[Yogi]

Curtman Curtman:

RUEZ RUEZ:

You claimed the U.S. is going to commit the crime of murder. He's asking you to clarify.

Yeah, deliberately taking someone's life when they pose no threat to you.. That's murder.

"Saying it's up to the discretion of the government to decide whether someone lives or dies makes them accessories to the enforcement of capital punishment in another state, and we believe that's wrong."

I'm going to go out on a limb here. Admittedly, I know very little about American laws, but I would hazard that long before either you or I took our first breath, that it was written into law that 'if you knowingly, willingly, take a life, you forfeit your own'. ( Bart, help me out here!)

So again, the USA is not guilty of doing anything wrong!

[Curtman]

Yogi Yogi:

So again, the USA is not guilty of doing anything wrong!

The USA is a sovereign country. Canada is as well, and its courts have ordered the Canadian government to do what it can to prevent this life from being terminated. Its not technically a crime for Iran to stone someone to death either, but damn rights its wrong.

Where's the moderators anyway? This was about not sending people to American jails who decided killing Iraqi civilians was a bad idea. Then martin14 made a baseless claim about the NDP ignoring laws, and the it went "right off the rails"

[djakeydd]

Id trade harper for a us deserter any time.

[fifeboy]

RUEZ RUEZ:

fifeboy fifeboy:

Nor, it appears looking at the election results, a Conservative one. Only about 38% wanted that, less now.

Ok, what's your point?

Let's see:
You said

RUEZ RUEZ:

Also just because the opposition parties all hate the Conservatives it doesn't make them a majority. The people have spoken, they don't want a Liberal government, or an NDP one.

So my point was: Just because the conservative party got only 38% of the vote does not make them a majority government that can do what it wants. They need the support of someone else (NDP or Liberals only because we know Steve would NEVER try to get the support of the BLOC. to attempt to govern. It appears the Canadian people did not want a Stevie government either. So RUEZIE, that's my point.

[Yogi]

Curtman Curtman:

Yogi Yogi:

So again, the USA is not guilty of doing anything wrong!

The USA is a sovereign country. Canada is as well, and its courts have ordered the Canadian government to do what it can to prevent this life from being terminated. Its not technically a crime for Iran to stone someone to death either, but damn rights its wrong.

Where's the moderators anyway? This was about not sending people to American jails who decided killing Iraqi civilians was a bad idea. Then martin14 made a baseless claim about the NDP ignoring laws, and the it went "right off the rails"

Back up here Curt.. Back WAAAY up. If this thread is infact right off the rails...' it is so because YOU WERE AT THE CONTROLS AND STEERED THE TOPIC IN THIS DIRECTION when YOU introduced Ronald Smith to the thread in YOUR FIRST POST!!!

quote And that would be different how?
[/color]

Canadian on death row in U.S. loses last appeal; only hope hangs on clemency

[Curtman]

Yogi Yogi:

Back up here Curt.. Back WAAAY up. If this thread is infact right off the rails...' it is so because YOU WERE AT THE CONTROLS AND STEERED THE TOPIC IN THIS DIRECTION when YOU introduced Ronald Smith to the thread in YOUR FIRST POST!!!

Curtman Curtman:

And that would be different how?


Canadian on death row in U.S. loses last appeal; only hope hangs on clemency

That's right.. I gave an example of the Conservative Government of today ignoring an order from a Canadian court. No example was ever provided for the NDP ignoring the law of Canada.

[FieryVulpine]

*sarcasm* Yeah, and our laws overrule the American courts *sarcasm*

This man killed two people in another sovereign state that believes in a fair trial. Let's compare that with William Sampson, a Canadian who was sentenced to death by beheading in Saudi Arabia about ten years ago, which we all know how fair and impartial the Saudi system is. The Liberal government at the time barely lifted a finger to convince the Saudis to grant him clemency, and Prince Charles intervened on his and five other Britons' behalf.

So what makes Ronald Williams so worthy of clemency, and William Sampson not, hm? Or do you just care more about stroking your own ego that either of them?

[ShepherdsDog]

What is it with all these people who think our Charter of Rights and Freedoms mean fuck all in other countries??

[Yogi]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

What is it with all these people who think our Charter of Rights and Freedoms mean fuck all in other countries??

Not sure if you're just being sacastic here or not Shep.

I, for one believe and expect the protection of the Canadian Charter of Rights in Canada. When I cross the border into any other country, I am fully aware that I am, at that point governed by that country's laws. Why would I/should I expect the Canadian Charter of Rights to be some kind of 'invisible shield' OR 'magic wand' which I can pull out, and wave around, if I should knowingly and willingly, contravene any of my host country's laws which I many not personally agree with? Also, in Canada, Ignorance of The Law has never been a successful defense, Why should it be if I break the laws of another country when I am within that country's borders?

[martin14]

Yogi Yogi:

Curtman Curtman:

Yogi Yogi:

So again, the USA is not guilty of doing anything wrong!

The USA is a sovereign country. Canada is as well, and its courts have ordered the Canadian government to do what it can to prevent this life from being terminated. Its not technically a crime for Iran to stone someone to death either, but damn rights its wrong.

Where's the moderators anyway? This was about not sending people to American jails who decided killing Iraqi civilians was a bad idea. Then martin14 made a baseless claim about the NDP ignoring laws, and the it went "right off the rails"

Back up here Curt.. Back WAAAY up. If this thread is infact right off the rails...' it is so because YOU WERE AT THE CONTROLS AND STEERED THE TOPIC IN THIS DIRECTION when YOU introduced Ronald Smith to the thread in YOUR FIRST POST!!!

quote And that would be different how?
[/color]

Canadian on death row in U.S. loses last appeal; only hope hangs on clemency

Don't worry Yogi, Curts just pissed cause he got told off in another thread
that he also took way off, just more Stevie bashing.
Must be in love with the PM or something.

[herbie]

FieryVulpine FieryVulpine:

*sarcasm* Yeah, and our laws overrule the American courts *sarcasm*

This man killed two people in another sovereign state that believes in a fair trial. Let's compare that with William Sampson, a Canadian who was sentenced to death by beheading in Saudi Arabia about ten years ago, which we all know how fair and impartial the Saudi system is. The Liberal government at the time barely lifted a finger to convince the Saudis to grant him clemency, and Prince Charles intervened on his and five other Britons' behalf.

So what makes Ronald Williams so worthy of clemency, and William Sampson not, hm? Or do you just care more about stroking your own ego that either of them?

What makes you think official state policy has on/off clauses, or that one person - the PM, has the right to choose when to apply that policy.
Both face the death sentence. Canada opposes capital punishment. Therefore Canada is obligated to intervene and appeal for clemency.
No choices. No options.

[Curtman]

martin14 martin14:

Don't worry Yogi, Curts just pissed cause he got told off in another thread that he also took way off, just more Stevie bashing.

Come on back... I noticed you took way off once you realized that you had no idea what you were talking about.

[Curtman]

FieryVulpine FieryVulpine:

*sarcasm* Yeah, and our laws overrule the American courts *sarcasm*

A Canadian court ordered the Canadian government to intervene. What is complicated about that? The American courts have nothing to do with it.

I would just like martin14 to explain which CANADIAN laws the federal NDP have ignored.

[EyeBrock]

The federal NDP have never been in an official capacity to enact,ignore or apply any Canadian laws so it's a moot point isn't it?

[martin14]

Curtman Curtman:

FieryVulpine FieryVulpine:

*sarcasm* Yeah, and our laws overrule the American courts *sarcasm*

A Canadian court ordered the Canadian government to intervene. What is complicated about that? The American courts have nothing to do with it.

I would just like martin14 to explain which CANADIAN laws the federal NDP have ignored.

From the article:

$1:

The new directive cites law that bars refugees from Canada on the "grounds of serious criminality" in order to make the case.

The dippers would like to circumvent this law, by hoping for an election,
and then hoping again they may be in a position to change the law.



My original post:

$1:

Can you just imagine what the dippers would do to all Canadian Law if they got power ?

Just ignore them all

I even highlighted the important bit for you.