# The Evacuation of Canadians from Lebanon Thread



## twistidnick (20 Jul 2006)

I just don't understand, according to CTV News Net and Global National, over 1% of the Canada's Pop. is in need of evacuations from Lebanon. Can someone please explane to me why so many of our countrymen are their?

Also, I don't know how it is in other cities, but, I was downtown (Windsor, On)Tuesday night and their were people driving around with Lebanese Flags, hanging out of cars, screaming death to Israel, Random Lebanese Sayings and also Victory to Hezbollah. I personally find this very disturbing that this conflict is coming so close to my home and I am powerless to do anything about it.

Nick


----------



## George Wallace (20 Jul 2006)

There are four or five times as many in Hong Kong.  If we go around the world and start counting, you may find that no one lives in Canada according to the statistics that you look at.  Where do you live?   ;D


----------



## vonGarvin (20 Jul 2006)

Pte. (R) Amlin said:
			
		

> I personally find this very disturbing that this conflict is coming so close to my home and I am powerless to do anything about it.


You are NOT powerless.  Get an Isreali and Lebonese flag, make a sign, and say "Save the innocents.  Death to Hezbollah".  Organise an information picket.  Write a letter to the editor.  Talk to those who seem to be supporting the death of a nation.  Talk to those who support a terrorist organisation.  Report them to the police.  That or invest in paint ball guns and vent your rage playing paint ball somewhere.


----------



## twistidnick (20 Jul 2006)

Windsor, On Born and Raised.


----------



## twistidnick (20 Jul 2006)

i like the paintball gun idea.  but your right those are all feasible options.


----------



## Remius (20 Jul 2006)

Pte. (R) Amlin said:
			
		

> I just don't understand, according to CTV News Net and Global National, over 1% of the Canada's Pop. is in need of evacuations from Lebanon. Can someone please explane to me why so many of our countrymen are their?
> 
> Also, I don't know how it is in other cities, but, I was downtown (Windsor, On)Tuesday night and their were people driving around with Lebanese Flags, hanging out of cars, screaming death to Israel, Random Lebanese Sayings and also Victory to Hezbollah. I personally find this very disturbing that this conflict is coming so close to my home and I am powerless to do anything about it.
> 
> Nick



Hmn, I didn't see the report in question but I'm guessing they have their numbers wrong.  Let's be generous and say we have 40 000 000 people in Canada.  Lebanese Canadians and others account for 40 000 in Lebanon (again being very very generous).  That's 0.1%.  I highly doubt that we have 400 000 (1%) Canadians in Lebanon.

Chalk it up to innacurate reporting.


----------



## chanman (20 Jul 2006)

Did someone move a decimal?  Our population should be somewhere above 31 million, maybe closer to 32 (guess we'll find out when the Census 2006 data is finally compiled) so I doubt we have over *300,000* people living in Lebanon.  In fact, if that were true, Canadians would make up nearly _10%_ of Lebenon's population (using wikipedia's population number for Lebenon.)

OTOH, if you take the estimate of how many Canadians are there (21,000 contacted by Foreign Affairs, with possibly up to 50,000 living in country, right?), then depending on how big your number is, Canadians could conceivably make up around 1% of Lebanon's pop.


----------



## aluc (20 Jul 2006)

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1153260642188&call_pageid=968332189003&col=968350116895

Now, I read this in yesterday's paper and found it quite interesting. I am in no way advocating what this gentleman wrote in his letter to the editor of the Star, and I realise it is just a  letter to the editor and may not be based on any facts or statistics. But it may raise an excellent question as to why there are so  many Canadian citizens presently in Lebanon. Does this man's letter hold any water, or is he just blowing hot air?  Without turning this into a witch hunt, it would be interesting to see what the reasons are. Is this man correct , or is everyone just there on summer vacation?

"There are a substantial number of immigrants from Lebanon (1) currently living in Canada. At the time of the 1991 Census, there were 54,605 people born in Lebanon living in Canada, representing 1% of all immigrants. Immigrants born in Lebanon made up 0.2% of the total Canadian population that year."
(http://www.rootsweb.com/~lbnwgw/whoiswho/references/canadaimmigration.htm) - copyright  Citizenship and Immigration Canada     

This is the most recent account of census numbers I could find in my limited time this morning.


Are these people really Canadians?
Jul. 19, 2006. 01:00 AM

Canadians flee war

July 18.

Over the last 40 years we have had thousands of refugees from Lebanon. We offered them Canadian status and passports. With fighting flaring up again in Lebanon we are expected to come to the rescue of 40,000 alleged Canadians.

In my mind, a Canadian is a person who lives, works and pays taxes here, not a person who comes for a short time in order to get a passport that makes international travel easier and then heads elsewhere.

I would be curious to see the tax records for some of those who expect Canada to come to their aid to see if they have been living and working in Canada or if they obtained Canadian passports as flags of convenience.


----------



## twistidnick (20 Jul 2006)

Octavianus said:
			
		

> In my mind, a Canadian is a person who lives, works and pays taxes here, not a person who comes for a short time in order to get a passport that makes international travel easier and then heads elsewhere.
> 
> I would be curious to see the tax records for some of those who expect Canada to come to their aid to see if they have been living and working in Canada or if they obtained Canadian passports as flags of convenience.



I wanted to touch on this but i didn't want to be deemed a racist.


----------



## aluc (20 Jul 2006)

Pte. (R) Amlin said:
			
		

> I wanted to touch on this but i didn't want to be deemed a racist.



Understood. Yet I've been scouring the major papers here in T.O. and have come across a handful of letters to the editor such as the one I previously posted. The Sun/Star have published such letters, and I believe it is a question countless people are asking - why are there so many Canadians there? Some people may consider such questioning racism...but what isn't seen as racism in this day and age. I think people are generally curious, especially when tax money is being used to pay for the evacuation of such a large number of Canadians. Questions aside, the most vital thing here is to ensure that our citzens are removed from harm's way, just as any of us would wish if we were stranded in a similar situation. I am in no way commenting on if these people are Canadian or not, because the bottom line is that they are citizens and must be afforded the same rights that all Canadian citizens are entitled to.


----------



## ArmyRick (20 Jul 2006)

Is there people who become Canadians for the sake of convience? I beleive there is. I get a little sick and tired of people abusing their privileges here in Canada. 

If I were to drive around in my town waving flags and screaming death to X nation, I would be called a blood thirsty racist...


----------



## Good2Golf (20 Jul 2006)

Pte. (R) Amlin said:
			
		

> I wanted to touch on this but i didn't want to be deemed a racist.



Nothing at all racist about your (and others') concerns.

What gets me are those with dual citizenship and who leave Canada travelling on a Canadian passport, then when they get into certain regions, continue their travel on the other citizenship, then when things head South, start travelling again on the Canadian passport. 

It would be interesting to know how many Canadians being evacuated actually entered Lebanon on a Canadian passport.  Per the Geneva Convention, there are ramifications to travelling on different passports.

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## Remius (20 Jul 2006)

The whole citizenship question is valid not racist.

They have citizenship then they are canadian.  Plain and simple in the eyes of the country and the law.  How citizenship is granted is a whole other ball game though.

As far as to why they are all in lebanon?  There are many reasons.  Here are some from my experience with Lebanese-Canadians I grew up with.  

Most lebanese that I know/knew have a strong sense of pride with regards to their country of birth.  Many remember when Lebanon was the "Jewel" of the meditaranean.  Then War hit.  Some fled to safer parts of the world to give their children or themselves a better life.  Most that I have known spent 15 years+ in Canada before deciding to move back.  Most were under the impression that Lebanon would return to its former glory.  Also many were children when they came to Canada.  

Now keep in mind that they were all christian.  I have never realy known a muslim lebanese person.  i know that there are various sects some extreme some not. 

I don't doubt or question their citizenship.  i still don't understand why in the world you would leave one of the best countries in the world and put yourself back in to an unstable area.  But i still don't doubt their citizenship because of it though.

Again, this may not be the standard for all cases.  Just personal experience.

As for passports and such.  Well we live in a society that recognises dual citizenship.  If I had two passports and one gave me an advantage over the other in certain circumstances I would use it.  Not sure if that's legal or not though.


----------



## ArmyRick (20 Jul 2006)

When it is convient to be Canadian, be Canadian. Is that how it works?


----------



## Remius (20 Jul 2006)

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> When it is convient to be Canadian, be Canadian. Is that how it works?



No no.  That's not what I mean.  I think though that if they have dual citizenship and both countries recognise that fact then they should have access to whatever their citizenship entitles them to. But they should also accept the pitfalls as well.  Like, if they go back and are told they have to do mandatory military service for example, then guess what?  Your screwed.  I know of one case where a dual citizen went back to Lebanon and was pressed into mandatory military service.  He tried to appeal it through the Canadian Embassy but was told that there wasn't much they could do to help.


----------



## GO!!! (20 Jul 2006)

I find the whole "citizen" fiasco revolting, but with a simple fix.

Simply instate a rule that states that any Canadian citizen born in another state must;

1. Spend one half of their time (183 days a year) on Canadian soil.

2. Carry proof that their taxes are paid and up to date for the fiscal year. 

Citizenship which was permitted to lapse would come into effect again when the proper tax return was filed, and appropriate taxes paid.

You are already required to spend six months in Canada per year for your health care coverage to remain valid, why should citizenship be any different?

I agree with Army Rick. Our citizenship and passports are not to be used as flags of convenience when your nation of origin implodes (again).


----------



## Remius (20 Jul 2006)

Well, I would go even further.  I think citizenship should be earned, not given as a default based on how much time you spend in country.  You could come here, not do one single thing to benefit the country and claim citizenship after three years.  Meanwhile buddy comes over, struggles to make his place, works for the government or volunteers etc etc and is treated the same way.

Sounds extreme and probably will never happen but it would place some sort of value on citizenship.


----------



## vonGarvin (20 Jul 2006)

Wasn't it "Starship Troopers" that differentiated between "Civilians" and "Citizens"?  I can't remember, but what was the difference?  I think that "Civilians" referred to all inhabitants of earth, whereas "Citizens" where those civilians who have earned the title "Citizen", and all of the inherent privelages of being a citizen, through service to the state.


----------



## Remius (20 Jul 2006)

I think you are correct.  The Roman Empire also granted citizenship to soldiers serving twenty years. (I'm not saying we should do that though, but the concept is good)


----------



## aluc (20 Jul 2006)

Just having to earn your citizenship makes it that much more important and cherished for the beholder. It's like owning your own car or house....pride of ownership ! The fact that one has earned something usually means they have greater respect, and/ or value what they've earned more so than someone who has  not worked for what they have.


----------



## Kat Stevens (20 Jul 2006)

Duey said:
			
		

> Nothing at all racist about your (and others') concerns.
> 
> What gets me are those with dual citizenship and who leave Canada travelling on a Canadian passport, then when they get into certain regions, continue their travel on the other citizenship, then when things head South, start travelling again on the Canadian passport.
> 
> ...


Why?  I have dual citizenship, along with that spiffy red EU passport.  Makes travel in Europe a breeze, why wouldn't I use it?


----------



## Trinity (20 Jul 2006)

Yeah....  great idea..

Citizens and Civilians

oh wait.. until you realize that you are going to have discrimination from 
one group to the other.

I'm not for any idea that's going to create separate classes because that's exactly
what would happen here.  Not necessarily the have's and have nots, but you would definitely
create a new boundary where discrimination will happen.  We already have enough reasons
to discriminate against our fellow man... do we really want one more?


----------



## probum non poenitet (20 Jul 2006)

Not sure if it's relevant, but I knew quite a few South Africans in the early 1990s.

Almost all of them had or were seeking dual citizenship- British, U.S., Canadian, Australian, etc.

They were quite up front about it. They were afraid that the end of apartheid was going to be a bloody civil war, and that whites would be persecuted (much like Mugabe's Zimbabwe).

So they carried two passports so they could escape in a hurry if things went wrong. They weren't thinking in terms of loyalty rather in terms of practicality.

I have no clue if that's what many of the Lebanese are doing, but it would make sense considering what a powder-keg that whole region is.


----------



## HDE (20 Jul 2006)

It may well be part of a plot to quietly move tens of thousands of Canadians into Lebanon; suddenly, one day, the coup happens...a little piece of Canada  on the shores of the Med


----------



## Remius (21 Jul 2006)

Trinity said:
			
		

> Yeah....  great idea..
> 
> Citizens and Civilians
> 
> ...



We already have the distinction.  Canadian residents and Permanent Residents.  Right now the only requirement to apply for citizenship is time in country.  3 years.  So why not have a requirement to earn it other than time?  How about tangible contributions or service to state?


----------



## aluc (21 Jul 2006)

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1153433434245&call_pageid=970599119419

EDITORIAL: Dual citizens all equally Canadian
Jul. 21, 2006. 08:46 AM

Of the 50,000 Canadians who have found themselves caught in the middle of the brutal conflict raging in Lebanon between Israeli and Hezbollah, many are mothers who no doubt love all their children equally.

So why is it that some Canadians in all parts of this country are asking whether these same mothers — or their husbands, children or uncles and aunts — can be loyal to two countries at the same time?

The question of dual citizenship has become a hot issue since Ottawa announced it would evacuate all Canadian citizens who want to leave Lebanon and bring them home at taxpayers' expense.

To start, many people were surprised to learn 50,000 Canadians were in Lebanon when Israel launched attacks after Hezbollah militants captured two Israeli soldiers and killed seven others. Many Canadians there at the time were tourists; most of the rest lived year-round in Lebanon.

Why, the critics ask, does Canada allow people to hold Canadian citizenship when they have chosen to live in another country? What obligation does the Canadian government have to spend millions of dollars to rescue people who may carry a Canadian passport strictly as a matter of convenience? And why does Canada even grant citizenship to people who are citizens of some other country?

The federal government answered the last question back in 1977 when it updated the Citizenship Act to allow Canadians "to have two or more citizenships and allegiances at the same time." The 1977 act made Canada one of the first of countries to permit dual citizenship. Today, about half of the world's nations allow their citizens to be a citizen of another country.

When the act was approved, Ottawa recognized that a country heavily dependent on immigration for its growth could not expect immigrants to leave their previous lives completely behind when they came here. Dual citizenship was an acknowledgement that people have multiple connections in a rapidly shrinking world — to family, to identity, history and culture — that cannot nor should not be denied.

Today, there are roughly 600,000 naturalized Canadians who maintain dual citizenship. Clearly some of them use — and occasionally abuse — their Canadian citizenship as an "insurance policy" in times of trouble or as a "passport of convenience" when they travel and work abroad. But the majority are decent, hardworking Canadians with ties to both their adopted country of Canada and to their homeland. Did the French passport that Governor General Michaëlle Jean possessed until last year really make her less of a Canadian? Is Queen Elizabeth any less British — or any less Canadian — for being a citizen of 17 different countries?

As far as the government and the law are concerned, a Canadian is a Canadian. That is why Ottawa has a moral obligation to rescue any Canadian in Lebanon who wants out — regardless of whether they went to Lebanon to care for a sick parent, to earn a living or to live out their retirement.

Canada is desperate for skilled and educated immigrants to keep our economy humming and to use their connections with their homelands to help this country forge stronger trade links with the rest of the world.

We could hardly attract them if we insisted they break the bonds with the countries from which they came or if we offered them a form of second-class citizenship that left them to fend for themselves if they were to run into the kind of trouble Canadians in Lebanon now face.


----------



## George Wallace (21 Jul 2006)

Interesting line:

"Canada is desperate for skilled and educated immigrants to keep our economy humming and to use their connections with their homelands to help this country forge stronger trade links with the rest of the world."

Sure we are desperate for skilled and educated immigrants to keep our economy going etc., but I am sure that we are interested in them actually living in Canada, not their native land.  Kinda looks more like they are not really becoming Canadians to me, so why should they receive all the benefits?  If they are paying their taxes to a foreign government and not to the Canadian government, taking advantage of Canadian Medicare, EI, Welfare, and other Canadian 'Social Programs' while living in a foreign land for twenty or more years, I would call them more of a drain than an asset on our Society.  

I would expect them to come and actually live in Canada to take advantage of our 'benefits'.  I have nothing against 'Family connections' in foreign lands, but I do have a problem with prolonged, or even worse, permanent Residency in their native lands.


----------



## GAP (21 Jul 2006)

I wonder how many Lebonese are actually in their own country...30-50 thousand Canadians, Thousands of Americans, Australians, etc, etc,, and now this: 

30,000 Filipinos stranded in Lebanon  
Web posted at: 7/21/2006 11:46:36  Source ::: AFP MANILA •
http://www.thepeninsulaqatar.com/Display_news.asp?section=World%5FNews&subsection=Philippines+%26+South+Asia&month=July2006&file=World_News20060721114636.xml

The Philippine president yesterday appealed for Israel and Hezbollah to avoid harming some 30,000 Filipinos stranded in Lebanon, and urged the international community to help evacuate her citizens. 

Facing criticism for failing to do enough to help Filipinos stuck in the war zone, many of whom are female domestic workers, Gloria Arroyo insisted her government was doing everything it could. 

"The Philippines makes a special appeal to all combatant forces to spare Filipino nationals who have no wish other than to be taken out of harm's way," she said in a statement. 

"In the name of humanity, I ask the combatants not to harm them," she said, while appealing for other countries to "help us in the evacuation process." 
More on Link


----------



## acclenticularis (21 Jul 2006)

Wow, 50,000 Canadians in Lebanon.  That is like 1.5 out of every 1,000 Canadians is in Lebanon.  Lebanon!  

I would expect them to come and actually live in Canada to take advantage of our 'benefits'.  I have nothing against 'Family connections' in foreign lands, but I do have a problem with prolonged, or even worse, permanent Residency in their native lands.
+1

Although, I dislike restrictions etc.  There should be a post-citizenship residency requirement.  You want to be a Canadian citizen, well you have to remain a resident for X number of years to completely fullfil your end of the bargain.  No more, just became a citizen to get my family over to Canada as kind of a safe haven in case of emergencies in my 'preferred land' sort of thing.  Not probably a PC kind of idea, freedom restrictions etc., but do we have to be a country of convenience?


----------



## 1feral1 (21 Jul 2006)

Octavianus said:
			
		

> I would be curious to see the tax records for some of those who expect Canada to come to their aid to see if they have been living and working in Canada or if they obtained Canadian passports as flags of convenience.



You hit the nail on the head mate!

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## FastEddy (22 Jul 2006)

Wesley 'Down Under' said:
			
		

> You hit the nail on the head mate!
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Wes




Couldn't agree with it more either.

But does raise a few questions: 
1. What the hell is so attractive about Lebanon, that all these foreign Nationals are there ?.
                                                 
2. If this is the place they want to spend the rest of theirs lives in and its so great, why the hell didn't they stay there in the first place ?.

3. When is Canada going to realize its be suckered ?.

We need immigrants, Oh Yeah !: During visit of Queen, Sister In law met RN type off the Britania, fell in love, it sailed, she followed him to UK, married there, transferred off for base posting to be with now pregnant wife. She found UK hard to adjust to after North American Standards. So he decided to Migrate to Canada: He 19 yrs RN 9 aboard the Britania, we had  to post a $20,000 bond, guarantee a residence and employment and two and a bit years later he was issued a visa. Five years later, Citizenship and he had to give up his British Passport. To this day, its the best move he says he has ever made and wouldn't want to live anywhere else.

Today all you have to do, is flush your passport down the toilet, we sure have a great system.

Maybe we are looking in all the wrong places. Correct me if I'm wrong, there are quite stringent quota's and restrictions for EU and Mediterranean Countries.

My apologies "Wes" for tail ending your post.

Cheers.


----------



## 1feral1 (22 Jul 2006)

FastEddy said:
			
		

> Couldn't agree with it more either.
> 
> But does raise a few questions:
> 1. What the hell is so attractive about Lebanon, that all these foreign Nationals are there ?.
> ...



None needed mate  

Today in Sydney over 15,000 Leb 'Aussies' marched in protest to the war in Lebanon. Many placcards read "John, save our country". I honestly thought as citizens of Australia was their country.  

Yip, we too have been hoodwinked, now the gov't is flying every single Leb out of the region, and you guessed it, the taxpayer is copping the bill! Wanna know more, try www.news.com.au 

So at the end of the day, are they Australians or Lebanese living in Australia. Get your priorities right folks.

We're on to your rort!

Wes


----------



## Bill Smy (22 Jul 2006)

http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Worthington_Peter/2006/07/21/1695081.html

Fri, July 21, 2006

CONVENIENT CANADIANS 

By Peter Worthington    

What in heaven's name are 50,000 Canadians doing in Lebanon? 

Surely they can't all be there for a wedding, or a family reunion, or an academic conference, or even as tourists? 

The estimated 50,000 are roughly 20% of all the Lebanese who have become Canadian citizens -- about 250,000 of 'em. 

Put another way, there are twice as many Canadians in Lebanon as there are Canadians in the army. 

Are they all in Lebanon for a visit? Hardly. 

Most are dual-citizenship Canadians who've chosen to return to the motherland to live as Lebanese -- until trouble strikes and then they want the Canadian government to rescue them, not the Lebanese government. 

Under terms of Canada's dual citizenship policy, the country in which people choose to live, or to visit, takes precedence over Canadian law -- which isn't to say we, as a country, shouldn't help people in trouble. 

Frankly, any dual-citizenship Canadian who chooses to live in one of the danger areas of the world should not expect Canada to rush to his aid and rescue him and relatives when danger threatens. 

Instead, appeal to the government you prefer to live under, rather than the Canadian one. 

Now Canada is chartering seven ships and a bunch of aircraft to rescue these citizens, many of whom have chosen not to live in Canada. Does Canada have an obligation to be responsible for them? The cost to taxpayers of removing tens of thousands from Lebanon is enormous. 

How many, one wonders, of these people will move back to Lebanon when the crisis is over and security is restored -- assuming it ever will be in Lebanon? 

The view that "a Canadian is a Canadian" and all should be treated equally may need revising. 

Why should the government be responsible for naturalized citizens who return to live in a dangerous country in which they are also citizens? 

Tourists or short-term visitors are in a different category. 

Some MPs have suggested Canadians in Lebanon whose principal country of residence is Canada, should be rescued first, since those whose primary home is Lebanon are better able to survive than visitors. 

Although Lebanese have settled in Canada for well over a century and are productive citizens, Canada's current policies risk clogging the country with people who shouldn't be here and whom we don't want. 

Already, we won't deport terrorist suspects or criminals if there's fear they may be executed or tortured in their birth country. This means virtually no bad guy can be deported to the Middle East. 

Canadians of Syrian or Iranian descent should avoid visiting Damascus or Tehran where they're in danger of being grabbed on phony charges -- which in no way is to suggest that the Lebanese Canadians being evacuated have done anything illegal. 

We already have a self-described al-Qaida family in Canada, with one member charged with murdering an American soldier in Afghanistan. Many feel this family doesn't deserve to be Canadian, since their allegiance is to an enemy of Canada. 

Canada accepts that dual citizens have special rights. But the policy needs fine-tuning. It can be argued -- as some countries do -- that allegiance should be to one country, not two or three. 

If someone wants to be a Canadian, that person should give up citizenship in his birth country. 

An exception should be made with the U.S. on grounds that we are geographically, traditionally and culturally close. 

But for other immigrants, the choice should be one citizenship and one passport. 

It's too late now for Lebanon, where 50,000 Canadians outnumber Americans by a two-to-one ratio. 

Ludicrous. Change the law before the next crisis!


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (22 Jul 2006)

Had to laugh watching the footage of the evacuees last night. when one woman got off the boat she said the toilets were disgusting on the boat (or non-existant I can't remember which). She said if she'd known that before they sailed she would have stayed and faced the bombs in Lebanon.
Is it my imagination or is all of this just getting a bit farcical? For lack of a place to go and take a dump you'd stay and risk death? Wow! :


----------



## The Bread Guy (22 Jul 2006)

Hate to be the spoiler, here, but to those suggesting immigrants have to "earn" citizenship here, one question:

What about all the people BORN HERE that haven't shown merit enough for the rights of (or have been negligent in carrying out the responsibilities of) true citizenship?  How do you tell a law-abiding, just want a better life person coming from offshore wanting to contribute when they see some people born here who, in some eyes, may not be worthy of citizenship?

Then again, maybe a "draft pick trade"  - keener, come on in; weiner, out you go?


----------



## GAP (22 Jul 2006)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> Hate to be the spoiler, here, but to those suggesting immigrants have to "earn" citizenship here, one question:
> 
> What about all the people BORN HERE that haven't shown merit enough for the rights of (or have been negligent in carrying out the responsibilities of) true citizenship?  How do you tell a law-abiding, just want a better life person coming from offshore wanting to contribute when they see some people born here who, in some eyes, may not be worthy of citizenship?
> Then again, maybe a "draft pick trade"  - keener, come on in; whiner, out you go?



What about approaching the problem the way they do with the snowbirds? first your free mediacal coverage is suspended, then, unless you are someplace because a Canadian Company posted you there for employment purposes, your priority drops down compared to say, a vacationer. This is all premised on the fact the Canadian Embassy knows you are in the particular country at all. A large part of the Canadian-Lebanese demanding to come home, the embassy did not know about. 

my 2 cents


----------



## nowhere_man (22 Jul 2006)

I found something that would pertain to this

: http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=hamilton/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1153518611512&call_pageid=1020420665036&col=1112101662670 (rest of article on page)

"Lama Ghandour, a 38-year-old mother of three from Ottawa, has not been back in Canada in 10 years  and did not want to leave, but was doing so for the sake of her children"

In my view i don't think she should be allowed to go on the Canadian ships or if she did she should be at the end of the line. Does anyone think that 10 years would mean that your being a citizen of Canada would be expired. This is a prime example pf people who keep there Canadian passport as a matter of convenience.


----------



## GAP (22 Jul 2006)

nowhere_man said:
			
		

> "Lama Ghandour, a 38-year-old mother of three from Ottawa, has not been back in Canada in 10 years  and did not want to leave, but was doing so for the sake of her children"



Is this the woman mentioned in the earlier part of this thread, whose husband works for the UN in Lebanon? If it is, her sentiments might be really heartfelt. But, if it someone who has moved back and keeps the passport as a "get out of jail" card, you would be correct in wanting her at the end of the line.


----------



## nowhere_man (22 Jul 2006)

I didn't see anything in the article about her husband working for the UN but if he was that is  the longest posting I've ever heard of.


----------



## Cliff (22 Jul 2006)

> Most are dual-citizenship Canadians who've chosen to return to the motherland to live as Lebanese -- until trouble strikes and then they want the Canadian government to rescue them, not the Lebanese government.



I can only wonder how many of these returning Cdns are pro-Hezbollah or actual terrorists operatives, for that matter.


----------



## GAP (22 Jul 2006)

nowhere_man said:
			
		

> I didn't see anything in the article about her husband working for the UN but if he was that is  the longest posting I've ever heard of.



It was not in the article. I thought it was in this or the the other Lebanon thread where (might have been CFRA) where a relative to the woman explained why she was in Lebanon for so long. At the time it made sense.


----------



## beach_bum (22 Jul 2006)

My problem with all of this is that my tax dollars are being spent on this.  Why shouldn't they have to pay something?  Those who come back to Canada and have homes and jobs etc....fine, but what of those who have nothing here?  On the news last night the Red Cross was looking for donations (cash) because many coming back hadn't been here in so many years and had no homes etc to go to.  Who is going to pay for them?


----------



## JackD (22 Jul 2006)

i have been reading the Peter Worthington article and indeed a few others from the "Spotlight on Military News" - I see nothing wrong with duel citizenship - and indeed leaving the country and living elsewhere if need be. I live and work in Poland - my wife and my family are Polish and Canadian. Do I contribute to Canada? Damned right I do and did. I spent 44 years of my life in Canada - eleven years in the army, 3 years off and on prospecting, 3 years in forestry, 3 years wild life work - and a couple of years in developing a fruit industry in the Prairies. I've made a lot of people rich - and ate a lot of crap. Here I teach - and I act as an ambassador for the country that didn't do much for me - a better ambassador than those useless sods in the embassy in Warszawa. My salary - from holding down 4 jobs is about $900 Canadian a month - far less than welfare n'est-ce pas?. That I live overseas doesn't mean I am less a Canadian. I am and always will be - Worthington, the useless jerks who write for the national Post  and indeed anyone who thinks different  can all stuff themselves. It has been a tradition for Canucks to go elsewhere to make a contribution to this nation. Don't mistake being elsewhere for not being Canadian - I'm damned proud I'm a Canuck and I'm also damned proud to be a Pole too


----------



## hugh19 (22 Jul 2006)

So JackD  if you choose to live in Poland  good on you. But if  the brown stuff hit the rotary device, why should canadian taxpayers pay for you to leave?? Thats the big question. It was your choice to leave, so why should we be responsible for you?


----------



## karl28 (22 Jul 2006)

Here is a simple solution check the tax records if they (so called citizens) paid taxes every year like the rest of us than they get to come home if not to bad so sad you wait it out there .


----------



## casing (22 Jul 2006)

This whole fiasco has me flabbergasted.  I echo many of the opinions in this thread questioning why most of these Lebanese-Canadians have the right to emergency evacuation and why we, the daily taxpayers, must foot the bill for the tens of thousands of pseudo Canadians to return "home" (home? yeah right).

I would like to raise a thought that I don't remember reading in this thread yet, but that sledge has alluded to quite clearly.  On top of the fact that these people (and I'm not lumping legitimate tourists or resident Canadians visiting family in this) seem to hold Canadian citizenship as a get-out-of-danger-zone-free card, why are they entitled to evacuation at the expense of resident Canadians when they went to Lebanon willingly and chose to stay there.  Tensions in the area have been high for years.  Breakout of conflict was always a strong possibility.  Daily exposure to dangers such bombings is common knowledge.  Yet, tens of thousands of "Canadians" choose to make Lebanon their full-time home.  Now that the crap has hit the fan they have the "right" to be evacuated, and seemingly it had better be in style or the government (oh excuse me, just PM Harper, apparently) risk further ire.

All that being said, I disagree with opinions such as Worthington's that dual citizenship should be disallowed.  I do believe there should be strong restrictions on it, but ditching dual citizenship privileges completely would be unfortunate.  I don't have any answers other than to say that yes, I think there should be graduated privileges.  And no, I do not hold dual citizenship.

_Grammar edit._


----------



## vonGarvin (22 Jul 2006)

I am of the opinion that ANY person who holds a valid Canadian Passport should be evacuated.  Full stop.

Having said that, those ingrates complaining about conditions and stating that they would rather have waited, I only say this: "Fine.  Back of the line.  HMCS Imagination will be along shortly, and the Captain has generously agreed to allow you full access to his cabin."

I also believe I heard one young person on the radio stating that his heart is with Hezbollah.  I say fine, send his heart back to Hezbollah, and we'll keep the rest of him here.

In Prison.


----------



## JackD (22 Jul 2006)

In reply to the Sledge - would I expect to be rescued - no damn way. no one risks the life for me - no damned way would I have that - nor would I have any one foot the bill for me - but if the manure hits the fan and I had to get my wife and daughter out of here - yes - is there something wrong with that - I'll pay their way - but I expect that they be _allowed_ back in Canada - Canada's reputation would have been a bit better had that been the policy with Jews and various other peoples prior to the Second World War wouldn't it? You see I have obligations both as being nationalised Polish and being Canadian. Canadians do not cut and run - remember what I said. I am known as being Canadian - I have an image to uphold and being one does not exclude the other - and if it means anything i doubt I'll ever get back to Canada - but i keep a vial of Saskatchewan dirt to be sprinkled on my grave.


----------



## KevinB (22 Jul 2006)

I polygraph all trying to get out on their alligience -- then I handcuff and toss the failures off teh boat at the halfway point... ;D


----------



## gaspasser (22 Jul 2006)

von Garvin said:
			
		

> I am of the opinion that ANY person who holds a valid Canadian Passport should be evacuated.  Full stop.
> 
> Having said that, those ingrates complaining about conditions and stating that they would rather have waited, I only say this: "Fine.  Back of the line.  HMCS Imagination will be along shortly, and the Captain has generously agreed to allow you full access to his cabin."
> 
> ...



"And if you don't like the beer, go home."  My sentiments exactly!  Just be glad that there were folks around to put their lives on the line so you could get out of a sticky situation.  I have absolutely NO sympathy those who look a gift horse in the mouth and cry about it.
I believe sympathy is found in the dictionary between sh*t and syphylis. My 16 year old knows, he looked it up.


----------



## FormerHorseGuard (23 Jul 2006)

i was in the USA after 9/11 and no one offered to come get me and bring me home. I am born, raised, ex service person and a proud Canadian, married and since divorced an American. I woud not expect the Canadian government to resuce me from any where in the world I choose to live after leaving Canada, then complain out loud how slow or how bad the trip was. 
I think if you are Canadian, you should have any right to dual passports, dual citizenship and realize you are a Canadian first and foremost.
My background is Scottish, Welsh, German,Irish and Canadian. I consider myself Canadian and nothing else. If you want to live in your homeland and claim to be a Canadian when it is convient do not complain how slow and how unprepared the goverment that  you do not pay taxes to, or choose not to live here full time, you do not have a say in how things are done to protect you and save you.

I have a family friend who left China and when and if he leaves Canada, and visits his former homeland , he knows full well the Canadian Passport is no protection once he lands on China's soil because they will consider him to have broken their law. You enter a country that is unsafe as those in the middle east, you should be told up front, we will not protect you because you know and Canadian Government knows that it is a powder keg waiting to blow. Enter at own risk should be stamped on passports when leaving.

I think the full time residents of the country  whould be the last to be taken out because they  choose to be there and not live in Canada. 
Complainers should be put to the end of the line and left there.

I heard one lady on the news say something to the effect if she knew how rough the trip would of been she would stayed in her house and would of felt safer with the bombs falling because it took longer then she thought it should to leave.
BOO HOO suck it up lady  you got out and did not ahve to pay or risk your life at some border point.


----------



## vonGarvin (23 Jul 2006)

I am Canadian, and my heritage is mostly Irish.  I am, however, a Germanophile.  I lived there as an exchange student for a year (I was 16, it rocked!), I have a degree in German language and literature, and I just love the people/country.  In the world cup, when Germany was playing whomever, I was going for the Germans.  One exception: should Germany had ever played Canada, my team would MOST DEFINATELY been  
Hands down.
No discussion.
Canada Number 1.
Germany "Number 10" (to use the old Vietnam era slang)
So, though my "ties" to Germany are a product of my experiences, my heart belongs to, and always will be with  

People with dual citizenship?  No Problem.  Divided loyalties?  That I can understand.  Calling down one of your "homelands" is unacceptable.  These people should cry, yes cry for what's happening in Lebanon, but also I feel they should be grateful that their adoptive homeland has gone well out of its way to get them out of harm's way.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (23 Jul 2006)

Just my further $0.02....

I've always been bothered by the "hypenated-Canadian" as too often it appears as though the culture of origin takes precedence over the culture of Canada as a whole. What this event did was highlight the extreme polarity of this issue.

I have no problem with a hyphenated-Canadian who is 75%+ Canadian with some loyalty to their nation of origin, but when you have so-called citizens (and I think this is truly worthy of debate) who have decided they are residents of foreign countries whose loyalty overwelmingly is NOT with Canada, except when they need free health care to have expensive procedures like childbirth or cancer treatments, then I think we have a serious problem.

As a further note, I believe that the British system that made Canada wealthy, strong and a place where people want to immigrate to all but ignored in our PC world, as the "tolerance"/"multicultural" mantra becomes dominant, although not enough people are considering the implications of that transition (Sharia Law, self-created firewalls around specific religious groups that make integration impossible and cultures who embrace marijuana and crime over education or think that welfare is satisfactory lifestyle choice stand out).

Bottom Line:  I think we're looking at the tip of the iceburg of a larger national debate on where our country needs to go forward and I think it will be very interesting to see how that plays out over the next 5-10 years.


Matthew.   

P.S.  For those who haven't read "The World is Flat" by Thomas Friedman, I highly recommend it.....


----------



## George Wallace (23 Jul 2006)

There are many questions to ask about this 'event'.  We have asked many about Duel Citizenship, residency, etc. and in the most cases we are generalizing in our comments.  We all are stating opinions, and at the same time not mentioning that we also know of exceptions to those opinions expressed.

We have had some of these evacuees arrested as soon as they have stepped off the plane, as they were fugitives of the Law.  This just points to the fact that some of our 'Bureaucrats' are doing their jobs and doing those jobs efficiently.

I have also noticed that some of these evacuees can not speak English or French.  I know that we have many in Canada who live in their 'ghettos' who can not speak English or French, but the point is: They live in Canada.  What is going on when we have people coming in as evacuees on Canadian Passports, who have lived in a foreign land for over twenty years, can't speak one or the other of our Official Languages, and have no place of residence in Canada?  These people are being put up, at Government expense, in hotels in Ottawa, Toronto and Montreal.  This points to a serious problem which backs up comments of "Passports of Convenience".


----------



## Springroll (23 Jul 2006)

FormerHorseGuard said:
			
		

> i was in the USA after 9/11 and no one offered to come get me and bring me home.



We were also living in the USA on 9/11 and even though we were posted down there with NATO, we were told that we would be given ample notice to leave on our own if there was a threat made to the base or surrounding bases. 

Nobody was offering to take us out on their dime, and our spouses were to remain there indefinitely.


----------



## tingbudong (23 Jul 2006)

> I think we're looking at the tip of the iceburg of a larger national debate on where our country needs to go forward and I think it will be very interesting to see how that plays out over the next 5-10 years.



Couldn't agree more, and it is going to be a very, very interesting discussion.


----------



## cameron (23 Jul 2006)

I happen to of African descent and born and raised in the West Indies (a beautiful little island named St. Kitts as a matter of fact).  I have absolutely no problem with people migrating to Canada, USA, Gt. Britain, Netherlands etc. to seek better opportunities or to live in a peaceful and stable society (or to pursue their dream of joining a first class western military).  What I do have a problem with is people who migrate from a country to seek refuge in another and then openly support terrorist organisations while living in the country that shelters them.

If those people driving around shouting Hezbollah slogans and calling for the annihilation of Israel feel that way, THEN WHY THE FUCK DON'T THEY GO BACK TO LEBANON AND FIGHT FOR HEZBOLLAH!!!


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (23 Jul 2006)

cameron said:
			
		

> I happen to of African descent and born and raised in the West Indies (a beautiful little island named St. Kitts as a matter of fact).  I have absolutely no problem with people migrating to Canada, USA, Gt. Britain, Netherlands etc. to seek better opportunities or to live in a peaceful and stable society (or to pursue their dream of joining a first class western military).  What I do have a problem with is people who migrate from a country to seek refuge in another and then openly support terrorist organisations while living in the country that shelters them.
> 
> If those people driving around shouting Hezbollah slogans and calling for the annihilation of Israel feel that way, THEN WHY THE frig DON'T THEY GO BACK TO LEBANON AND FIGHT FOR HEZBOLLAH!!!



Preach it! You got my vote!


----------



## big bad john (23 Jul 2006)

cameron said:
			
		

> I happen to of African descent and born and raised in the West Indies (a beautiful little island named St. Kitts as a matter of fact).  I have absolutely no problem with people migrating to Canada, USA, Gt. Britain, Netherlands etc. to seek better opportunities or to live in a peaceful and stable society (or to pursue their dream of joining a first class western military).  What I do have a problem with is people who migrate from a country to seek refuge in another and then openly support terrorist organisations while living in the country that shelters them.
> 
> If those people driving around shouting Hezbollah slogans and calling for the annihilation of Israel feel that way, THEN WHY THE FUCK DON'T THEY GO BACK TO LEBANON AND FIGHT FOR HEZBOLLAH!!!



Not so politically correct, but I like it.  Well said!


----------



## ArmyRick (23 Jul 2006)

Well said cameron and straight to the point


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (23 Jul 2006)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> Preach it! You got my vote!



+1 on that!


Matthew.


----------



## 1feral1 (23 Jul 2006)

cameron said:
			
		

> If those people driving around shouting Hezbollah slogans and calling for the annihilation of Israel feel that way, THEN WHY THE frig DON'T THEY GO BACK TO LEBANON AND FIGHT FOR HEZBOLLAH!!!



Too right!

They export their violence and hatred to our countries, then exploit it on TV with these, at times scary rallies. The males have their faces wrapped in those scarfs, just like the terrs ( Sorry Tamouh, I mean freedom fighters). The demonstrations in Sydney have caused millions of dollars of damage on occasion. No respect, just boiling with hatred, insighting fear and shock into mainstream Australians, who have frankly had a gutful with the lot.. One would swear he was in downtown Beruit! The last parade held in Sydney the other day had 15,000+ of them, but this time it was peaceful. This time.

Regards,

Wes


----------



## exsemjingo (23 Jul 2006)

This whole situation just goes to show what's wrong with this country.  Try speaking frankly about it in public, and you'll come across as some kind of cracker.  What needs saying is that Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese government, and that acts of war like kidnapping soldiers brings retaliatory acts of war.  This isn't just more 'tit for tat' violence.
It is sad to say that fight is coming here by the boatload, and no one in the media realizes it.


----------



## gaspasser (23 Jul 2006)

Isn't it a great thing that we have Freedom of Speech and some of these "hyphenated foreigners" are preaching racial hatred under the free speech banner.  If any normal Canadian spouted this type of garbage, we'd be in jail.  Try going back to your homeland and spout the same stuff, see how far you get.  I'm tired of immigrants complaining about Canada and upholding thier country of origin as the greatest place on earth. If you don't like it here, go back!   
I was born and mostly raised in the UK, my family immigrated to Canada in the late 60's.  I AM Canadian. Strangely I swore and oath to the Queen, what would happen if Canada and the UK went to war???  Half a breath, fight for Canada.   
As for the media, we all know that some of the outlets look for the negative and roll with that for ratings. Even if you were to risk your life saving a stranger, the media would turn it around and crap on you for mouthing expletives while giving mouth to mouth and CPR.  Most of the evacuees are probably very happy to be on safe ground, and the media went after the one who spouted off about the travel conditions.  What would they say if we sent Hercs over to get them out.  "Oh Dear, we had to face sideways and it was bumpy and we had to eat stale sandwiches" And crap all over the government for using outdated equipment.  Hold it, maybe that's not a bad idea........?


----------



## 1feral1 (23 Jul 2006)

Meanwhile in Australia, the government of New South Wales has authorised mental health councillers to council those back from Lebanon, all at the taxpayers expense of course, and I wonder how many will now 'claim' they now have PTSD or are now traumatised and can't work. It looks like we'll be paying for more than we thought or should.

Let me see, ships to other destinations, then chartered aircraft to Australia, then mental health, and now they'll ride the dole to again milk us more more, then they'll complain. Its a never ending cycle of taking us for a ride! 

Recently in Sydney (from the Fairfiled suburb of western Sydney) a family who proudly flew an Australian flag on a flagpole in their front yard were approached by NSW police, and asked to take the flag down because it was antagonising local ethnic islamic youth and causing unrest in the community.

Can you believe that? Asked to lower your own country's flag because it offends people who now live here, accept our dole, and rape us for all they can, now those same people whinge and complain on conditions during their journey back to Australia for Lebanon, and clam we did not help them enough.

I, like others am sick of it!

What next.

Shakes head (in TOTAL disgust),


Wes


----------



## vonGarvin (24 Jul 2006)

From http://www.hamiltonspectator.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=hamilton/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1153518611691&call_pageid=1020420665036&col=1014656511815
One Canadian's story about why she is in Lebanon.

I found this sentence interesting
Then, in the middle of my workday one week ago, an alarm went off in the office and we were told not to go outside.

Seven Israeli soldiers had been killed and two taken hostage; there was celebratory shooting going on nearby.
And this:
The majority of the Lebanese do not naturally support Hezbollah, but Israeli attacks are rallying support. I am staying in a dorm at the American University of Beirut, and even these least radical Lebanese were joyful when Hezbollah hit an Israeli warship.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Jul 2006)

Note the military in civvies mentioned (CP photo attached)..... 

 Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the [http://www.cb-cda.gc.ca/info/act-e.html#rid-33409|Copyright Act.]

*Canadians safe after dramatic rescue in violent southern city *  
Les Perraux and Alex Panetta, Canadian Press, 24 Jul 06
http://www.recorder.ca/cp/National/060724/n0724133A.html

BEIRUT (CP) - Canadian soldiers made a perilous journey into Hezbollah territory Monday to whisk stranded Canadians from the most violent city in the fight in southern Lebanon. 

A dozen civilians were outnumbered by about 15 Canadian military personnel, including several in plain clothes, as they rushed onto a ship in Tyre, a southern Lebanon port reduced to ruin by constant Israeli bombardment. 

As bombs fell a few hundred metres away, several hundred refugees including the Canadians climbed into life rafts and were ferried to the Princesa Marissa anchored off shore. The ship did not even attempt to dock to stay clear of the blasts. 

"It was 13 days of bombing - every day, night and day," Adouy Ali of Montreal told reporters dockside in Cyprus. His pregnant wife and two children were with him. 

"That's why we're tired, and the kids are tired too. The sentiment is very angry because everything is against the civilians. And the civilians - all the people dying are civilians -every day." 

The rescue also took place under a hail of leaflets dropped by an Israeli plane. Guerrillas answered with a small arms fire. 

The high-risk, high-security rescue was a sharp contrast with the sleepy atmosphere at the main Canadian evacuation centre in Beirut on Monday. 

There officials decided to throw the doors open to anyone with a Canadian passport who wants to leave to speed up the process in the capital where bombing is sporadic and early panic has disappeared. 

Having anchored in both spots, the crew of the Princesa Marissa said urgency was in the air in Tyre compared to laid-back Beirut. 

The ship is expected to return to Tyre Wednesday, this time chartered by the Canadian government, to pick up Canadians stranded in the country's south. 

Crew members of the Cypriot ship chartered by the European Union could smell the plumes of smoke from bombed-out buildings as Israeli forces pounded a series of targets with a half dozen bombs apiece. 

"Here we saw bombs 500 metres away," said Yiannis Ioannou, a cook on the ship who prepared a buffet for the evacuees. 

"In Beirut, you see nothing. (In Tyre) you see (bombs) always hitting the same targets. Always six bombs hitting the same place." 

Added another crew member: "In Beirut, you dock. In Tyre, you stay somewhere in the middle of the sea." 

Ship Capt. Kyriakos Papaevrides said the trip was dangerous but necessary. "Somebody has to go," he said. "Somebody has to help the people. We put ourselves in danger to help the people." 

As the ship arrived in Cyprus, security personnel pulled away journalists and Papaevrides scolded his crew members for giving out their names. 

Ali said other Canadians still need help. He wonders how people will get to the port. 

"There are still Canadians over there," he said. "They can't go out from their village. I know two friends of mine are in Al-Masha'ib. They can't move from there." 

While the south is paralyzed demand for rescue has started to fade among Canadians in Beirut. 

Foreign Affairs staff have offered safe passage to more than half of the 39,000 Canadian citizens in the country as of Monday, the last day they asked people to wait for the embassy to call. 

Only 7,500 have taken up the offer. Canadian Ambassador Louis de Lorimier says the evacuation will continue until every citizen who wants to leave is gone. 

"We will be evacuating people all week," de Lorimier said. "Demand is less. No doubt some people have left on their own. Some people have probably decided on their own to stay." 

Some 1,187 Canadians were taken from Beirut on Monday, less than half of Sunday's number. 

The decision to change the evacuation procedure - offering passage to all passport-holders who turn up instead of just those contacted by the embassy - was explained at a Foreign Affairs background briefing in Ottawa. 

"We find we are contacting people who have left. Instead of expending a lot of time and effort to do that, we feel we should send out a message to those who might want to leave," said an official who spoke on condition he not be named. 

As for those in the south who wish to leave from Tyre: "Canadian citizens were advised last night that they and their dependents should go directly to the port of Tyre on Wednesday morning, July 26, and not wait for further communication from our embassy in Beirut." 

Officials asked the media to help get the word out to Lebanese in Canada who may be in contact with family and friends in Tyre. 

As for the security risk of boarding passengers at Tyre, one of the officials said: "Us ensuring the safety of anyone in the south would be very difficult." 

Prime Minister Stephen Harper "buoyed spirits" and thanked staff during a visit to the evacuation operations centre on Monday in Ottawa, one official said. 

"He told everyone to work hard and keep up the good work," during what has been called the largest evacuation of its kind in Canadian history. 

Harper has conceded that Foreign Affairs staff on the ground have been over-stretched and working punishing hours. 

As for the risk that terrorists could have hitched a government-paid ride to Canada on false passports, officials at the briefing insisted that documents have been checked in Lebanon with the same vigilance as would be the case for anyone entering Canada. 

Officials said it's too early to offer even an estimate of what the evacuation effort has cost so far. 
---


----------



## chrisf (25 Jul 2006)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> Note the military in civvies mentioned (CP photo attached).....



I'm certain they'd have preferred not to have been noted


----------



## AmmoTech90 (25 Jul 2006)

BBC had footage of MPs escorting people in small boat out to cruise liner last night.  Nice new temperate CADPAT flak vests.
Good job on them keeping their cool when faced with hysterical people screaming and grabbing at them.

D


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Jul 2006)

BBC showed video of German troops taking all comers with valid passports of all nationalities, and the folks really WERE rippin' into them, physically, especially those who didn't have their babies on their passports, having to leave them behind.  Hate to sound callous, but that's what happens when you let this stuff lapse....

Good on all the troops who participated!


----------



## AmmoTech90 (25 Jul 2006)

It started off describing Germans, but you could see the top of a tacvest on one of the "Germans" and when it went to ships boat one guy turned you could see the cap badge.

Here's the report, looks like it's been corrected (at least in some of the text) regarding the German/Canadian thing since last night.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi/bb_rm_fs.stm?news=1&bbram=1&bbwm=1&nbram=1&nbwm=1&nol_storyid=5211606

(Need Realplayer...bleh...to show it)

Edit: Original link doesn't work...trying to fix it.  Sort of works now

Edit2: Horrible spelling.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (25 Jul 2006)

Again as usual Canadian troops doing a fine job! I hate to pat a MP on the back but that guy who was in the life raft with the old lady deserves a hearty well done keeping his cool. So hear it goes who ever you are Cdn MP in life boat, well done and to the rest well done.


----------



## Lost_Warrior (25 Jul 2006)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060725.w2evacuate0725/BNStory/International/home



> Tyre — Tyre was under constant aerial bombardment by Israeli forces on Tuesday, a day before a ship chartered by Ottawa is to try to evacuate Canadians from the southern Lebanese port.
> 
> There are an estimated 1,000 Canadians still trapped in the dangerous southern part of the country, though Foreign Affairs officials said Monday that there was no way to guarantee safe passage from the border villages.
> 
> ...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (25 Jul 2006)

So out of the 50,000 Canadians how many have left.


----------



## GAP (25 Jul 2006)

Quagmire said:
			
		

> So out of the 50,000 Canadians how many have left.



From what I can find out through new reports, etc. about 8-9 thousand, give or take.


----------



## aluc (31 Jul 2006)

http://www.torontosun.ca/News/Canada/2006/07/31/1711378-sun.html	

Mon, July 31, 2006
Evacuees' free ride ripped

By TOM GODFREY, TORONTO SUN




Ottawa is being urged to impose a fee to cover emergency rescue costs for thousands of Canadians who obtain passports and return to live in their native countries.

The issue outraged Canucks after Foreign Affairs in Ottawa admitted 50,000 people with Canadian passports were in Lebanon and many had not been in Canada or paid taxes here or years.

More than 12,000 Lebanese-Canadians have now been evacuated from that war-torn country and returned to Canada in boats chartered by the government.

'INSURANCE PREMIUM'

Richard Kurland, a Montreal lawyer and immigration policy expert who's spearheading the fee campaign, said the extra cost would apply to those who haven't paid taxes in Canada for five years.

"If people who don't live here and never file tax returns want to use Canadian passports as insurance passports, make them pay an insurance premium," he said last week.

The proposal has been circulated to all federal government offices dealing with passports and the Prime Minister's Office.

Kurland said the fee, which is estimated at $50 yearly, will apply for Canadians who obtain a passport and leave.

"They should pay into the Canadian coffers," he said. "It's unreasonable for people to expect services without making a contribution."

Foreign Affairs refused to comment on the plan.

Passport Canada spokesman James Leveque said his agency administers Passport Act regulations and doesn't set policy.

AGAINST TWO-TIER

NDP immigration critic Bill Siksay said he is against the idea of two-tier citizenship.

"There shouldn't be a monetary component to become a citizen," Siksay said


----------



## HItorMiss (31 Jul 2006)

Octavianus said:
			
		

> AGAINST TWO-TIER
> 
> NDP immigration critic Bill Siksay said he is against the idea of two-tier citizenship.
> 
> "There shouldn't be a monetary component to become a citizen," Siksay said



Odd and I thought I paid taxes to the Government to be a citizen of Canada???

Well boy's there you have it no need to pay your taxes but you can still reap all the benefit's of being a citizen and none of the burden.


----------



## Trooper Hale (31 Jul 2006)

Makes sense to me, nothing in this world is set in stone but death and taxes as the saying goes. Kind of relevant to Lebanon isnt it? Either stay there and pick the first option or come here and take up the second. Nothing nasty meant there by the way.


----------



## Trinity (31 Jul 2006)

There's not a money component to being a citizen

HELL.. I'm not paying taxes then..  and I'm going to quote that MP!

(I'll probably just be a citizen in jail though.. but that's OK.. they need ministry in jail too)


----------



## GAP (31 Jul 2006)

Trinity said:
			
		

> (I'll probably just be a citizen in jail though.. but that's OK.. they need ministry in jail too)



Hmph...they done got religion coming out of their ears already....ask any parole board..their interviewees have all found religion and are going to walk the straight and narrow.


----------



## Neill McKay (31 Jul 2006)

HitorMiss said:
			
		

> Odd and I thought I paid taxes to the Government to be a citizen of Canada???
> 
> Well boy's there you have it no need to pay your taxes but you can still reap all the benefit's of being a citizen and none of the burden.



Not quite.  The people living in Lebanon have in fact reaped almost no Canadian government services -- just a mediocre (but well-timed) boat ride to Cyprus.

You pay taxes for the roads you drive on every day, and the firefighters who will come in minutes if your house catches fire.


----------



## FredDaHead (31 Jul 2006)

Neill McKay said:
			
		

> Not quite.  The people living in Lebanon have in fact reaped almost no Canadian government services -- just a mediocre (but well-timed) boat ride to Cyprus.
> 
> You pay taxes for the roads you drive on every day, and the firefighters who will come in minutes if your house catches fire.



So your point is basically that we pay for all the services we get, right? Then the Lebanese people who have Canadian passports should pay for the boat ride out of their hellhole country they so adore.

However, once they come here and want to use our roads, our hospitals, our busses/trains/subways, why shouldn't they be forced to pay taxes? They'll be in Canada for quite some time, and will take full advantage of all the services we provide, no?


----------



## Trinity (1 Aug 2006)

Hey true enough..  maybe they don't need to pay anything while they're away

Welcome back to Canada.  We have this new tax called the GST.  Hope you enjoy it.

Oh btw..  please ensure you fill out your Revenue Canada forms this year.


----------



## FastEddy (1 Aug 2006)

Trinity said:
			
		

> (I'll probably just be a citizen in jail though.. but that's OK.. they need ministry in jail too)




And did you know we give Special Discounts and Free Upgrades to Religious Groups and Members.

Like from five to ten, at no extra charge !. Free Upgrades from Minimum to Maximum  Prisons.

Not only that we'll consolidate all your Misdemeanor's into one large Felony. 

Our Motto is "We're here to Serve and so are you".

Cheers. LOL !


----------



## GO!!! (2 Aug 2006)

Neill McKay said:
			
		

> Not quite.  The people living in Lebanon have in fact reaped almost no Canadian government services -- just a mediocre (but well-timed) boat ride to Cyprus.


Well then! They should have no opposition to paying the evidently modest fee for a cruise ship and commercial airliners to be chartered into a war zone to pull them out. 



> You pay taxes for the roads you drive on every day, and the firefighters who will come in minutes if your house catches fire.


....and apparently to exfiltrate Canadian citizens of dubious loyalties from their countries of birth and residence - or was that someone else that paid for the evacuation?

Here, I'll answer that, "NO, my taxes paid for that"


----------



## enfield (2 Aug 2006)

Was the cost of this evacuation large enough to even justify any controversy over the cost per person? In the grand scheme of government spending (and waste) I can't see the cost of this evacuation being all that significant. We gave a free ride to a bunch of people - so what? We gave free rides to Americans, Aussies, Ukrainians, and just about anyone with a foreign passport - should we track down them for money?

The world is full of 'global citizens' with multiple an doverlapping residences, nationalities and citizenships. A number of Canadians died in the WTC on 9/11 - since they had apparently chosen to live and work in the US, many probably for most of their lives, were they any less Canadian? 

Frankly, if a number of Lebanese-Canadians chose not to live in Canada (which is easy) and to make a go in post-war Lebanon (which is challenging) I applaud them and hope they return after this conflict to help rebuild.


----------



## Centurian1985 (2 Aug 2006)

I would be very interested in how many thousand Lebanese have been hanging onto a Canadian passport but havent been to Canada for several years or who havent paid their taxes!


----------



## GAP (2 Aug 2006)

I think the controversy should be more around what this precedent created. 

Does this mean that everytime something happens, war, hurricanes, etc. we must foot the bill to get Canadians out?


----------



## HItorMiss (2 Aug 2006)

Neil you realize that Firefighters are often a Provincial or county expense that's why you pay tax to them. Second It was not just one boat ride, it was a boat ride and aircraft chattered at great expense mind you, that if I do the math right (which I likely have not) for every 1 legitimate Canadian visiting family or traveling we moved 10 others that became citizens then buggered off to make a go back in the holy land of conflict abusing the statutes that the Canadian passport has achieved over the years.

I strongly protest this myself, not the Government for doing what it thought it had to (kudos to Harper for taking a stand in this conflict). What I protest is the fact that without a viable option we had to take everyone. A system should have been in place like the annual flat rate fee to keep your passport or you loose after X amount of years out side of Canada not paying into the coffers that may have to save you.


----------



## GO!!! (3 Aug 2006)

Like I've been saying all along, simply adjust the passport system to include a "taxes paid" stamp.

To get your stamp, you must return to Canada, pay your taxes, and have proof of it presented at a passport office. Passports are null and void without a current tax stamp. Non payment of taxes can result in the revoking of citizenship for persons born outside of Canada.

Citizenship has priviliges *and* responsibilities - this country is not a smorgasboard of benefits for the international community to pick and choose from.


----------



## paracowboy (3 Aug 2006)

if I may?



			
				GO!!! said:
			
		

> Citizenship has is supposed to have priviliges *and* responsibilities - this country is not should no longer be  a smorgasboard of benefits for the international community to pick and choose from.


----------



## FastEddy (3 Aug 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> if I may?




Great Idea !, if only.

Now here's a couple of thoughts.

1.  Lets say a person has a passport of connivance, (Canadian + Lebanese), returns almost immediately to Lebanon after obtaining Canadian Citizenship. Resides there for ten or more years. Now needs very expensive Open Heart Surgery Approx. 200 K $. Flys to Canada for ($1,800 Rd. Trip), stays with relatives. Then returns to Lebanon. If thats not being Suckered, I don't know what is.

2. Now for the Vacationing Families who have shelled out Approx. $7,600 (4 Rd. Trip) and have been evacuated both by Sea and Air by Canada. Are they or could they claim from their Airlines the unused portions of their tickets. If not are the Airlines coughing up that money to the Government.

3. Sounds like I'm P....d off, your damn right. We've got money for that, but Quebec has just cancelled the Program of Taxi Service (to and from) for Senior Citizens requiring Dialysis Treatments downtown. They now have to pay for it out of their monthly $684.00 Old Age Pension Cheque.

Do I think they should be billed and that we need reform, Damn Straight. Does this apply to every Country, not necessarily, theres always exceptions to the rule but certainly those who Aid, Allow or Turn a Blind Eye to Terrorist Organizations.


----------



## Missile Man (4 Aug 2006)

All,

Yes, 90% of the evacuees from Beirut/Tyre are indeed CEPs (Canadian Entitled Persons) and the reason they wewre in Lebanon of all places when this broke out is becuase they were visiting their families in Southern Lebanon.  As it is a pretty long hike to Lebanon, when they visit they don't go for a couple of weeks, they visit for months.  

I suppose I should qualify my remarks quickly - I just got off the plane from OP LION and escorted approx 2400 CEPs from Beirut to Cyprus on the leased ferries.

Anyway, to put an end to the conjecture in this thread, most of the evacuees are indeed Canadian, and live most of the time in Ottawa, Montreal, Toronto, etc.  They happened to be over there visiting when this all flared up last month, and needed to get the hell out of there, so we went over and did the business.  Did some conveniently hitch a ride to Canada?  Sure, it happened.  But 90% of the CEPs were shell shocked, had witnessed family/friends die and were just glad to get out of Southern Lebanon.


----------



## vonGarvin (4 Aug 2006)

Thank you for your input, missile man.  Your operation (or the CF's role) went largely un noticed by the Canadian Media.  Well done on your part


----------



## FastEddy (5 Aug 2006)

Missile Man said:
			
		

> All,
> 
> Yes, 90% of the evacuees from Beirut/Tyre are indeed CEPs (Canadian Entitled Persons) and the reason they wewre in Lebanon of all places when this broke out is becuase they were visiting their families in Southern Lebanon.  As it is a pretty long hike to Lebanon, when they visit they don't go for a couple of weeks, they visit for months.
> 
> ...




So by your Math, out of the 50,000 reported Canadians over there, 40,000 were just Vacationers.

If I'm stupid enough to park my a.. on the 38th parallel and the North Koreans start shooting at me or at the South.

Why should Canadian Tax Payers be Finace- ally responsible to get my Stupid A.. out of there ?. Therefore anyone who willingly and intentionally places them selves in harms way should at least be responsible for the financial cost of such an extraction. And please don't tell me Lebanon was not just such a hot spot waiting to happen with their sponsorship of Hezbollah. 

Then such CEP's had to nerve to complain and condemn the very Government on World Wide T.V., who rescued them about the methods and conditions of same. And if they had known, it would have been better to have stayed with the bombs falling about them. That's Gratitude for Yeah.

As for any role the CF's played, that's what we do. Re:  "von Garvin", Media's reporting, he's spot on there.


----------



## Missile Man (5 Aug 2006)

No, not 40,000 of 50,000 were vacationers.  I said 90% of evacuees.  We pulled 13,000 out.  Thus, 90% of 13,000.  Yes, there are an estimated 50,000 CEPs registered with the CDN embassy, but not all got out by DFAIT means (boat from Tyre/Beirut to Cyprus/Turkey).  

As for them complaining about our efforts, that is what you saw on tv here, and accounted for very few evacuees.  The 2% who were vocal and complaining were the only ones interviewed by the media there, as that was more newsworthy than quiet, grateful CEPs (98%).

Whether or not they are "entitled" to get out is not for me to decide.  If you had CDN citizenship, we got you out.  However, I will say that there were certainly different variants of "need" over there.  Some embarking in Beirut had luggage and Ray-Bans, while those from Tyre had no luggage.  One man had bloodied hands and no shoes.  He told us he was digging through rubble for 8 hours trying to free a neighbor's son.  That was need.

Fasteddy, you may be whistling a different tune if you get caught in a war zone, with the airport and roads bombed to hell, the only way out a CDN chartered ferry.  I don't imagine you would be manking about fiscal responsibility with bloodied hands, your family and neighbors all dead, and not a possession left.  Just a thought...


----------



## FastEddy (6 Aug 2006)

Missile Man said:
			
		

> No, not 40,000 of 50,000 were vacationers.  I said 90% of evacuees.  We pulled 13,000 out.  Thus, 90% of 13,000.  Yes, there are an estimated 50,000 CEPs registered with the CDN embassy, but not all got out by DFAIT means (boat from Tyre/Beirut to Cyprus/Turkey).
> 
> As for them complaining about our efforts, that is what you saw on tv here, and accounted for very few evacuees.  The 2% who were vocal and complaining were the only ones interviewed by the media there, as that was more newsworthy than quiet, grateful CEPs (98%).
> 
> ...




Love the way you work the percentages and the Dead neighbors, no shoes, bloodied hands, nice touch.

I never mentioned that the Canadian Government shouldn't evacuate its Citizens from and in situations like this, but that Vacationing or Cdn. Passport holders who deliberately visit or place them selves in dangerous or harms way, should also suffer the cost and not the Canadian Taxpayer.

And Buddy, if I were ever to be caught in a war zone, its only because my Country sent me there. And here's a thought for you, How many Korean Canadians do you know who Vacation in North Korea !.


----------



## Missile Man (6 Aug 2006)

Wow, fasteddy, DFAIT and DND should have consulted army forums for the answer to this crisis, you have solved it ion one post!  According to you solution; we should have set up a debit machine at the brow of each cruise ship (if insufficient funds were indicated, the evacuee would be turned away back into Tyre/Beirut); and, 2 - if people visit their families in a war zone, they are simply out of luck.  Though the Beirut airport was bombed out (can't fly out) and all of the roads were destroyed (can't drive anywhere) their only way out was by our charterred boats!  We could have actually made money on this humanitarian crisis!  And there we were, like suckers, spending millions of dollars and placing 150 DND personnel and hundreds of DFAIT pers in harm's way for 14 days in order to evacuate Canadian civillians from a war zone.  What were we thining?  Not only does your plan save all of the fuss and muss of money and danger, we could have actually MADE money on this swan!

Dude, did you actually preview your post before you posted it?  Brutal.


----------



## paracowboy (6 Aug 2006)

FastEddy said:
			
		

> I never mentioned that the Canadian Government shouldn't evacuate its Citizens from and in situations like this, but that Vacationing or Cdn. Passport holders who deliberately visit or place them selves in dangerous or harms way, should also suffer the cost and not the Canadian Taxpayer.
> 
> And Buddy, if I were ever to be caught in a war zone, its only because my Country sent me there. And here's a thought for you, How many Korean Canadians do you know who Vacation in North Korea !.


so, folks can then only visit their families if they live in Switzerland? You're getting a tad rabid.


----------



## enfield (6 Aug 2006)

Three weeks ago Lebanon was not a war zone, and there was no indication it was about to become one. And certainly no indication that, in a matter of days, every transport link to Lebanon would be severed. If it was that dangerous there, 13,000 people - including children, pregnant women, and the elderly - simply would not have gone. 

For areas that are considered dangerous DFAIT puts out travel advisories. I expect the situation is different for people who choose to ignore standing advisories and visit certain places, like the Congo or Afghanistan. In general, dangerous places don't have 13,000 vacationers. 

I don't understand why some, such as Fast Eddy, are so upset about this. The expense of ferry travel and airfare for 13,000 is so minor in the grand scheme of government expenditure that it doesn't seem worth the debate. We did a good thing for people, the government fulfilled all posible obligations, end of story.

To echo von Garvin: good work Missile Man, we appreciate the effort you put in.


----------



## Kat Stevens (6 Aug 2006)

Adrienne Clarkson would have spent more than this on a long weekend at the cottage.  Of all the things to bitch about wasting my tax money on, this is pretty far down the list.


----------



## GaelicSoldier (7 Aug 2006)

Huge amount of respect Missile Man,  

WARNING ETHICAL CONTENT!!


 I can't really undersand how some people can say things like that about our own people, (mind you I'm not complaining).  How would FastEddy feel if someone in his family got stranded in a war zone?  He'd probably be pissed if the Govt didn't spend a small amount if their budget to bring his family home.

And to paracowboy and Enfield, respect for supporting the ideals of leave no-one behind.

To everyone who might have family and/or friends in Lebanon, you have my best wishes and hope that your family and/or friends make it home safe.

Cheers :cheers:


----------



## FastEddy (7 Aug 2006)

Missile Man said:
			
		

> Wow, fasteddy, DFAIT and DND should have consulted army forums for the answer to this crisis, you have solved it ion one post!  According to you solution; we should have set up a debit machine at the brow of each cruise ship (if insufficient funds were indicated, the evacuee would be turned away back into Tyre/Beirut); and, 2 - if people visit their families in a war zone, they are simply out of luck.  Though the Beirut airport was bombed out (can't fly out) and all of the roads were destroyed (can't drive anywhere) their only way out was by our charterred boats!  We could have actually made money on this humanitarian crisis!  And there we were, like suckers, spending millions of dollars and placing 150 DND personnel and hundreds of DFAIT pers in harm's way for 14 days in order to evacuate Canadian civillians from a war zone.  What were we thining?  Not only does your plan save all of the fuss and muss of money and danger, we could have actually MADE money on this swan.
> 
> Dude, did you actually preview your post before you posted it?  Brutal.




Usually when points or questions are addressed by, 1. Ignoring them 2. Answering with another Question 3.Not considering them, its usually because they want to deflect away from their own argument.

So I'll try to avoid the above, 1. to execute such a evacuation by sea for some 13,000 (originale Est. could have been 50,000) and employing 150 DND personnel and hundreds of  DFAIT Pers., plus what ever additional Government personnel, plus the ships, air transport and in transit support and aid groups. The cost of this, as some posters claim is a mere pittance (compared to the GNB). Well I guess we'll never know. Maybe if we did, there might be a bit more concern about it.

2. No one has suggested or downplayed the efforts and results the DND & DFAIT personnel played in this matter.

3. No one has questioned that Land and Air routes of evacuation were unavailable due to the IDF strategical rendering. So that the sea was the only option.

4. As for your attempt at Humor or Sarcasm (ADM's at the Bow of ships), I might have a bit more faith in our Governments ability to execute such a recovery plan other than ADM's.

5. For the Danger or Hot Spots of the World, I personally don't need a Government Warning not to Visit or reside in such area's, even if violence or outbreaks have not occurred yet. No, I would not visit Israel. And as much as I would love to visit the Pyramids, Egypt is out to. Awareness, Caution or Prevention, take your pick.

6. As for the Government consulting me, it was only suggested that the Evacuees be responsible for the costs of their evacuation. And no where was it mentioned that they shouldn't be immediately evacuated. If you think that such a opinion indicates that I had all the solutions, then your scope of comprehension is very limited.

7. For the choice of Countries one might visit, Switzerland in particular, I would whole hearted agree, it would be by all means.(this is not only sarcastic, but true).

As for reading and editing ones post before submitting, I fully agree, a lot of people should try it.


----------



## paracowboy (7 Aug 2006)

Eddy,

so people shouldn't visit Israel, then either? No more pilgrimages by the devout of 3 different (albeit related) Faiths? 

We could take this further, into the even more absurd, by stating that since the US has declared a War on Terror, and have suffered attacks on their home soil, that no Canadian should visit America. In fact, since we are involved in the same war, where does that leave Canadians who remain inside our own borders?

Ridiculous? A bit. But no more so than stating that visitors to Lebanon lose their rights to be rescued by their home nation. I've served alongside a number of former Lebanese citizens who go home to visit at every opportunity. Are they, then, not allowed to do so? Should we turn our backs on them for having been born elsewhere? Do their sacrifices for Canada no longer matter?


----------



## GAP (7 Aug 2006)

The evacuation of Canadians from Lebanon, set a precedent. Is it a good or a bad precedent? I don't know. 

What I think needs to be done, is for the government to clearly define where they will intercede and where they will not. Up until now it has been a one-off thing each and every time, and it is getting more frequent as people do more travelling and are increasingly demanding that when they get themselves in a fix, the government should help them. 

On the world stage, in the case of Lebanon, Canada did the right thing.  It could do no less that the other countries were doing, and when all is said and done, probably should have and would have in any case, no matter the political party in  power.


----------



## tomahawk6 (7 Aug 2006)

In a crisis a government has the responsibility of evacuating its citizens. It is a humanitarian question more than anything else. The US State Dept. warned US citizens from traveling to certain countries. If they go ahead and travel anyway it should be at their own risk, but in the end politics gets involved and the government has to step in to save its citizens from their own stupidity.


----------



## FastEddy (7 Aug 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> Eddy,
> 
> so people shouldn't visit Israel, then either? No more pilgrimages by the devout of 3 different (albeit related) Faiths?
> 
> ...




Yes absurd is definitely the case when you are insisting that I am against the extraction of Canadian Citizens from a War Zones.

Yes if I did not want to risk a very good chance of being killed by a suicide bomber, I would not visit Israel, if you want to be my guest. And point of fact, there's a lot less chance of that if visiting the U.S.A.. So I'll just play the odds in this case.

Again no one has suggested that we turn our backs on them. It appears some people (including you) seem to argue and boo-hoo for just the sake of arguing.


----------



## paracowboy (7 Aug 2006)

FastEddy said:
			
		

> Again no one has suggested that we turn our backs on them.


maybe I'm mis-reading your posts, then, but that *is* what I'm gathering from your posts.



> It appears some people (including you) seem to argue and boo-hoo for just the sake of arguing.


 As I stated above, I gathered from your posts that you don't think we should rescue our citizens from nations they're visiting if that nation is dangerous. I disagree with that, and I'm trying to put some perspective in. If that's not what you're saying, then we've both wasted bandwidth and time. But, it appears that I'm not the only one to gather that from your posts, so perhaps the fault lies in your posts not being clear enough?


----------



## Missile Man (7 Aug 2006)

Precisely.  Finally this thread is put in context.  Fasteddy, as much as it pains you, you cannot put a price on human life.  Even if that human life "shouldn't have" visited relatives in a combat zone or "should have" found their own way out.  As soon as we learned there were civillians stuck in Lebanon with no way out, we all volunteered to go.  My first questtions were not, "why are they over there?", or, "why don't they find their own way out".  In fact, I asked no questions.  The 150 of us were on a plane in 24 hours, not knowing 1 - how long we would be there, 2 - what exactly we would be doing over there, or 3 - how dangerous it was over there.  Our first instinct was not a military instinct, rather it was a human instinct - "people need our help, and we are trained and ready to assist, what time does the flight leave?".

If you ever end up stranded in a combat zone, hopefully your rescuers will react with human intuition and hop on the first flight over there.  Your threads would likely read a lot differently.


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Aug 2006)

This op ran the gamut from helping people who were truly in need through no fault of their own and were incredibly thankful afterwards, to middle of the road folks who figured, heck, dust off the passport, Canada's laying on boats to get out of this rapidly worsening situation to the full-fledged opportunists who then have the nerve to wank on about how they didn't get a turn-down on the cruise through the Aegean Sea!

Put this into perspective...none of the CEPs even came remotely close IMO, to that a$$hat, James Loney, who knowingly put himself in harms way and who I'm sure, notwithstanding what he and his a$$hat compatriots said, expected someone to do something.  Just who the heck he thought was going to help him other than CF and coalition force personnel I have no reasonable idea.  Even his clownship was entitled to a$$-saving by Canada.

My biggest beef were the people that complained bitterly about the goat show of an extraction.  Given how I've seen things run in the military and in government life, I figure concrete action inside of a week was not at all bad.  Thankless people need to shake their heads.

Cheers,
Duey


----------



## Petard (7 Aug 2006)

von Garvin said:
			
		

> Wasn't it "Starship Troopers" that differentiated between "Civilians" and "Citizens"?  I can't remember, but what was the difference?  I think that "Civilians" referred to all inhabitants of earth, whereas "Citizens" where those civilians who have earned the title "Citizen", and all of the inherent privileges of being a citizen, through service to the state.



I think Robert Heinlein identified Citizens as veterans, those who served 2 years or more, and who upon release were the only ones allowed to vote (although later he would say in interviews he meant anyone volunteering for federal service that's not quite how it came out in the book, I could be wrong here). Civilians got the same privileges but couldn't vote. 
Heinlein got a lot of flack over that but many missed the point, which in a round about way I think a lot people are trying to get at here. In the novel it is suggested democracies fail because the majority of people enjoy their privileges but do not repsect their obligations to the society providing them, so the franchise should only be given to those who truly respect it, retired soldiers. Now how well would that idea fly today?
Anyways, I digress.
I think the priority was to do something for all legally Canadian citizens caught in Lebanon, and Canada, I believe, did the right thing trying to evacuate as many as we could, and much thanks, and respect, go to the dedication of the personnel, like the missileman, that pulled it off with such professionalism.
Now that that's done I think we need to look at this perceived lack of obligation, and possibly loyalty, of some of these  expatriate Canadians. Fasteddy, before he became somewhat emotional about all this and people started dog-piling him, at first seemed to be agreeing with what most people were saying in this thread, as do I, which if I'm reading this right, is that  people with dual citizenship need to be reminded somehow of their obligations to this Canadian society they've made claim to. I'm not sure how that might be done, although I think a Heinlein type manoeuvre on them, such as obligatory service, might be asking too much, but maybe some kind of fee and legally binding oath to retain that Canadian passport is in order for those who do not reside in Canada.


----------



## FastEddy (8 Aug 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> maybe I'm mis-reading your posts, then, but that *is* what I'm gathering from your posts.
> As I stated above, I gathered from your posts that you don't think we should rescue our citizens from nations they're visiting if that nation is dangerous. I disagree with that, and I'm trying to put some perspective in. If that's not what you're saying, then we've both wasted bandwidth and time. But, it appears that I'm not the only one to gather that from your posts, so perhaps the fault lies in your posts not being clear enough?




It seems Clarification is only as valid as the individual interpretation. therefore, as I've stated and now again.

1. Yes Citizens are entitled to evacuation if a situation warrants it or demand is made.

2. Yes such evacuations should be conducted, regardless of onus of error, circumstances or default of evacuees.

3. At no time did I wish to indicate or infer by intention or otherwise, anything contrary to the above.

4. My contention was, if such evacuations were deemed to be the result of some default of the evacuees, that they should be burden with the costs of such evacuations.

5. Yes, in my opinion, in this case I personally feel that they should be responsible for cost of their evacuation. 

6. Area's, Locations, Countries and such banter seems to have been taken out of context (whether by design or my poor presentation).

I trust that the above  clarifies any possible mis-interpretations to you or any other reader. If it doesn't, then I fully agree with you , we are both wasting Band Space.


----------



## George Wallace (21 Sep 2006)

Things must be very stable in Lebanon these days, because there are 7,000 people, who were evacuated by the Canadian Government, who have since returned to Lebanon.  I wonder what we should do if the situation flares up again and these people then want to be 'rescued' again?  Makes on question where their loyalties really lie.


----------



## Kirkhill (21 Sep 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Things must be very stable in Lebanon these days, because there are 7,000 people, who were evacuated by the Canadian Government, who have since returned to Lebanon.  I wonder what we should do if the situation flares up again and these people then want to be 'rescued' again?  Makes on question where their loyalties really lie.



Given the threat over there perhaps we should put a limit on the number of evacuations. How about one evacuation per person per month?  It should just about cover the demand.  :


----------



## cplcaldwell (21 Sep 2006)

We should put an "Evacuation Coupon" in the back of every passport. You know like the coupons they put in the back of the Ikea catalogue. 

Once you use the coupon you pay! >


----------



## George Wallace (21 Sep 2006)

cplcaldwell said:
			
		

> We should put an "Evacuation Coupon" in the back of every passport. You know like the coupons they put in the back if the Ikea catalogue.
> 
> Once you use the coupon you pay! >



Although a joke, you may have a valid idea.


----------



## GAP (21 Sep 2006)

What is wrong with the government, having met it's mandate in protecting and evacuating Canadian citizens, from requesting that those same citizens who return to the area of conflict on a more or less permanent basis, that they reimburse the government for the cost of their original removal? If you call for an ambulance, you are responsible for its' cost (stretching it, I know), but there is a legitimate argument for the government to be reimbursed. These were not tourists, or people who happened to be doing business in that country at the onset of the conflict, they were residents.

my 1 cent...I need the other


----------



## Zell_Dietrich (21 Sep 2006)

I'm going to get slammed for this ... hard ... but I'm going to say it anyways.  *Membership has its privileges*. Citizenship entitles one to protection,  if you're a citizen that means you are one of us and we are honour bound to keep you safe.  I know when I paid for my passport (and when they paid for theirs) a good chunk of that money went into a fund that pays for exactly these kinds of operations. So really if people want the money back... they used a service they paid for.  This fund is not nearly depleted - hardly ever used in fact.  I know it is kind of an unpopular view,  but even if they are only technically Canadian, there is a duty on our part to help.  


(Now just to put a spin on things)
We also sent resources to Now Orleans,  I know we evacuated people.  How many of those Canadians have since returned?  Why are we not complaining about how they don't contribute to Canada but feel entitled to our help?  Heck most of the people we helped out weren't even Canadian and never will be :-o


----------



## vonGarvin (21 Sep 2006)

GAP said:
			
		

> If you call for an ambulance, you are responsible for its' cost (stretching it, I know)


FYI: In New Brunswick, the government absorbs the cost of the ambulance.  It costs the patient nothing.  


Good analogy, though.


----------



## vonGarvin (21 Sep 2006)

Zell_Dietrich said:
			
		

> I'm going to get slammed for this ... hard ... but I'm going to say it anyways.  *Membership has its privileges*. Citizenship entitles one to protection,  if you're a citizen that means you are one of us and we are honour bound to keep you safe.  I know when I paid for my passport (and when they paid for theirs) a good chunk of that money went into a fund that pays for exactly these kinds of operations. So really if people want the money back... they used a service they paid for.  This fund is not nearly depleted - hardly ever used in fact.  I know it is kind of an unpopular view,  but even if they are only technically Canadian, there is a duty on our part to help.


I actually agree with you.  They are Canadian Citizens, so we took them out of harm's way.  I couldn't give a north bound rat's south end if they go back, go to Botswana or go to Chinatown.  
Firefighters have evacuated people from burning buildings, and when the fire is out, those same people go back in.  


So what?

NOW: if people have a problem with persons using "Canadian Citizenship" for convenience, that is a different topic altogether and has NOTHING to do with the evacuation from Lebanon.


----------



## jimb (21 Sep 2006)

It seems to me that this whole topic cries out for a change to our laws regarding DUAL citizenship.

 In my opinion, if you want to be a Canadian, you have to drop the previous nationality, and SINK or SWIM with the rest of us here in Canada. No more "escape clause " or back up passport. Furthermore, if you live outside of Canada, you have to come BACK to Canada to renew your passport. 

A further point............What is with this current Canadian law, that gives Canadian citizenship to a baby born in Canada to parents who are NOT Canadian citizens, or even legal immigrants to Canada ? This results in people coming here to have a kid, who will years later be able to sponsor his/her parents to come to Canada, under the Family Re-unification class of Immigration application, because their child is a Canadian citizen , but who has never llived in Canada. This is simply wrong.

Jim B Toronto.


----------



## GAP (21 Sep 2006)

jimb said:
			
		

> What is with this current Canadian law, that gives Canadian citizenship to a baby born in Canada to parents who are NOT Canadian citizens, or even legal immigrants to Canada ?



That is the case for most countries, including the US. If you are born there, then you are a citizen automatically.


----------



## big bad john (24 Sep 2006)

http://www.canada.com/components/print.aspx?id=88638bc7-edd1-4363-b6d5-3805ead406ac

What you can do for your country
Why dual citizens should be forced to choose
  
Andrew Coyne 
National Post 


Saturday, September 23, 2006


More Columns By This Writer 
Here's a statistic guaranteed to set your teeth on edge: Of the 15,000 Lebanese citizens evacuated from Beirut by Canadian Forces during last month's war -- the largest such operation this country has mounted since the Second World War, at a cost of $85-million -- some 7,000 are reported to have returned home. Home, as in Lebanon.

Why were Canadian ships sent thousands of miles across the sea to pluck another country's citizens out of harm's way? Because, as you well know, they are also Canadian citizens. That is, they are dual citizens, beneficiaries of a 1977 change in immigration legislation, and as such, though many have not lived or paid taxes in this country for several years, are entitled to all the protections the Canadian state affords.

Despite the public outrage this aroused at the time, the Harper government wisely decided the middle of a war was not the time to revisit the principle of dual citizenship: They were Canadian citizens, and that was that. But the war being now ended, the government is said to be considering whether to abolish this strangely ambivalent status, to which at least four million foreign-born Canadians, plus an uncounted number of native-born, lay claim.

If so, this would be an event of enormous symbolic importance. Moreover, it would fit this Prime Minister's broader aim, which is nothing less than to recast the meaning of Canadian nationhood -- as a moral project, in which we are collectively and individually engaged, rather than a simple dispenser of services; something that lays claims upon us, as much as it confers entitlements. And the very least claim it can make upon us is that we commit ourselves to it, to the exclusion of all others.

This asks no more of us than that we make a choice. It does not bind us permanently, nor does it impose any barrier to entry. We can be citizens of Lebanon first and then of Canada, or of Canada and then Lebanon. The only thing we can't do is be a citizen of both countries at the same time.

What's wrong with that? Nothing, if your view of nationhood is essentially service-based -- just as you can belong to two frequent-flier programs at the same time. But if you incline to a view of the nation as moral project, as a moral order we are in the process of constructing, then a higher degree of commitment is implied.

It seems to me that this latter view is pretty much intrinsic to the whole idea of nationhood. A nation is, after all, an abstraction. We know why we are members of a particular family or race or gender. But to say why we belong to a nation, especially this nation, requires us to give the matter some thought. And yet we know, intuitively, that it has something to do with moral purpose.

Provinces are essentially service-delivery agencies, inspiring the degree of loyalty that bloodless phrase deserves. But when we say we are Canadian, and swell with pride at the thought, it is because we invest it with some moral content. We associate the nation with our highest moral ambitions, as the vessel of our best selves.

But higher purpose is not achieved without reciprocal obligation. If a nation is something we do together, with and for each other, it requires us to make certain commitments to one another: to pay our taxes, to accept decisions that don't go our way, in extremis to lay down our lives for one another -- in short, to put each other first. The associations that inspire our fiercest loyalties -- our team, say, or our unit -- are not those that give things to us, but those that ask things of us. What, if anything, have we asked of ourselves?

If there was a moment when this thought began to crystallize in a lot of people's minds, it was a few years ago when Yann Martel, the winner of the 2002 Booker Prize for his novel The Life of Pi, referred to Canada as a "hotel." He meant it as a compliment, "the greatest hotel on Earth," but the image was jarring, almost transactional, implying the most fleeting sort of attachment.

And yet we have not drawn the appropriate conclusion. We still try to buy each other's affiliation, "selling" Canada to disaffected parts of the country on the basis of the benefits it can provide -- for what they can get out of it rather than what they can put into it. And we do not seem to notice that the more we have done so, the more disaffected they have become.

There is, however, an older tradition, memories of which lie buried deep in this country's collective consciousness, and it is one I believe the current Prime Minister is attempting to tap. You can see it in his invocation of our moral obligations in Afghanistan, in his unflinching challenge to Canadians to live up to our sometimes lofty notion of ourselves, even at the cost of Canadian lives.

Some look at our losses in Afghanistan and complain that we are bearing a "disproportionate" share of the burden. But there was a time when Canadians would have worn such distinctions with pride.

ac@andrewcoyne.com


----------



## Kat Stevens (24 Sep 2006)

This whole topic is beginning to get on my tits.  I was born in the UK, became a citizen at 15, and was in the army by 18.  I gave Canada 23 years of my life, proudly and without reservation.  I am Canadian to the core, and I am also a citizen of the UK, equally proudly, and anyone who doesn't like that fact can take a long hard suck on my lilly white English arse.


----------



## Kirkhill (24 Sep 2006)

Cheers Kat- you've got company.


----------



## Brad Sallows (25 Sep 2006)

Sure.  But while you're in the UK do you expect the British government to look after your interests, and vice versa in Canada?  Or do you expect Canada to come riding to your aid in Britain, and vice versa?


----------



## big bad john (25 Sep 2006)

Do you mean that if I become a Canadian citizen and get stranded and held "hostage" in beautiful downtown Brixton, Canadian Soldiers will n ot come and rescue me?  lol


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Sep 2006)

I'm more concerned about Sauchiehall.


----------



## Kat Stevens (25 Sep 2006)

Yes, I fully expect JTF-2 to come charging to the rescue when I am being threatened with a wilted leek by the St David's Parish Popular Front For The liberation of Tiger Bay.  

Edited upon further review of preceding posts.


----------



## The Bread Guy (29 Sep 2006)

This, from Hansard (Senate) 28 Sept 06....
http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/chambus/senate/deb-e/032db_2006-09-28-E.htm?Language=E&Parl=39&Ses=1#13

"Notice of Motion to Authorize Committee to Study Evacuation of Canadian Citizens from Lebanon
Hon. Hugh Segal: Honourable senators, I give notice that at the next sitting of the Senate, I will move:

That the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs be authorized to examine and report on the evacuation of Canadian citizens from Lebanon in July 2006; and

That the Committee submit its final report no later than March 30, 2007, and that the Committee retain all powers necessary to publicize its findings until April 30, 2007."

Don't know enough parliamentary process to know when that'll be, though....

Any suggestions for questions they should be asking?  ;D


----------



## Blindspot (30 Sep 2006)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> Any suggestions for questions they should be asking?  ;D



Yeah:

1. How many were evacuated?
2. How many have now returned to Lebanon?
3. How much do we charge them?


----------



## 1feral1 (30 Sep 2006)

Why waste one more cent on a bunch of thankless "Canadians of convenience".


Wes


----------



## Klc (30 Sep 2006)

It's not like the senate has anything better to do...


----------



## GAP (30 Sep 2006)

In order to ascertain the true development of this crisis, the said committee will have to have a holiday in Lebanon  personally inspect the areas of destruction and non-destruction (read resort) to determine whether the Canadians should have been evacuated from those areas. Our poor hardworking Senators...tsk tsk...we demand so much from them, it's inhumane. 

At the very least, this should be a joint Senate/commons jaunt inspection.


----------



## patt (30 Sep 2006)

Blindspot said:
			
		

> Yeah:
> 
> 1. How many were evacuated?
> 2. How many have now returned to Lebanon?
> 3. How much do we charge them?



those figures are already known. The Goverment is pissed because we gave them a free trip back to Canada they whined and cried about the conditions on the boat and now are back in Lebanon


----------



## warspite (30 Sep 2006)

Xfire said:
			
		

> those figures are already known. The Goverment is pissed because we gave them a free trip back to Canada they whined and cried about the conditions on the boat and now are back in Lebanon


I couldn't believe what I was hearing on the radio. It was just short of unbelievable that these yuppies could whine about getting a free ride. What did they expect... that the Canadian government would send them a cruise ship? I mean really, these people aren't even living in Canada and when Canada comes to get them to safety they have the nerve to complain and whine.....


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (30 Sep 2006)

Why wouldn't they?.....as much as it sucks, it seems to work.


----------



## neko (30 Sep 2006)

Blindspot said:
			
		

> Yeah:
> 
> 3. How much do we charge them?



Unfortunately we are charging them nothing. We taxpayers are footing the 85 million dollar bill to evacuate these people from the country that they live in. :rage:  How screwy can things get?  Especially considering that normally the government asks people to repay them the cost of evacuation but in this case they decide not to, for people who don't even live in this country.


----------



## couchcommander (30 Sep 2006)

neko said:
			
		

> Especially considering that normally the government asks people to repay them the cost of evacuation but in this case they decide not to..



See:



> It was just short of unbelievable that these yuppies could whine about getting a free ride



Could you imagine if they actually had to pay for their evacuation? 

Er, I mean, we really should have been paying *them* for the pleasure of evacuating their families. Not to mention compensating them for the obviously second rate nature of it all. Imagine not having a working washroom while trying to flee a war zone? All i can say is "the horror, the horror." 

On top of this, how many years has it been since most of these people paid taxes? Think of the administrative savings we've accumulated because of that! And to believe that we keeping it all for ourselves. tisk tisk.


----------



## neko (30 Sep 2006)

couchcommander said:
			
		

> See:
> 
> Could you imagine if they actually had to pay for their evacuation?
> 
> ...


 ;D

You know though, we may end up compensating them for their rough ride, just think if they decide to sue over it. : 
And Layton would demand we pull our troops from Afghanistan to cover the cost.


----------



## marlene (30 Sep 2006)

85 million for the evacuation, and I wonder how many initially claimed refugee status to enter Canada only to return and live in the country that was so dangerous they had to flee from it. The system doesn't work but unfortunately we live in a society where those that scream and whine the loudest win.  And the ones that scream and complain (as in those that complained regarding the so called gross discomfort they were forced to endure on evacuation) ruin it for those who are a) genuine refugees, b) are living in Canada and proud to be Canadian).  It's unfortunate.  It only takes a few to ruin it for many.

marlene


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (30 Sep 2006)

There should be one caveat issued by the Canadian Govt. that, just like going back onto thin ice after being pulled off, now that the area has been declared unstable Canadian citizens returning do so at their own risk.


----------



## mcchartman (30 Sep 2006)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> There should be one caveat issued by the Canadian Govt. that, just like going back onto thin ice after being pulled off, now that the area has been declared unstable Canadian citizens returning do so at their own risk.



I was more thinking of some sort of special tax for Canadians living in risky countries (unless they are there as Gov't workers) to allow them to benefit from the advantages of the Canadian citizenship. It would work much like an insurance if you will... isn't that what a lot of them use their citizenship for in the first place? Thus, should a conflict or other tragedy erupt, their monetary contribution would cover for the emergency dispatches of ships/planes. THEN, and only THEN would they be morally entitled to complain if there were rats on board.

And should a conflict NOT erupt, it can always go towards filling the potholes in our streets...

Jokes aside though, this situation has sparked a lot of controversy over the double citizenship question and the 'Canadians-of-conveniance' notion. I still don't consider that abolishing dual-citizenship would solve the problem (even though I have never supported the concept myself), and as of yet, that's the only solution I could come up with.


----------



## HDE (30 Sep 2006)

It would be pretty hard to make the case that they don't know they're entering into a danger zone,  with all the risks involved.   I believe there's gotta be a point when the onus shifts to those knowingly putting themselves at risk to deal with the consequences.

Rescuing them once is reasonable; making a habit of it is an insult.


----------



## The Bread Guy (30 Sep 2006)

As esoteric as this may sound, the issue to me is this.  On my citizenship ID (born here, but got it to have photo ID before drivers' licenses had a photo), it talks about having the rights of a citizen, as well as "responsibilities" of a citizen.

Outside of not breaking the law, what are the MANDATED responsibilities of being a Canadian citizen?  

Voting?  Don't know if it's illegal not to vote, but kinda hard to enforce and/or prosecute if it is, given traditional voter turnouts at all levels.

Pay taxes?  See part about breaking the law - you work here, you pay taxes here.

Serve in the military?  Not with an all-vol military.

Support or agree with your government?  Well, this IS a democracy, and as long as you're not promoting hatred or counselling criminal activity, you can think and say what you like.

Barring any rules re:  what you *have to* do, it apprears you need only attend and have the passport.

By this yardstick, if someone moves back to their respective "old country" with Canadian citizenship and a passport, they're the same type of citizen as me visiting the same country if the feces hit the oscillator. 

Now, could the "return messaging" have been better?  Perhaps.  I can't remember too many evacuators say clearly, "listen, this is a war zone - bullets are flying and men are dying.  We're getting people out who want to leave, but it's not always easy, or necessarily comfortable.  Still more comfortable than the shooting, though."  Then again, as government employees, what they could and couldn't say....  (I say no more because of a conflict of interest here as a gov't employee).

Even though we don't have two-tiered citizenship, how's this for a solution?  Those with proof of CURRENT residence in Canada get first dibs, followed by those who can't show a recent phone bill, tax bill, whatever.   If anyone says this might be onerous, I've found out they need up to three pieces of ID to issue a new Ontario health card (including proof of residence), so if one is travelling to unsettled places, it might not be too much to ask.  

Don't know how the bureaucrats would feel about that, but it's a start, no?


----------



## HDE (30 Sep 2006)

I see it as a "Yes we'll rescue you because you're a Canadian citizen, however..." sort of deal, particularly when they knowingly put themselves in harm's way again.   As Canadian citizens I'd imagine there could be a means of "debiting" their "entitlements".


----------



## neko (30 Sep 2006)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> Now, could the "return messaging" have been better?  Perhaps.  I can't remember too many evacuators say clearly, "listen, this is a war zone - bullets are flying and men are dying.  We're getting people out who want to leave, but it's not always easy, or necessarily comfortable.  Still more comfortable than the shooting, though."  Then again, as government employees, what they could and couldn't say....  (I say no more because of a conflict of interest here as a gov't employee).



As the evacuees were fleeing because of the fighting they shouldn't need anyone to tell them that. 



			
				milnewstbay said:
			
		

> Even though we don't have two-tiered citizenship, how's this for a solution?  Those with proof of CURRENT residence in Canada get first dibs, followed by those who can't show a recent phone bill, tax bill, whatever.   If anyone says this might be onerous, I've found out they need up to three pieces of ID to issue a new Ontario health card (including proof of residence), so if one is travelling to unsettled places, it might not be too much to ask.


Who's going to take a tax or phone bill on vacation with them? Besides evacuating them is fine, but they should have to cover the costs. If however they were actually residents here the government could foot the bill. And citizens who go to trouble spots should have to cover the costs of any government assistance they require to get themselves to safety, whether they are residents or not.


----------



## 3rd Horseman (30 Sep 2006)

I was under the impression that the Canadian government did priorities the evacuees as fols:
priority one - Canadian citizen with current residence in Canada ie on vacation proved by a return ticket.
Pri 2 - Canadian citizen with long term visa and a residence in Canada.
Pri 3 - Canadian citizen living in Lebanon with residence in Canada
Pri 4 - Candian citizen living in Lebanon
and so on

  This was a huge issue and caused some of the complaints.


----------



## ArmyRick (30 Sep 2006)

Too often and too much, i find "Real Canadians" don't like the smell of the whole Lebanese evacuation affair. I am from the GTA and beleive me, I know many, many immagrants (all my grandparents are from european countries), everybody i talked to agrees at the grass roots, these guys became canadian when it was convient for them and only then


----------



## The Bread Guy (1 Oct 2006)

neko said:
			
		

> As the evacuees were fleeing because of the fighting they shouldn't need anyone to tell them that.
> Who's going to take a tax or phone bill on vacation with them? Besides evacuating them is fine, but they should have to cover the costs. If however they were actually residents here the government could foot the bill. And citizens who go to trouble spots should have to cover the costs of any government assistance they require to get themselves to safety, whether they are residents or not.



Wasn't clear - I meant communicating to the taxpayer that it may not be the Ritz getting out of a war zone.  Seems a lot of the complaints came through in the media, but nobody explaining, "hey, there's shooting, ya know."

As for bringing proof of residence, we've all learned to live with more security at airports, we could live with bringing one more piece of paper.

A number of people bring up the issue about rescues from places in the crapper - what about if you left when it sucked a long time ago, stayed here & became a citizen, then went back when it calmed down, only to have it heat up 10 years later?  Can't say they went right INTO harm's way when they returned, can one?

How about proof of evacuation insurance (exc. for gov't workers) if you're going into any of a list of what DFAIT considers risky-near-crappy countries?  Or making people sign a declaration when they pay for their ticket to any of these countries, indicating they understand there's no guarantee they'll be able to be pulled out right away if things go south?  Flying to Damascus to eventually get into LBN?  Too easy - your ticket is to Damascus, we'll get you outta Damascus.


----------



## neko (1 Oct 2006)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> Wasn't clear - I meant communicating to the taxpayer that it may not be the Ritz getting out of a war zone.  Seems a lot of the complaints came through in the media, but nobody explaining, "hey, there's shooting, ya know."



Understood.
 Yeah that probably would have helped stop the complaints on this end. Honestly though, _war zone_ and _ritz_ aren't generally an association one would make.  


			
				milnewstbay said:
			
		

> As for bringing proof of residence, we've all learned to live with more security at airports, we could live with bringing one more piece of paper.



True we could adapt easily enough.


			
				milnewstbay said:
			
		

> A number of people bring up the issue about rescues from places in the crapper - what about if you left when it sucked a long time ago, stayed here & became a citizen, then went back when it calmed down, only to have it heat up 10 years later?  Can't say they went right INTO harm's way when they returned, can one?



No because they wouldn't have in the above case. Not saying the Lebanese did either. Just that it should be a given that if you do go somewhere the government recommends against, you should be liable for all expenses incurred in getting your butt out of there. And you would need to understand that it might not happen right away.


			
				milnewstbay said:
			
		

> How about proof of evacuation insurance (exc. for gov't workers) if you're going into any of a list of what DFAIT considers risky-near-crappy countries?  Or making people sign a declaration when they pay for their ticket to any of these countries, indicating they understand there's no guarantee they'll be able to be pulled out right away if things go south?  Flying to Damascus to eventually get into LBN?  Too easy - your ticket is to Damascus, we'll get you outta Damascus.



I don't think insurance is necessary, but a person knowingly going to a danger spot might wish to have it.
I believe we should rescue Canadians if at all possible from wherever they are in danger, just they may end up stuck with the bill.
I'm happy enough the government didn't demand reimbursement from rescued Canadians after the tsunami, but they were living here, paying taxes and all that.If there were any that lived elsewhere, well they should have had to repay Canada, or the country that they call home could have payed us back or rescued them in the first place. It's just an entitlement I don't feel they are, well, entitled to.


----------



## couchcommander (1 Oct 2006)

milnewstbay said:
			
		

> A number of people bring up the issue about rescues from places in the crapper - what about if you left when it sucked a long time ago, stayed here & became a citizen, then went back when it calmed down, only to have it heat up 10 years later?



A Canadian citizen, residing in these places on a visa as a Canadian citizen.. yea sure I'd take them out as quickly as I could. 

However, a Lebanese national, who came to Canada because it was convienent, became a Canadian citizen because it was convienent, then went back to Lebanon when it was convienent, and has been living as a Lebanese national back home because IT was now convienent....nah, go talk to the Lebanese government, or you can pay your own way out. 

It's simple though, if you enter a country with a Canadian passport you are afforded all the rights, privledges, and protection our nation can afford you. If you want to enter or live on a different passport, then great, complain to that country when things go bad. 

I suppose my entire beef is with the "I'm a Canadian when it suits me."


----------



## warrickdll (12 Oct 2006)

I believe that allowing Canadians to hold multiple citizenships to be a mistake. 

There is no practical way to be completely and equally loyal to separate entities with separate agendas. This might not be much of a problem when the cultures are very similar, as in the US or UK, but that is only a happy coincidence - not a demonstration of the soundness of the principle.

What is needed is something more than Permanent Resident (Landed Immigrant) status, with its inherent restrictions on the time allowed outside of Canada, but still less than full citizenship. Maybe give "Honourary Citizenship" a real meaning.


----------



## The Bread Guy (25 Oct 2006)

If I read this correctly, a Senate Committee is going to give a sober second look at the evacuation effort:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/chambus/senate/deb-e/039db_2006-10-24-E.htm?Language=E&Parl=39&Ses=1#55

Hon. Hugh Segal, pursuant to notice of September 28, 2006, moved:

That the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs be authorized to examine and report on the evacuation of Canadian citizens from Lebanon in July 2006; and

That the Committee submit its final report no later than March 30, 2007, and that the Committee retain all powers necessary to publicize its findings until April 30, 2007.

He said: Honourable senators, this past summer, as a result of sudden and unexpected circumstances, it was necessary for the Government of Canada to evacuate thousands of our citizens and permanent residents from Lebanon. The efforts of DFAIT staff, both within the region and here in Canada, the coordination required with the Department of National Defence and the extraordinary speed with which the evacuation was necessary is, in the committee's view, worth reviewing and assessing.

For this reason, the Standing Senate Committee on Foreign Affairs wishes to conduct an inquiry into this evacuation. The purpose of this inquiry would be to learn from our experiences. While much was made at the time with respect to perceived flaws in the operation, we must all admit that, in an exercise of this scale and the subsequent return to Canada of so many of our citizens so quickly, much also appears to have been done properly by our officials.

In a world as volatile as ours is today, I ask that colleagues approve this motion so that we might examine all that transpired, in order to help prepare the government for any other such eventuality. Experience is the best teacher. While we have the opportunity to question those who are on the front lines, either here or in the Middle East, I suggest that we take advantage of this opportunity. Heaven forbid the situation ever prevents itself again, but should we be faced with such an exercise in the future, we would be, I think, remorse in our duties as a committee had we not taken the opportunity to learn from the first experience and assess, in the most non-partisan and objective of ways, the best practices and areas of improvement that may emerge from that review.

Let me assure honourable senators that we plan no travel. We will have hearings here in Ottawa and we may use satellite teleconferencing to talk to officials in the Middle East 

(....)

Hon. Marcel Prud'homme: ....  I feel more at ease, but I made my views known to the chairman. I am extremely concerned about this study. I say that, because I have read everything that has been said since the end of this sad event in Lebanon, where everybody started to talk about another subject, namely, dual citizenship. As brilliant and as tough as my colleague is, I think it will be difficult for him to keep the debate within the boundaries of what he would like us to study.

[Translation]
(....)
There is a high risk, I would suggest, that people who do not have the same good faith as Senator Segal could take the opportunity to engage in a debate within the broader debate on dual citizenship. This is something I have been agonizing over for 40 years. Let us imagine, for instance, that Canadian nationals could become members of Parliament in foreign countries.

[English]

*We have enough division in this country, without having outside political parties coming into Canada to say, "Elect me to sit in someone else's country — dual citizenship."*

(....)

There are forces in this country that are not as elegant as some of us here would like to be. *Those forces could use this study for other purposes, with an intention that is not as clear or as pure as the one we would like to advance.* I have read some of the material, and I did not like it. As honourable senators know, I represented a totally Canadien français — I do not use the word "Québécois" — district when I started. Over the years, I began to represent fewer and fewer Canadien français and Quebec nationalists and more and more new Canadians. These new Canadians have alerted me to that danger of debate on dual citizenship .... With the firm hand of the honourable senator in the chair, I trust that he will not go outside what he wants to study. However, the committee chair should be prepared to have people asking to be witnesses and, thereby, to extend the mandate of the committee. We will let the universe unfold, as an ex-Prime Minister once said. It is reluctantly that I did not adjourn the debate, in order to be gracious to the chair.

(....)

The Hon. the Speaker: Are honourable senators ready for the question?

Hon. Senators: Question!

The Hon. the Speaker: Is it your pleasure, honourable senators, to adopt the motion?

Motion agreed to.


----------

