💬 Off-Topic Oh, Canada! - A place to post about Timbits, hockey, moose, and maple syrup.

[WonderWino]

Unfortunately a pardon in Canada only benefits him there as regards to employment, bondability etc. While the charge disappears in Canada, it stays on record in the U.S. It won't automatically cause him to be turned away at the border, but they will see the conviction and ask him about it.

As it's fairly minor he will probably still be allowed in a few years after a pardon, but if he is his usual unpleasant egotistical demanding self they could very well turn him right back around and punt him back over to the Canadian side for no other reason then they don't like him and be totally justified in doing so under U.S. law.

Ehh not really. If they turn him away at the US border they had best have a better explanation than 'we just don't like you' cause he could easily turn around and say that was a cover for 'because you're trans,' make a civil rights issue of it and sue the shit out of the US border service for discrimination that does violate US law. At a bare minimum it would be a public relations and media disaster for them, and given his history he is very likely to do it

 

[The Un-Clit]

Ehh not really. If they turn him away at the US border they had best have a better explanation than 'we just don't like you' cause he could easily turn around and say that was a cover for 'because you're trans,' make a civil rights issue of it and sue the shit out of the US border service for discrimination that does violate US law. At a bare minimum it would be a public relations and media disaster for them, and given his history he is very likely to do it

It's my understanding (but I may be wrong) that U.S. border security has a long standing policy of refusing entry into the U.S.A. for any reason they like to anyone they like (other then diplomats) with the full backing of the state dept. even if they don't baldly say so and couch it in terms of "suspicious behaviour and a past criminal record" instead of "this troon creeps us out."

Yanks, am I wrong?

 

[WonderWino]

It's my understanding (but I may be wrong) that U.S. border security has a long standing policy of refusing entry into the U.S.A. for any reason they like to anyone they like (other then diplomats) with the full backing of the state dept. even if they don't baldly say so and couch it in terms of "suspicious behaviour and a past criminal record" instead of "this troon creeps us out."

Yanks, am I wrong?

Not really. They still have to adhere to both US federal law and international law. The whole 'they can do anything they want' stuff is a myth. Same as they couldn't refuse entry to someone for being black or a woman. Even quoting 'suspicious behavior' is legally actionable if they don't have some reasonable cause to make claims like that. They'd have to be idiots to deliberately say something or refuse entry for questionable reasons, it could easily lead to opening a large can of worms. The last thing the border service wants is some kind of incident

 

[Sookie]

Not really. They still have to adhere to both US federal law and international law. The whole 'they can do anything they want' stuff is a myth. Same as they couldn't refuse entry to someone for being black or a woman. Even quoting 'suspicious behavior' is legally actionable if they don't have some reasonable cause to make claims like that. They'd have to be idiots to deliberately say something or refuse entry for questionable reasons, it could easily lead to opening a large can of worms. The last thing the border service wants is some kind of incident

They can turn away anyone they want for any reason. As a person who has crossed the Surrey/Peace arch border 100's of times I know this for a fact. My husband had a record for possession of a homegrown joint in his early 20's and when we tried to cross (long before 911) he was denied access due to his record. He had to apply for a pardon, which he did get. We eventually made our way back to the border and were told very clearly "our President of the United States does not recognize Canadian pardons. We then needed to apply for a waiver which at the time was about $800 (this was 20 years ago) . They can turn Yaniv away and I guarantee you that, even though he may try, there will be nothing he can do about it. The powers of the US border control are almost omnipotent . They can and will do anything they want and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

 

[WonderWino]

They can turn away anyone they want for any reason. As a person who has crossed the Surrey/Peace arch border 100's of times I know this for a fact. My husband had a record for possession of a homegrown joint in his early 20's and when we tried to cross (long before 911) he was denied access due to his record. He had to apply for a pardon, which he did get. We eventually made our way back to the border and were told very clearly "our President of the United States does not recognize Canadian pardons. We then needed to apply for a waiver which at the time was about $800 (this was 20 years ago) . They can turn Yaniv away and I guarantee you that, even though he may try, there will be nothing he can do about it. The powers of the US border control are almost omnipotent . They can and will do anything they want and there's not a damn thing you can do about it.

No, they're not 'almost omnipotent' They are not even close. I'll say it again: no organization in the US, federal, state, private, or anything else - border control included, can not do anything that violates US federal law, international law the US is party to or any agreements they have with whatever other state is involved

I didn't say a thing about pardons, this has nothing to do with pardons, this is about dispelling the myth that you can be refused entry 'for any reason whatsoever even illegal ones' and that they can magically do anything they want in violation of US law.

I'll say it again:

- deny someone entry for being black, see what happens. The border patrol will be sued to kingdom come
- deny someone entry for being a woman, see what happens, The border patrol will be sued to kingdom come
- deny someone entry for being a muslim who we suspect but have no evidence of being a potential terrorist, see what happens, The border patrol will be sued to kingdom come. Every major law firm, the ACLU, the ADL and probably a dozen other similar organizations would froth at the mouth like cujo in the hope you hired them to take that legal case
- deny someone entry for a reason other than what was stated as the actual reason, see what happens. Thats a discrimination lawsuit waiting to happen. yaniv falls under this one. if you seriously think there is nothing you can do for being turned away for discriminatory reasons you are not familiar with US law, at all. Both the media and every major law firm in the country would have a field day with border patrol over it
- deny someone entry for accusations you have no evidence for - 'we think you're trying to smuggle drugs, but we searched you and the vehicle and refused entry anyway, by extension we just defamed you in an unlawful manner by calling you a drug smuggler without evidence' see what happens. The border service gets sued
- have a border patrol agent force you to strip and do degrading things, see what happens and how fast the border patrol gets sued
- have a border patrol agent physically assault or threaten someone, see what happens and how fast the border patrol gets sued


The border service has to operate within the bounds of US law, period

 

[ProtonMailMan]

Regarding your first paragraph, it is utter bollocks

No, they're not 'almost omnipotent' They are not even close. I'll say it again: no organization in the US, federal, state, private, or anything else - border control included, can not do anything that violates US federal law, international law the US is party to or any agreements they have with whatever other state is involved

I didn't say a thing about pardons, this has nothing to do with pardons, this is about dispelling the myth that you can be refused entry 'for any reason whatsoever even illegal ones' and that they can magically do anything they want in violation of US law.

I'll say it again:

- deny someone entry for being black, see what happens. The border patrol will be sued to kingdom come
- deny someone entry for being a woman, see what happens, The border patrol will be sued to kingdom come
- deny someone entry for being a muslim who we suspect but have no evidence of being a potential terrorist, see what happens, The border patrol will be sued to kingdom come. Every major law firm, the ACLU, the ADL and probably a dozen other similar organizations would froth at the mouth like cujo in the hope you hired them to take that legal case
- deny someone entry for a reason other than what was stated as the actual reason, see what happens. Thats a discrimination lawsuit waiting to happen. yaniv falls under this one. if you seriously think there is nothing you can do for being turned away for discriminatory reasons you are not familiar with US law, at all. Both the media and every major law firm in the country would have a field day with border patrol over it
- deny someone entry for accusations you have no evidence for - 'we think you're trying to smuggle drugs, but we searched you and the vehicle and refused entry anyway, by extension we just defamed you in an unlawful manner by calling you a drug smuggler without evidence' see what happens. The border service gets sued
- have a border patrol agent force you to strip and do degrading things, see what happens and how fast the border patrol gets sued
- have a border patrol agent physically assault or threaten someone, see what happens and how fast the border patrol gets sued


The border service has to operate within the bounds of US law, period

Utter bollocks. Every "police" agency in the U.S., state and federal, routinely violate all laws at their sole whim and with "immunity." The only limit on their power stems from the fact that occasionally a story too interesting for the media to ignore breaks and they find themselves mildly embarrased at worst. You are living in a fantasy-world if you think the U.S. Border Patrol or any other police agency in the United States pays the slightest attention to the law unless they think someone is watching them at the time.

 

[WonderWino]

Regarding your first paragraph, it is utter bollocks


Utter bollocks. Every "police" agency in the U.S., state and federal, routinely violate all laws at their sole whim and with "immunity." The only limit on their power stems from the fact that occasionally a story too interesting for the media to ignore breaks and they find themselves mildly embarrased at worst. You are living in a fantasy-world if you think the U.S. Border Patrol or any other police agency in the United States pays the slightest attention to the law unless they think someone is watching them at the time.

Uh huh. No. If they were they would be getting hit with lawsuits on a massive level. They do not have a choice in the matter.' Violating laws at their sole whim with immunity'

Sure buddy. If anyone actually believes that they're the ones living in a fantasy land. You're talking like one of those antifa crazies

 

[Short Stack]

@ProtonMailMan Hate Cops much? Jesus Christ dude.....
& I'm sure you'll refuse any help from them should you be a victim or a crime or involved in an accident to affirm your convictions.
You're speaking in absolutes, not good cognitive thinking my friend

 

[Sookie]

No, they're not 'almost omnipotent' They are not even close. I'll say it again: no organization in the US, federal, state, private, or anything else - border control included, can not do anything that violates US federal law, international law the US is party to or any agreements they have with whatever other state is involved

I didn't say a thing about pardons, this has nothing to do with pardons, this is about dispelling the myth that you can be refused entry 'for any reason whatsoever even illegal ones' and that they can magically do anything they want in violation of US law.

I'll say it again:

- deny someone entry for being black, see what happens. The border patrol will be sued to kingdom come
- deny someone entry for being a woman, see what happens, The border patrol will be sued to kingdom come
- deny someone entry for being a muslim who we suspect but have no evidence of being a potential terrorist, see what happens, The border patrol will be sued to kingdom come. Every major law firm, the ACLU, the ADL and probably a dozen other similar organizations would froth at the mouth like cujo in the hope you hired them to take that legal case
- deny someone entry for a reason other than what was stated as the actual reason, see what happens. Thats a discrimination lawsuit waiting to happen. yaniv falls under this one. if you seriously think there is nothing you can do for being turned away for discriminatory reasons you are not familiar with US law, at all. Both the media and every major law firm in the country would have a field day with border patrol over it
- deny someone entry for accusations you have no evidence for - 'we think you're trying to smuggle drugs, but we searched you and the vehicle and refused entry anyway, by extension we just defamed you in an unlawful manner by calling you a drug smuggler without evidence' see what happens. The border service gets sued
- have a border patrol agent force you to strip and do degrading things, see what happens and how fast the border patrol gets sued
- have a border patrol agent physically assault or threaten someone, see what happens and how fast the border patrol gets sued


The border service has to operate within the bounds of US law, period

You really have no clue what you are talking about. You're completely wrong. Do you really think they are stupid enough to tell someone they are denying someone entry for any of your above reasons? They can absolutely deny you and there is nothing you can do about it. I know this as absolute fact.

It's a moot point anyway as Yaniv now has a criminal record they have every reason to "legally" deny him entry

 

[WonderWino]

You really have no clue what you are talking about. You're completely wrong. Do you really think they are stupid enough to tell someone they are denying someone entry for any of your above reasons? They can absolutely deny you and there is nothing you can do about it. I know this as absolute fact.

I know exactly what I am talking about. No, I don't think they're stupid enough to use the stated reasons, but if any of those reasons are the real one they are going to have an interesting time coming up with a legitimate reason not to. If its a bs excuse there is no legitimate reason, which means no evidence to support their stated reason for denying entry. Should be real interesting to see the border patrol try to explain a 'they looked suspicious your honor' or 'we suspected they were up to something your honor....oh what? you want some evidence to base that suspicion on? sorry don't have any of that' excuse.

But thats irrelevant to the other point - the border patrol cannot do anything it wants to and is not immune from US law. If they were, then yes they would be able to turn people away for being black, or a woman or a muslim or whatever else they wanted to. Notice they don't do that? Gee, I wonder why that is. Totally couldn't have anything to do with the fact they know they have to follow US law at all

and drop the 'and theres nothing you can do about it hur hur hur' horseshit. There very much is, its called get a lawyer, contact the media and start an international incident. What do you think lawsuits are for. You want to talk about 'absolute facts?' You can sue the shit out of the border patrol and any other US organization that violates your rights or does something illegal to you under US law. That is an absolute fact

By your logic some border patrol agent could hit you in the head with a brick, claim 'he was acting suspicious and I had to defend myself' and theres totally nothing you can do about it. Yeah. I'd like to see them claim that and see what happens

 

[⠠⠠⠅⠑⠋⠋⠁⠇⠎ ⠠⠠⠊⠎ ⠠⠠⠁ ⠠⠠⠋⠁⠛]

Not really. They still have to adhere to both US federal law and international law. The whole 'they can do anything they want' stuff is a myth. Same as they couldn't refuse entry to someone for being black or a woman. Even quoting 'suspicious behavior' is legally actionable if they don't have some reasonable cause to make claims like that. They'd have to be idiots to deliberately say something or refuse entry for questionable reasons, it could easily lead to opening a large can of worms. The last thing the border service wants is some kind of incident

- deny someone entry for being [ethny]

It's cute that you think that. The US CBP has explicitly harassed and blocked American citizens returning from Canada to America solely on the basis of their ethnic origin as recently as three months ago.

As @Sookie points out, they most certainly can deny entry to dangerous 'Canadian' criminals like Jonathan Yaniv. Which is not to say that they will. I wouldn't really expect them to if he makes a stink about it.

 

[Spastic Colon]

It's cute that you think that. The US CBP has explicitly harassed and blocked American citizens returning from Canada to America solely on the basis of their ethnic origin as recently as three months ago.

As @Sookie points out, they most certainly can deny entry to dangerous 'Canadian' criminals like Jonathan Yaniv. Which is not to say that they will. I wouldn't really expect them to if he makes a stink about it.

Agreed. If the US gov't can declare American citizens "enemy combatants" and circumvent their constitutional rights, they can surely keep out non citizens at the border under the guise of "national security".

If they tell Yaniv "no", he's going to chimp out and give them the excuse they need to keep him out. Plus, let's be real, given his history -- who is going to care that Yaniv is denied entry for any reason? Even if they admitted it was because he was a troon, do you really think that the rainbow brigade wants to go to bat for a guy that makes them look bad? In order to take a case to trial, you need to have a sympathetic plaintiff. And let's not forget that Yaniv most likely had some CP on that hard drive of his. He also has a habit of mixing alcohol and pain killers -- so they could claim he looked like he was under the influence. The US gov't will find any and all dirt on someone if they need to defend their decisions. Doesn't matter if the border dude was a straight up nazi -- for PR reasons a threat will be discovered or manufactured if necessary. Best case scenario (for Yaniv) is that he would get an apology from the US gov't. He's not going to win some huge lawsuit against the US and get a big payout. Would never, ever happen. But if he wants to waste years and what little money he has left to try it, he should go for it. It would be hilarious to watch him get destroyed. We're not quite at Canadian levels of cucked on the troon question yet.

 

[wry wrangler]

Canadian Police are trained in the same manner as US police. Their misdeeds in Canada receive less air-time because the media likes to deepthroat the state and everything gets kept quiet, Further, Canadians are indoctrinated in their K-12 education to love authority, so most people refrain from challenging authority or going against the grain.

You must live in a different Canada than I do. In the Canada I live in, media are routinely flooded with stories about how hopelessly racist the police are. In particular, media put out a litany of stories on a regular basis about how horribly they mistreat natives, from allegedly refusing to investigate crimes against them to outright accusations of brutality and complicity in murder. Around the time that Coulton Bushie was killed by Gerald Stanley during an attack on the latter's farm, the CBC in particular was wall-to-wall coverage of the RCMP's various alleged misdeeds.

 

[Anonymus Fluhre]

You must live in a different Canada than I do. In the Canada I live in, media are routinely flooded with stories about how hopelessly racist the police are. In particular, media put out a litany of stories on a regular basis about how horribly they mistreat natives, from allegedly refusing to investigate crimes against them to outright accusations of brutality and complicity in murder. Around the time that Coulton Bushie was killed by Gerald Stanley during an attack on the latter's farm, the CBC in particular was wall-to-wall coverage of the RCMP's various alleged misdeeds.

Reports on the police hiding the information on First Nation women disappearing, which Trudeau said he would inquire about when he was running for PM but never did, reports on police abusing their power by driving people outside of the their city to walk back barefooted and often without a jacket too. Certain area's getting their own police force (First Nation reserves where police are routinely attacked.).

 

[SpaceAce]

reports on police abusing their power by driving people outside of the their city to walk back barefooted and often without a jacket too

Canada fun fact: We call them "Starlight Tours"

 

[Freya]

American liberty

Lmao

 

[Sweetpeaa]

Reports on the police hiding the information on First Nation women disappearing, which Trudeau said he would inquire about when he was running for PM but never did, reports on police abusing their power by driving people outside of the their city to walk back barefooted and often without a jacket too. Certain area's getting their own police force (First Nation reserves where police are routinely attacked.).

Most frighteningly is they tend to disappear as soon as they leave the reserve and move to a city. I always thought it was the other way around and that they were killed by their family members or ex-boyfriends and the reserve just didn't give a fuck.

 

[Pandemic at the disco]

So I found something amazing after spending too much time on Vancouver twitter.

It seems like they obsessively retweet stupid bullshit from a over the world asking for money but then some things popped out. They are doing a "virtual city hall" tonight.

C.A.T.A.

Coalition Against Trans Antagonism

Safer Space Guidelines: • This event is for everyone, except for cops, media, and/or fascists. • While allies are welcome to attend, please be aware that members of the trans community will be prioritized, particularly those who are multiply marginalized.


We're having a meeting for everyone but you.

Twitter

Haha wtf Trannies are taking over Canada, really.

 

[Homer Simpson]

Reports on the police hiding the information on First Nation women disappearing, which Trudeau said he would inquire about when he was running for PM but never did, reports on police abusing their power by driving people outside of the their city to walk back barefooted and often without a jacket too. Certain area's getting their own police force (First Nation reserves where police are routinely attacked.).

I think the last time that stuff happened was the 90s? Happened in australia too from what I've heard.

Wanna talk about the Aboriginal women that were having their kids taken away for not maintaining their homes and instead of just cleaning the house killed and dismemebered the woman inspecting the home? I used to work at a residential home and the kids would come back from home visits with bruises and cigarette burns. One kid got fostered by another relative, was back in 2 months.

What was that quote by a Huey in The Boondocks? Not every famous nigga that gets thrown in Jail is Nelson Mandela. To pretend the abos are never in the wrong is pure ignorance.

 

[Pandemic at the disco]

Coalition Against Trans Antagonism
Haha wtf Trannies are taking over Canada, really.

Coalition Against Trans Antagonism

NO TERFS, NO SWERFS

noterfsnoswerfs.com

C.A.T.A.s website is exceptional. If this weren't connected to an actual group via twitter, I would think they are satire.

However they are clever enough that they don't mention anything about who they are on the website.

Instead there are miracles like this:

"TERFs will try to recruit

• Young cisgender girls, as young as 13, though there really is no age limit to indoctrination
• Cis girls who identify as feminists, but feel like transgender people have “taken the spotlight” from cisgender women and their struggles under patriarchy
• Cis girls who are struggling with masculine, tomboy or butch identity, but do not identify as trans
• Cisgender lesbians who struggle with the idea of being attracted to a trans woman, or who fear that her attraction may make her “less lesbian” or “secretly straight”
• Any young, angry, disempowered and vulnerable cisgender girl who is searching for community and acceptance."

Still they want to attack lesbian grandmas and prevent children from being indoctrinated by terfs.

So fuck anyone who wants to stop Johnny from giving tampons to teens, I guess they are part of a hate group now.

This is like ground zero for this insanity and since I have a lot of time because of quarantine, I am going to fall down this rabbit hole if only for my own amusement.