this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
122 points (96.9% liked)

Canada

7200 readers
592 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Football (CFL)

  • List of All Teams: unknown

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Universities


💵 Finance / Shopping


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social and Culture


Rules

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage:

https://lemmy.ca


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The government said Canadians who joined ISIS would face the 'full force' of the law, but not a single woman who lived under ISIS has yet been convicted.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] fixerdude2@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 year ago (8 children)

Why is the federal government even allowing them to return to Canada?? Our liberal government and justice system is broken.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 61 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If they are still legally citizens, the country cannot refuse them entry to the country.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Sure, but aiding and abetting an organization that is legally recognized and sanctioned by Canada and pretty much all other developed countries as terrorist group has to run afoul of some law.

Like, what the fuck are these people saying to the customs reentry officers when they ask what they were doing in Afghanistan or Syria or whatever for the last several years? “Just some stuff, don’t worry about it”?

Edit: clarification: I am aware that it is considered a violation of human rights to render a person stateless. I am expressing surprise that the former terrorists returning to Canada weren’t immediately arrested on terrorism charges upon entry.

[–] hddsx@lemmy.ca 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It doesn’t matter if they murdered half the world. Canada cannot deny them entry. Now, they can allow entry and take them straight to jail. But that is still allowing entry into their country of citizenship

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well yeah; that’s what I mean. I’m surprised they weren’t taken straight to jail, pending trial.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Our jails are crowded and some of them are falling apart. Put them in jail after trial by all means, if their sentences so dictate. Putting them in jail before trial is only a good idea if they're flight risks or a danger to others (which some of these women might be, I admit, but you need at least a figleaf of justification beyond "ISIS bad"). If they're in jail, the money to feed, clothe, and house them comes out of our tax dollars, which may be better spent elsewhere.

(That's in addition to the fact that some of them could still be found not guilty, in which case you've just held innocent people in jail.)

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

…these people spent anywhere from a few years to a decade aiding, abetting, and enabling terrorist extremist groups. I would absolutely consider them a flight risk and a potential danger to others, under the circumstances.

Don’t get me wrong - the US justice system is idiotic in a myriad of ways, but if a US citizen tried to return to the country after years of gallivanting around with ISIS or Boko Haram or whatever other extremist group you’d care to name (pointedly: any extremist group, not just specifically Islamic-identifying ones), I would fully expect the US customs agent to call in the federal marshalls the second it became apparent that they’d probably been off doing sketchy shit with terrorists. And I say that because I would further expect the FBI to have clued in on the fact that they’d been doing that, and would probably have a case file on them, and perhaps charges pending, and likely even a warrant out for their arrest.

[–] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Turns out we all move on from these massive conflicts pretty quickly. I married a korean

[–] soulshot@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Go touch more grass please.

[–] jerkface@lemmy.ca 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't see how you think not letting them return to the country is a responsible solution to any problem.

[–] clif@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago

Making it someone else's problem is always a possible solution to your problem.

Semi /s, I think?

[–] MapleEngineer@lemmy.ca 32 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

As Canadian citizens they have a Section 6 right to return to Canada. You know, the same Section 6 right that the fucking tantrumists thought was being taken away because no country would take them during the pandemic because they weren't vaccinated

[–] Touching_Grass@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago

Its a much worse situation when a government can strip you of citizenship. Not about to give that up for a couple shit birds

[–] corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 year ago

Calm yourself. It's not easy to deny someone entry to their birthplace, nor to remove citizenship when they have nothing else.

Stop watching Pierre and his endless drama and you'll be fine.

Go learn.

[–] cobra89@beehaw.org 6 points 1 year ago

Why isn't the liberal government just suspending the constitution?!?111??? 🙄

[–] ILikeBoobies@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

International reputation and wanting to be able to deport immigrants that commit crimes here

[–] LHookham@c.im 1 points 1 year ago

@fixerdude2 @sik0fewl
Did you read the article?