Canuckistan's acting up

Posted by: yoyo52

Canuckistan's acting up - 07/07/08 12:49 PM

U.S. deserter could qualify as refugee: court. Why?<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>"The authorities indicate that military action which systematically degrades, abuses or humiliates either combatants or non-combatants is capable of supporting a refugee claim where that is the proven reason for refusing to serve."<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>[color:red]&#63743;</font color=red> [color:orange]&#63743;</font color=orange> [color:yellow]&#63743;</font color=yellow> [color:green]&#63743;</font color=green> [color:blue]&#63743;</font color=blue> [color:purple]&#63743;</font color=purple>
Posted by: MacBozo

Re: Canuckistan's acting up - 07/07/08 12:57 PM

Obviously one of them liberal, activist judges. <br><br>
Posted by: yoyo52

Re: Canuckistan's acting up - 07/07/08 01:22 PM

They're everywhere!!<br><br>[color:red]&#63743;</font color=red> [color:orange]&#63743;</font color=orange> [color:yellow]&#63743;</font color=yellow> [color:green]&#63743;</font color=green> [color:blue]&#63743;</font color=blue> [color:purple]&#63743;</font color=purple>
Posted by: keymaker

Re: Canuckistan's acting up - 07/07/08 01:48 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>U.S. deserter could qualify as refugee: court. Why?<p><hr></blockquote><p> Well, you answered your own question but the distinction made by the judge between a "war crime, a crime against peace or a crime against humanity" and that which only amounts to "military misconduct" was unnecessary because attacking people in their homes, which is one of things that traumatised Key, is a war crime.<br><br>km<br><br>
Posted by: six_of_one

Re: Canuckistan's acting up - 07/07/08 04:11 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>because attacking people in their homes ... is a war crime.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Apparently the Canadian Federal Court disagrees ...<br><br>Turn up the signal, wipe out the noise ...
Posted by: Geetaro

Re: Canuckistan's acting up - 07/07/08 05:50 PM

cuz there's too much gyang warr <br><br>have you seen this: <br>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soundtrack_To_War<br><br>Nature is always ready to humble us. Actually every day.
Posted by: Alec_Fromm

Re: Canuckistan's acting up - 07/08/08 05:29 AM

War is for those of a lower intelligence. ALL deserters are welcome in my Canada!<br><br>- a.k.a. Mississauga -
Posted by: DLC

Re: Canuckistan's acting up - 07/08/08 06:30 AM

"....are welcome in my Canada!"<br><br>Alec... did you get promoted to PM ??"<br><br>Congratulations !! <br><br><br>can you please invade us ... we need freedom from an evil dictator !! <br><br>David (OFI)
Posted by: keymaker

Re: Canuckistan's acting up - 07/08/08 06:39 AM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Apparently the Canadian Federal Court disagrees ...<p><hr></blockquote><p> I don't think it disagrees - the judge was only referring to what the Immigration Board concluded. The judge is not entitled to go behind findings of fact of the Board but found for the applicant on other grounds namely application of the lower standard of military misconduct.<br><br>The Board got it wrong, of course, assuming the application was properly argued. What Key witnessed was "abuse, humiliation, and looting by the U.S. army". The Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Art 3 povides that protected persons "shall at all times be humanely treated, and shall be protected especially against all acts of violence or threats thereof and against insults...". By Art 27 "Protected persons are entitled, in all circumstances, to respect for their persons, their honour, their family rights... and their manners and customs". <br><br>Obviously the judge was confined to legal reasons and was content to apply the lower standard not considered by the Board rather than questioning its findings of fact. <br><br>km<br><br><br><br>