done at Rome on March 10, 1988,
(viii) the offences referred to in subsection 7(2.1) or (2.2) that implement the Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Fixed Platforms Located on the Continental Shelf, done at Rome on March 10, 1988,
(ix) the offences referred to in subsection 7(3.72) that implement the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 15, 1997, and
(x) the offences referred to in subsection 7(3.73) that implement the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations on December 9, 1999, or
(b) an act or omission, in or outside Canada,
(i) that is committed
(A) in whole or in part for a political, religious or ideological purpose, objective or cause, and
(B) in whole or in part with the intention of intimidating the public, or a segment of the public, with regard to its security, including its economic security, or compelling a person, a government or a domestic or an international organization to do or to refrain from doing any act, whether the public or the person, government or organization is inside or outside Canada, and
(ii) that intentionally
(A) causes death or serious bodily harm to a person by the use of violence,
(B) endangers a person’s life,
(C) causes a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or any segment of the public,
(D) causes substantial property damage, whether to public or private property, if causing such damage is likely to result in the conduct or harm referred to in any of clauses (A) to (C), or
(E) causes serious interference with or serious disruption of an essential service, facility or system, whether public or private, other than as a result of advocacy, protest, dissent or stoppage of work that is not intended to result in the conduct or harm referred to in any of clauses (A) to (C),
and includes a conspiracy, attempt or threat to commit any such act or omission, or being an accessory after the fact or counselling in relation to any such act or omission, but, for greater certainty, does not include an act or omission that is committed during an armed conflict and that, at the time and in the place of its commission, is in accordance with customary international law or conventional international law applicable to the conflict, or the activities undertaken by military forces of a state in the exercise of their official duties, to the extent that those activities are governed by other rules of international law.

terrorist group” means

(a) an entity that has as one of its purposes or activities facilitating or carrying out any terrorist activity, or
(b) a listed entity,
and includes an association of such entities

(1.1) For greater certainty, the expression of a political, religious or ideological thought, belief or opinion does not come within paragraph (b) of the definition “terrorist activity” in subsection (1) unless it constitutes an act or omission that satisfies the criteria of that paragraph.

Section 83 then continues with the specifics terrorism offences. I won't list the rest here.



THAT is what constitutes what a "terrorist" is under Canadian law, and for the purposes of C-24. Someone convicted of a terrorism offence under section 83 of the Criminal Code and sentenced to longer than five years.

NOT "if Ottawa thinks you are", NOT "under C-51", NOT "activists who question or protest Harper's environmental policies".
 

Alavard

Member
Stop it. Tinfoil hattery at it's worst.


Here is where citizenship may be revoked under C-24:



Now let's focus on B) there alone, rather than dig into all of those sections of the National Defence Act:




Then on to Section 83 of the Criminal Code:



Section 83 then continues with the specifics terrorism offences. I won't list the rest here.



THAT is what constitutes what a "terrorist" is under Canadian law, and for the purposes of C-24. Someone convicted of a terrorism offence under section 83 of the Criminal Code and sentenced to longer than five years.

NOT "if Ottawa thinks you are", NOT "under C-51", NOT "activists who question or protest Harper's environmental policies".

Harper literally said they would look at expanding the law to include more offenses.
 

lupinko

Member
Harper literally said they would look at expanding the law to include more offenses.

To add to that:

Again, look at Franke James, she wrote one letter asking Harper in making oil companies fully accountable, liable and responsible for any spills.

And what happened to her? Put on a no fly list and her travel visas all revoked.

And what does she normally do? Do environmentalist art.

And C-51 doesn't go after environmentalists? Really?

Simple google search says otherwise:

https://www.google.ca/?gws_rd=ssl#q=c-51+environmental+activist+fear

From the Globe and Mail to Huffpro to CBC to even Amnesty International.

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/...-bill-c-51-could-be-used-to-target-activists/

What are environmental activist and Aboriginals worried about and what do they protest? Oh right, Harper's oil industry practices, which falls under Canadian economic interest and policy, hmmm.

There is no defending the Harper Conservatives on this one and C-24.

I'm all for security but there is enough legalese and bullshit here to give broad interpretations on what exactly is "terrorism".
 

Boogie

Member
C51 is not "just" about "terrorism."

The "Security of Canada Information Sharing Act" is the part that contains the overly broad categories that could be perceived as including activists, etc.

The wording means that when there is "activity that undermines the security of Canada" government department A can share existing information with government department B. That's it.

It is still concerning, but It does not mean that any subject who has information shared with pursuant to the above becomes a "terrorist." It has nothing to do with a terrorism offense, under the criminal code, under 51, or 24.
 
It is high time to make a consensus (especially in Ontario) to back the Liberals.

Because the Ontario battleground is aet up the way it is.

Liberals have more for growth at the moment than NDP
 

Stet

Banned
Today's Nanos:



Not good for the NDP. Starting to look like the bad ol' days.

Here's a possible benefit:

The NDP's numbers started shifting a few weeks ago and it seemed like it was a flight response back to their party of origin from the voters who were fed up with the CPC and wanted an alternative that wasn't "Justin". Now it looks like the flight response is continuing, but it's no longer the low-hanging fruit and instead the NDP/Liberal split.

If that's correct, I don't know if there's much more ground the CPC can gain from the NDP, while the Liberals can definitely surge.
 
Are these all Ottawa area conservative candidates? They couldn't find a single woman to run in any riding in the whole city?

Nope! But considering someone like Poilievre is their local party bigwig, that should tell you about the quality of their team here overall.

Today's Nanos:
y4XCNzo.png

Not good for the NDP. Starting to look like the bad ol' days.

I'd feel a lot more comfortable with Nanos if I understood how his results were so different from everyone else. I've long trusted him more than other pollsters, but at the same time, it would be nice if there was anyone else backing him up.

EDIT: There is someone else backing Nanos up: Leger!

National numbers:
LPC 32 (+1)
CPC (-1)
NDP 26 (-3)

They basically have Quebec as a four-way tie, and the Liberals and Conservatives at 38 and 33 (respectively) in Ontario.
 
Thank God that makes me feel more comfortable. The Cons having such a loyal base (much like those in the US) is a bit irritating though.

Liberal all the way for me. I don't like how Trudeau dealt with Suzuki, but at least his plan for the environment is progressive and will get us back on the table with the rest of the world again when it comes to climate change.

I just want the NDP to siphon voters out of the Con party instead of the Liberal one lol
 
What is the endgame for the niqab dogwhistling? It doesn't seem to be helping the Conservatives much outside Quebec, and inside even if they "surge" they'll get hardly any seats.

Is it just to bring back the Bloc? I mean if the Conservatives can win a minority with the Bloc holding the balance of power it'll be a lot harder for the other parties to justify a coalition.
 

Kifimbo

Member
I'd feel a lot more comfortable with Nanos if I understood how his results were so different from everyone else. I've long trusted him more than other pollsters, but at the same time, it would be nice if there was anyone else backing him up.

Basically, LPC and CPC are tied in Canada (and probably in Ontario), while the NDP is clearly third, losing more and more seats in Quebec every day.
 
Today's Nanos:

Not good for the NDP. Starting to look like the bad ol' days.

We still have many people clinging to these two parties so it's not surprising that the NDP are taking a backseat.

The NDP will have their moment, but this is a gradual process that takes decades while people gradually shift to accepting a progressive government.

Basically, LPC and CPC are tied in Canada (and probably in Ontario), while the NDP is clearly third, losing more and more seats in Quebec every day.

It wouldn't surprise me at all if we get a Liberal minority because of this.

That would be a fantastic result for all of us.
 

Azih

Member
Would a Liberal minority be inclined or able to pass election reform?

Positive:

*JT has committed to ending FPTP
*A lot of Liberals on the grassroots and in Parliament are pro PR

Negative:

*JT himself prefers Australian style AV which has almost all the problems that FPTP does. Just like at Tony Abbott.
*Politicians liiiiieee.

I'm personally cautiously hopeful. I was on a virtual town hall with the Mississauga Streetsville candidate and I got him to say that he personally supports some form of PR. And I believe him.

Also when it comes to providing advice and research to confused politicians about what the heck PR is (a lot of them aren't very clear on what FPTP even is honestly) Fair Vote is really damn good at it and we will be on Libs, NDP, Greens,and even Conservatives MPs like white on rice in a minority situation where reform is being debated.
 

Azih

Member
I just thought of something. How would local MPs work with PR? Like who would go where?

Depends on the kind of PR. Really one of the tricky things with PR is that there is a lot of devil in the details.

In pure List PR, which is great for small countries, there is no geographic representation.

In Irish style STV, everybody is elected in a multi-member district. So instead of six local MPs in Mississauga for example you'd have six candidates elected for the entire city.

In German style Regional MMP, you would have Local MPs and Regional MPs that top up the party that got screwed over in the disproportional local level. So say instead of 12 MPs in Peel region you'd have something like 8 Local MPs and 4 top up MPs. Any party that is underrepresented would get a spot as one of the 4.

What happens in Ireland is that any citizen living in a STV multi member district can go to any of the MPs elected in the district for help.

In Germany citizens go to either their Local MP, or one of the top up MPs of the region for help.

It actually creates competition between MPs to serve constituents better as citizens can go to multiple people and they aren't living in local fiefs with only one MP as they do in FPTP and AV.

There's no 'two tiers of MPs' in either situation as all the MPs in the district or region are doing the same things and scrapping for the same votes in the next election.
 

Bisnic

Really Really Exciting Member!
Is there any website that gather polls from around the country for each ridings? I'm curious on who have the best chance of winning where I am.

I used to assume it was an easy win for NDP, since i live in Quebec, but i'm not so sure anymore. Especially since the CPC guy here is Gerard Deltell, some "big" name in Quebec politics.
 
D

Deleted member 126221

Unconfirmed Member
Liberal minority with the Bloc still alive? Yeah, I'd be okay with that.
 
If the Liberals form government with the help of the NDP (a big if), I would say reform is likely, but probably some form of preferential/ranked or runoff ballot, not PR.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom