(The UN insists countries have a legal obligation to repatriate terrorists who go abroad to fight against national interests or allies)
CBC, a.k.a The “Communist Broadbasting Corporation”, or the “Caliphate Broadcasting Corporation”, is a government funded “news” organization. It receives about $1.5 billion annually to spew out anti-Canadian stories. Taxpayers don’t get a say in the matter.
CLICK HERE, to reach the CBC Propaganda Masterlist. It is far from complete, but being added to regularly.
In all fairness, here the CBC is ”quoting” the UN Rapporteur, and Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale. However, there is nothing in the way of critical analysis or challenge to the claims. Some hard questions would be nice.
CLICK HERE, for the actual article this review references.
”Agnes Callamard, the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary or arbitrary executions, says it’s time for Ottawa to stop dragging its heels and repatriate its citizens who fought for ISIS and are now being held in Syria and Iraq. (Jose Cabezas/Reuters)”
Obvious question: Why? If citizens leave to take up arms in foreign conflict, then it is their problem. Canada is not obligated to bail them out.
”Several Canadians are currently being held by Kurdish authorities in Syria, following the collapse of ISIS in 2017.
So far, the federal government has said it has no obligation to repatriate them, and that it is ill-equipped to put them on trial.”
Not being equipped to put them on trial actually makes sense. The logistics here are enormous. How do you gather evidence, depose witnesses, and run a trial, based on events happening around the world?
Also, there is a small issue of ”jurisdiction”. Who has it, and how will that be settled?
”Ms. Callamard, why do you believe that Canada has a duty to bring these people home, those who fought alongside the Islamic State?
I believe it has a legal obligation to do so, if those foreign fighters are currently held in Syria by a non-state actor in this case a Kurdish group. That group has currently no international legitimacy, and probably neither does it have the capacity to undertake fair trials. That’s one reason as to why those individuals should be sent back to Canada.
As far as Iraq is concerned, if they are Canadian foreign fighters detained in Iraq they are tried under Iraqi counter-terrorism law. It’s an extremely problematic law that has been denounced by myself, and by the UN as well. Under the law, many foreign fighters can be sentenced to death.
It is a legal obligation placed upon Canada … to take all the necessary measures to ensure that its citizens do not confront or face death penalty. And frankly, the best way to do that in Iraq is to repatriate them for trial in Canada.”
Some mental gymnastics here. Callamard shrugs off so-called Canadians fighting for a group with no international legitimacy, yet says it’s wrong they are detained by people with no international legitimacy.
Okay, if a group is unable to conduct trials there, why should Canada go through the time and expense of doing it here? Logistics. Also, we wouldn’t have jurisdiction in events that happen overseas.
They can be sentenced to death. Who cares? These are not tourists on vacation who got mixed up in something bad. These are traitors who turned against out country.
”When you say that they should be brought to justice in Canada, the difficulty of actually prosecuting them would be the difficulty of gathering evidence, of protecting witnesses who have to be brought, of translating, of all kinds of things on the ground … in hostile territories. The chances of prosecutions, many would argue, is extremely fraught, and so perhaps bringing them back is not going to bring successful prosecutions. Doesn’t that fail the victims of these crimes?
Well, first of all, the victims of the crimes currently are completely failed. Let me be very clear: You just have to listen to the [winners of the] Nobel Peace Prize that has just been allocated, and you will know that there has been no accountability for anything that has been committed against the Yazidi community, whether we are talking sexual violence or mass massacres.”
This is a nice surprise. CBC actually asking this very important question: how do you deal with the logistics of actually conducting a trial?
”Why do you think Canada could do any better? Canada would fail them too, would they not?
At the moment, there is no accountability. That’s the first thing. The second is that of all countries that currently have the legal and technical capacity to undertake the challenging task, I believe that some of those governments, including Canada certainly, are far better placed to do so.
I’m not denying the complexity of the investigation. What I am suggesting is that after World War II we took on the challenge, and the international community brought to account those that had committed genocide and killed six million people — and far more, in fact.
After the Rwandan genocide, we took our responsibility and the international community together took action. After what happened in the former Yugoslavia, we did the same.”
(a) All countries have the legal and technical capacity? Great, then let’s try them overseas where these crimes happened. Pull their citizenships, seize their assets, and call it a day.
(b) Yes, you are denying the complexity of an investigation. How do you properly investigate a war zone going on halfway across the world?
(c) She conflates ”prosecuting” the Nazis with ”rescuing” ISIS fighters. Yes, ISIS fighters would probably prefer to be tried in Canada. But remember, Callamard said that all nations have the capacity to hold trials.
(d) Canada may be better placed, but again, why should we? Public funds would be far better used spent on our own people, rather than repatriating traitors and terrorists (just so we can try them and lock them up).
”There are politics in Canada, as you know, and we have tremendous opposition to the Liberal government if it even considers bringing the ISIS fighters back. And Canada’s statement we received today said there is no plan or deal in place to bring any Canadians who are in Syria to Canada. They are insisting that the ones who have returned, some will be prosecuted. But it doesn’t seem as though they’re interested in your idea.
So far every government, for the last four or five years, have brandished IS as enemy number one around the world. None of those governments are now prepared to take their responsibilities and put IS to trial. None of them.
So it’s not a particular problem with Canada. It characterizes all of the Western governments that have participated in the war in Syria and Iraq.
I am persuaded that at some stage they will have no other option but to be realistic and take an international responsibility for the next stage in the fight against extremism.
My suggestions, my strong recommendations, is that governments including Canada must do the right thing legally, and must do the right thing in front of historians.”
(a) Another surprisingly good question from the CBC. Yes, there is widespread public opposition to bringing ISIS fighters back.
(b) Callamard focuses on the righter of ISIS terrorists, but seems uninterested in the danger that they pose to Canadians. Further, she shows little concern for the drain in public resources in doing so. She just pays lip service to this.
(c) Callamard remarks that no western government is interested in doing this. Likewise, they also have their respective public to deal with.
(d) Western population are (rightly) not very interested in the well being of people who leave their countries to take up arms in foreign conflicts. When these traitors and terrorists come calling for help, there is understandably no sympathy. They are authors of their own misfortunes.
(e) Do the right thing in front of historians? Now we get a straight answer. This is about virtue signalling.
Compared to most interviews CBC does, this actually wasn’t ”that” bad. At least a few good questions were raised.
Not content with the rights of illegal migrants, the UN special rapporteur is also very concerned with the well being of terrorists who fight abroad.
It is because of nonsense like this, that opinion pieces to leave the UN altogether are published.
Nationalists believe that a government should look after its own people first and foremost. We choose leader to represent ourselves.
Globalists believe that national well being should be sacrificed in the name of ”the greater good” regardless of whether they have any sort of democratic mandate. As such, they are really accountable to no one.
This is just another UN call for nations to sacrifice their well being in the name of ”being view positively in history”.