[Newsbot]

Title: CSIS tracking 80 Canadians after going abroad for �terrorist purposes�
Category: Misc CDN
Posted By: N_Fiddledog
Date: 2014-03-26 12:24:38
Canadian

[martin14]

So, 130 they know about, 80 already returned.

Which means there are at least another 100 they don't know about.. yet.

They should be arrested, revoking any Canadian papers they have, and booting them out.

[N_Fiddledog]

If there was a law saying there is no right of return once you go off on Jihad, Khadr would still be in Gitmo.

Even if the Obaminator freed him, you know where he'd be? Anywhere but here.

[GreenTiger]

Keeping an eye on potential terrorists going over seas to learn how to be more of a threat sounds like a good thing.

[andyt]

It is, and they continue to watch them when they come back. But, while what these guys did is illegal, there isn't sufficient proof to stand up in a court of law to charge them. As for kicking them out, who's to say they aren't citizens or even born here.

[stratos]

andyt andyt:

It is, and they continue to watch them when they come back. But, while what these guys did is illegal, there isn't sufficient proof to stand up in a court of law to charge them. As for kicking them out, who's to say they aren't citizens or even born here.

Would their training to be terrorist give the Gov. cause enough to revoke citizenship even to natraul born citizens?

[andyt]

Not in the least. Maybe if they attempted to overthrow the Canadian govt, not sure. But even if you revoke citizenship, what if no country will take them? And what about the ones born here?

Nope, they're basically our problem. We need to ensure we establish good connections to the Muslim community so they will report on people we don't know about, as has already happened in some cases. These guys we do know about and they are being watched.

Sucks to be a state with civil liberties, huh?

[stratos]

Funny thing is most Jihadists and terrorists agree that states/nations with civil liberties suck.

Seriously thanks for answering, statements by you and N-Fiddledog made me wonder if there was some sort of clause for removal of citizenship the Gov. could use.

[andyt]

Also if they lied to get citizenship it can be revoked. But Martin et all are just spouting off. Not sure we want to go down the road of eroding more and more civil liberties. But the non-citizens, sure, find any legal reason to ship them out. And make citizenship harder to get in the first place. Like how did Khadr senior get to be a citizen?

[DrCaleb]

stratos stratos:

andyt andyt:

It is, and they continue to watch them when they come back. But, while what these guys did is illegal, there isn't sufficient proof to stand up in a court of law to charge them. As for kicking them out, who's to say they aren't citizens or even born here.

Would their training to be terrorist give the Gov. cause enough to revoke citizenship even to [natural] born citizens?

That's illegal under international law, I believe.

[N_Fiddledog]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

stratos stratos:

andyt andyt:

It is, and they continue to watch them when they come back. But, while what these guys did is illegal, there isn't sufficient proof to stand up in a court of law to charge them. As for kicking them out, who's to say they aren't citizens or even born here.

Would their training to be terrorist give the Gov. cause enough to revoke citizenship even to [natural] born citizens?

That's illegal under international law, I believe.

You need to be more specific there. What international law?

Geert Wilders is interesting here. Until he made a political boo boo last week his party was ready to win power in the Netherlands according to polls. He was saying he wanted to throw jihadis out who had dual citizenship. He seemed to think he could revoke one side of it at least.

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

stratos stratos:

Would their training to be terrorist give the Gov. cause enough to revoke citizenship even to [natural] born citizens?

That's illegal under international law, I believe.

You need to be more specific there. What international law?

Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 15.

http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a15

[N_Fiddledog]

The United Nations made a declaration of human rights, and that's law? Who says?

This is what they say.

$1:

Now, Therefore THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY proclaims THIS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS as a 'common standard of achievement' for all peoples and all nations

A common standard of achievement - that's law is it?

On the front page here, there's a news story explaining how the UN Human rights council just hired a Jew hater to look after the Palestine issue for them. These are the guys making a claim, and it becomes law, does it?

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

The United Nations made a declaration of human rights, and that's law? Who says?

The UN General Assembly ratified it, December 10, 1948. I'm sorry you didn't get that memo.

http://daccess-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLU ... penElement

[N_Fiddledog]

Yeah, it won't open for me.

What does that mean here - "ratify"? Why does that become law? Did Canada sign on to recognize it as law?

Wasn't Qadaffi the head of the UN Human Rights council at one time?