Recent content by crimesinister

Bill C-6: An Act to amend the Citizenship Act and to make consequential amendments to another Act http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=8117654 This enactment amends the Citizenship Act to, among other things, (a) remove the grounds for the revocation of...

How did we go from to You either has serious issues with reading comprehension, or, you sir, are a liar. A liar who hides behind loquacious language to hide your mendacity. Here's the court record A-52-15: He's appealing exactly the same case that was adjudged previously by J. Rennie...

You're most welcome, hkalltheway. Galatai is challenging the entire bill. The thrust of his argument is that the Governor General erred in granting royal assent to the bill. The Liberals have yet to tell me whether they plan to repeal almost the entire bill, or just certain sections. I say...

I have spent the past few months dedicating myself to defeating Harper. Now that the Tories are gone, I've been thinking about restarting my legal challenge against Bill C-24. However, I'm in communication with the Liberals, and they've clearly indicated that repealing Bill C-24 is a "high...

That's true of your criticism, and I have been very respectful in return responding to it. But there are many others who resorted to ad hominem attacks and their language had bigotry written all over it. As one of the leaders of a 30,000+ strong community, it behooves me to do nothing less.

Bill C-24 is a purely political gesture. Great! When I first mentioned the proposed lawsuit, some people here got very angry and started making ad hominem attacks against me, borne out of their racist narrow-mindedness. This is precisely the reaction I would get on a larger scale were I to go...

We also don't want the Conservatives to use the lawsuit to rouse anti-immigrant sentiments and energize their base. Rabid racists generally tend to support conservatives, and their stance towards immigration in Canada is "f*** off we're full". Bill C-24 is mostly an attempt by the Conservatives...

I'm sorry for not keeping you folks up to date. I have discussed this matter extensively with the opposition parties. NDP, Liberals and Greens have all agreed to repeal the odious provisions of the act. As those provisions are the ones I was planning to challenge, I think my energies are better...

If a post by some random guy on some random Internet forum is the basis on which you decide whom to vote for, you're a counterexample for the merits of democracy.

I do apologize. I shouldn't have let the trolls derail the conversation.

The fact that this law is causing so much confusion in itself is a good indicator that it must be voided for vagueness.

I have no legal background beyond successfully raising a Charter challenge against a parking ticket which was issued in error.

I know you're being sarcastic, but hey, what the heck, I'll respond anyway. It's not a question of whether they will or won't. It's a question of whether they can, and that's what's unconstitutional.

CIC website isn't legally binding. The form you fill and the statute are. I.e., CIC can state on their website and Min Alexander can say in interviews that the intent to reside does not apply once you become a citizen, but that's not what the law says. When the challenge of this SCCA provision...

Minister Alexander repeatedly said that the "intent to reside" only applies before the oath. But the wording of the requirement in the application begins with "if granted citizenship". If Minister Alexander has been less than honest about one provision, why would anyone in their right mind...