Security Certificates Have Some Value: One Man's Opinion

Thursday, June 15, 2006 03:49 AM

The head of the Supreme Court of Canada, Beverly McLachlin, has made her thoughts known about the security certificates in Canada.

In a not so round about way, the Chief Justice made her thoughts known that the interest of national security must come first.

Two men, both being held by the certificate process, are being held as a threat to this country's security.

The information as to why they are behind bars is not available to the public because countries who provide this type of information do so on the understanding that it will remain secret and they will not be identified in the process.

We need to protect the security of this country and if that means a security certificate as a means of holding people, then so be it.

In both cases there is unsubstantiated information, that they were involved in terrorist activities. They argue that if they are sent back to the country from which they came they face imprisonment and possible torture.

In the past Canada has been accused, and rightfully so, of being far too lax in allowing people into this country and of not having the ability to deport them when we have reason to believe they are not acting in our interests.

Terrorists had come to realize that in the past, we are easy pickings and the Chief Justice is now saying, in her mind, security certificates serve a valid purpose.

I’m Meisner and that is one man's opinion.

Previous Story - Next Story

Email |

Print |

Facebook |

Twitter |

Digg |

Del.icio.us

Posted on Thursday, June 15, 2006 03:49 AM in Views by Ben Meisner

Return to Home

Comments

Posted by: Don Mackenzie on June 15 2006 10:49 AM

Right On.

Posted by: Chadermando on June 15 2006 4:46 PM

I disagree the system is flawed. We are a country of laws and as such we should respect our primary law which is inocient until proven guilty.

The terrorists have just won if Bens opinion holds.

Nobody is arguing that we should say who our sources are, or that we should not be holding suspect terrorists. Thats lazy thinking.

IMO the argument is the process in which we do this, and that is where all of our rights are in jepordy. Just look at the political situation down south where they are using spy programs for political motivations, or the example of the export of Earnest Zundle on the security certificate for political reasons and not reasons of national security. Its first use ever was an abuse of the law for political reasons, and as such it should not be endorsed.

IMO there is no reason why we can not have an independent pannel that adjudicates and weighs the evidence on the matter as is done in Britain for suspects of terrorism.

To allow guilty until deemed innocient by an unaccountable and secret process is not the Canadian way and violates the Canadian Constitution.

Even if these guys are terrorists they should have the right to a hearing of independent councils that makes a decision on their threat level to society.

They say, one persons terrorist is another persons freedom fighter, and with that kind of definition where do we narrow it down for future generations as to who enjoys rights and who does not in the right of lawfull desent against unlawfull government agents? HSould we allow ithis to be decided by political partisanship.

I think we shouldn't be in such a rush to sacrifice Canadian values and rights without looking at the process involved and the future implications for abuse.

Posted by: Chadermando on June 15 2006 4:52 PM

If you wish to make the claim that the head of the Supreme Court of Canada, Beverly McLachlin, has made her thoughts known about the security certificates in Canada.

Then I for one would want to see a link to this comment or a direct quote of the comment, and even some context to the comment. Sorry Ben but your interpretation of this event is not enough for me. Its a serious issue and you do a diservice to your readers by making that claim of someone elses views without providing the context or the quote.

Posted by: Chester on June 15 2006 10:11 PM

One has to question why our country has the problems it does and what kind of thinking is responsible for it?

Our country has deterioriated in so many areas that many can't even understand or see where we went wrong in some instances.

It's time to realize that if we continue to think the way we have always thought, we will continue to get what we have always got.

Some of the reasons we now have problems are because we have allowed people to do what they want and the penalty's no longer act as a deterant.

It's time for the bleeding hearts to get out of the way and allow those with other solutions to our problems have a go at it. Chester