[typoon]

http://www.cjad.com/content/cp_artic...s/n032427A.htm

TORONTO (CP) - An American war dodger who fled the U.S. military because he believed the invasion of Iraq was criminal has lost his bid for refugee status in Canada in a case closely watched on both sides of the border.

In a written ruling released Thursday, the Immigration and Refugee Board said Jeremy Hinzman had not made a convincing argument that he faced persecution or cruel and unusual punishment in the United States.

There was no immediate comment from Hinzman but his lawyer Jeffry House said he would ask the Federal Court to review the decision.

"Mr. Hinzman is disappointed," said House.


Time to send this guy back to the US and have his a$$ court martialed.

[nredman]

don't join the military if you won't go to war. even if you don't agree with it

[Chuckit]

Maybe he joined under the belief that he belonged to a morally upright country.

[zizban]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Maybe he joined under the belief that he belonged to a morally upright country.

Irrelevant in this case. When you join the armed forces (ex Navy guy here) you swear an oath that will you follow the laws of the US, military rules and regulation and to obey any lawful command issued to you. If he thought the war was unjust, well, that's too bad, you swore an oath and the gov't expects you to uphold it.

[budster101]

Send him to Iraq anyway, just a gun and no ammo, and a white flag.

Coward.

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by zizban:
Irrelevant in this case. When you join the armed forces (ex Navy guy here) you swear an oath that will you follow the laws of the US, military rules and regulation and to obey any lawful command issued to you. If he thought the war was unjust, well, that's too bad, you swore an oath and the gov't expects you to uphold it.

I guess that's what we call a moral dilemma. Which is worse: lying or killing innocent people for an unjust cause? He evidently decided the latter.

[budster101]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
I guess that's what we call a moral dilemma. Which is worse: lying or killing innocent people for an unjust cause? He evidently decided the latter.

What are you talking about?

You mean he decided on the former, not the latter, and it isn't a choice. The armed forces are not a democracy. One takes orders and goes where one is sent.

He wanted his education paid for, and no responsibility...

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by budster101:
What are you talking about?

You mean he decided on the former, not the latter

He decided the latter was wrong. That's what I meant. (Not to read his mind. I'm just being charitable in my assessment.)

Originally posted by budster101:
and it isn't a choice. The armed forces are not a democracy. One takes orders and goes where one is sent.

The Army is not God. The fact that the armed forces are not a democracy just means that they don't allow disobedience. It doesn't mean that obedience is the morally sound choice. I may decide that I won't allow people to disobey me either, but that doesn't mean you should do whatever I tell you to do.

Performing an evil act because you fear the consequences of not doing so is a much more cowardly and despicable thing than breaking a promise you made without knowing all the facts.

[nredman]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Maybe he joined under the belief that he belonged to a morally upright country.

he's stupid then.

[Chuckit]

Not disagreeing with that, but statistically speaking, most in the Army are.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Not disagreeing with that, but statistically speaking, most in the Army are.

And this opinion is based on what, exactly?

[AKcrab]

Originally posted by budster101:
Coward.

You're in the military?

[JohnSmithXTREME]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
And this opinion is based on what, exactly?

He must be confusing the Army with the Marines?

[Athens]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
Maybe he joined under the belief that he belonged to a morally upright country.

Dosent matter he joined of free will, I would only agree for those that are drafted in. If he was smart he would have just kept his mouth shut and built a new life as a Illegal like many other Americans do that come up here for one reason or another.

[idjeff]

I read he ran to Canada after his unit was about to be deployed to Afghanistan....not Iraq.

[typoon]

No one can tell me that he and those who joined of their OWN free will didn't think there was ANY chance of not going to war at some point. It's sad when people start to use the Military as their own social program to get benefits.

[von Wrangell]

Originally posted by typoon:
No one can tell me that he and those who joined of their OWN free will didn't think there was ANY chance of not going to war at some point. It's sad when people start to use the Military as their own social program to get benefits.

:cough: Halliburtin, Bechtel and the list goes on :cough:

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by Athens:
Dosent matter he joined of free will, I would only agree for those that are drafted in.

Huh? The point couldn't even apply to people brought in by draft. It's not possible for someone who was drafted to go, "Wait, this is an evil organization I enlisted in. I didn't realize that. I shouldn't be here." Because if they were drafted, there was no rationale behind their enlisting.

Incidentally, according to Hinzman's site, he went to Afghanistan and abandoned before being sent to Iraq.

[typoon]

Originally posted by von Wrangell:
:cough: Halliburtin, Bechtel and the list goes on :cough:

What do they have to do with anything?

I mean it's sort of common sense when you join the military. Since you ARE trained to kill people. They don't just train you how to shoot a gun for no reason. That should have been this guys first hint that he might go to war even if he considers it unjust. Are there really any "just" wars? Maybe WWI and WWII but I'm sure you could find people to debate that issue too.

[von Wrangell]

Originally posted by typoon:
What do they have to do with anything?

I should have made it more clear by quoting the relevant part.

It's sad when people start to use the Military as their own social program to get benefits.

I agree with that comment on both a personal as well as a corporation level. Do you?

I mean it's sort of common sense when you join the military. Since you ARE trained to kill people. They don't just train you how to shoot a gun for no reason. That should have been this guys first hint that he might go to war even if he considers it unjust. Are there really any "just" wars? Maybe WWI and WWII but I'm sure you could find people to debate that issue too.

Absolutely. You don't join a military unless you are ready to fight wars. But if I understood it correctly he went to Afghanistan and fought there but went AWOL when he was about to be shipped to Iraq.

Understandable but still wrong.

And yes there are just wars. The problem is that it is seldom that everyone agrees if it's right to get involved or not. All defensive wars are just wars as an example. Interventions in civil wars are just wars as long as you don't side with either side. And the list goes on.

I would say that the war against Afghanistan was a just war. You can argue if it was necessary and how it was fought but it was just for the US to attack Afghanistan. Iraq on the other hand was not.

[dcolton]

The big news here is that Canada isn't going to harbor deserters. Considering the general mood in Canada...well, let's just say that I am not suprised Canada caved in, I figured they didn't have the intestinal fortitude to continue looking her gift horse in the mouth.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by dcolton:
The big news here is that Canada isn't going to harbor deserters. Considering the general mood in Canada...well, let's just say that I am not suprised Canada caved in, I figured they didn't have the intestinal fortitude to continue looking her gift horse in the mouth.

That's being unfair to Canada. I don't think it is a matter of spiting the US, or caving to the US. It is simply that this individual made an untenable claim under Canadian law. He claimed he's be persecuted in the US for his political views as if the US is a police state. It's a BS argument, and so he lost.

Now he can be returned to the US to face the consequences of his actions (as he should).

[dcmacdaddy]

Whether or not the war is "unjust" is irrelevant--Personally, I think it was. He signed up for the Army to be a soldier NOT a policy planner. Sucks for him and anoyne else in his position but that's part of the deal when you sign up. Bring him back and court-martial him.

[typoon]

Originally posted by von Wrangell:

I agree with that comment on both a personal as well as a corporation level. Do you?

I do Agree with this.

Absolutely. You don't join a military unless you are ready to fight wars. But if I understood it correctly he went to Afghanistan and fought there but went AWOL when he was about to be shipped to Iraq.

Understandable but still wrong.

And yes there are just wars. The problem is that it is seldom that everyone agrees if it's right to get involved or not. All defensive wars are just wars as an example. Interventions in civil wars are just wars as long as you don't side with either side. And the list goes on.

I would say that the war against Afghanistan was a just war. You can argue if it was necessary and how it was fought but it was just for the US to attack Afghanistan. Iraq on the other hand was not.

Actually "He fled from Fort Bragg, N.C., in January 2004, weeks before his 82nd Airborne Division was due to go to Iraq. He had served three years in the Army, but had applied for conscientious objector status before his unit was sent to Afghanistan in 2002."

Which to me anyway, means that he didn't want to go to Afghanistan either. If he did go. To me it just sounds like he was using it as his own personal social program to get benefits.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
That's being unfair to Canada. I don't think it is a matter of spiting the US, or caving to the US. It is simply that this individual made an untenable claim under Canadian law. He claimed he's be persecuted in the US for his political views as if the US is a police state. It's a BS argument, and so he lost.

Now he can be returned to the US to face the consequences of his actions (as he should).

Yeah, but if you judge it by the past actions of our insignificant northern allies, you would wonder why they would be a shelter for vietnam era cowards and not Iraq era cowards. What is the difference Simey? Could it be that Canadians have been so nasty and uncooperative over the past couple of years that they fear a greater backlash from the American people?

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by typoon:
Actually "He fled from Fort Bragg, N.C., in January 2004, weeks before his 82nd Airborne Division was due to go to Iraq. He had served three years in the Army, but had applied for conscientious objector status before his unit was sent to Afghanistan in 2002."

Which to me anyway, means that he didn't want to go to Afghanistan either. If he did go. To me it just sounds like he was using it as his own personal social program to get benefits.

I can't get onto his site right now, but I'm fairly sure he did go. And he filed for conscientious objector status because (IIRC) his wife converted him to Quakerism. But if he did fight in Afghanistan (we'll see soon), I think that blows a pretty big hole in the "he's a lazy coward" theory.

As for not wanting to go, I don't blame him. Gen. William Sherman, who has been called the first modern general, felt horrible about going to war as well. Of course, he did go and was amazingly vicious when it came down to it, but Sherman at least felt that he was doing the right thing.

[Athens]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
I can't get onto his site right now, but I'm fairly sure he did go. And he filed for conscientious objector status because (IIRC) his wife converted him to Quakerism. But if he did fight in Afghanistan (we'll see soon), I think that blows a pretty big hole in the "he's a lazy coward" theory.

As for not wanting to go, I don't blame him. Gen. William Sherman, who has been called the first modern general, felt horrible about going to war as well. Of course, he did go and was amazingly vicious when it came down to it, but Sherman at least felt that he was doing the right thing.

He did go to Agghanistan, when he was to be deplyed in Iraq that is when he filed the conscientious objector status which was denied, then he fled here.

[Athens]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Yeah, but if you judge it by the past actions of our insignificant northern allies, you would wonder why they would be a shelter for vietnam era cowards and not Iraq era cowards. What is the difference Simey? Could it be that Canadians have been so nasty and uncooperative over the past couple of years that they fear a greater backlash from the American people?

Canada has never given refugee status to a person fleeing a volunteer army. Vietnam was a draft. BIG DIFFERENCE

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Athens:
Canada has never given refugee status to a person fleeing a volunteer army. Vietnam was a draft. BIG DIFFERENCE

No difference at all. responsibility is responsibility, no matter how you look at it. And a slap in the face by a dependent nation is a slap in the face, no matter how you look at it.

[Athens]

Originally posted by dcolton:
No difference at all. responsibility is responsibility, no matter how you look at it. And a slap in the face by a dependent nation is a slap in the face, no matter how you look at it.

So there is no difference between a person who signs a legal document and joins up with a army on his own vs a person who dosent want to gets told you are in the army now. Explain that logic to me please.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Athens:
So there is no difference between a person who signs a legal document and joins up with a army on his own vs a person who dosent want to gets told you are in the army now. Explain that logic to me please.

Citizens have responsibilities. That is the short of it. Perhaps, when Canada declares independence and takes the queen off of the looney, then you would understand.

You see, the problem with Canada is that they think they can be of worldy significance if they try to usurp the power and authority of the United States.

[Athens]

Originally posted by dcolton:
Citizens have responsibilities. That is the short of it. Perhaps, when Canada declares independence and takes the queen off of the looney, then you would understand.

You see, the problem with Canada is that they think they can be of worldy significance if they try to usurp the power and authority of the United States.

Isnt that what independence is? Perhaps you should look it up. We are not your 51st state

[Chuckit]

Originally posted by Athens:
So there is no difference between a person who signs a legal document and joins up with a army on his own vs a person who dosent want to gets told you are in the army now. Explain that logic to me please.

A draft law has the same legal force as a contract. They are not the same thing, but I don't see why either is more obligated than the other (since Hinzman obviously didn't feel he was signing up for a war like Iraq).

[Athens]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
A draft law has the same legal force as a contract.

Yes it does, but I was referring to Canada accepting a claim. People that claim for refuge status that come from a volunteer army our wasting there time and out of luck. They made the choice. People that make a claim that come from a draft army is different because we don’t believe in that there fore a case has a good chance which was the difference between the Vietnam draft dodgers and this guy that didn’t want to fight in Iraq.

[typoon]

Originally posted by Chuckit:
A draft law has the same legal force as a contract. They are not the same thing, but I don't see why either is more obligated than the other (since Hinzman obviously didn't feel he was signing up for a war like Iraq).

When you sign up for the Military you NEVER feel like you are signing up for a war like Iraq or Afghanistan but IT HAPPENS. Just like wars are going to happen. You can't be that naive and think if you sign up to the military that you won't have a war of any type. Agree with it or not.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by Athens:
Isnt that what independence is?

No, independence isn't usurping the authority of another nation. Perhaps you should understand someone's statement, before making snide comments to look something up. Pot. Kettle. Black.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
No, independence isn't usurping the authority of another nation. Perhaps you should understand someone's statement, before making snide comments to look something up. Pot. Kettle. Black.

Thank you crash...it's been a while!

What the canadian doesn't realize is that I am saying Canada attempts to gain significance by being a defiant dependent.

[Athens]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
No, independence isn't usurping the authority of another nation. Perhaps you should understand someone's statement, before making snide comments to look something up. Pot. Kettle. Black.

So you are saying the United States has more Authority on what happens in Canada then Canada does? We didn’t kidnap this guy, he came here on his own. He is now subject to our laws. This reminds me of comments that many American guests spit out at the hotel I work at. We take a photocopy of ID of every guest that comes in and some Americans just love to claim that is against there 1st Amendment or one of them not sure with one and there rights are being violated. I usually have to point to the Canadian flag and remind them they are not in Kansas any more. There rights are back where they came from. We have our own laws, and if the US has or does something we don’t agree with we will exercise our rights as a country to deal with it as we wish while in our boarders. Such as Canadians visiting the US are subject to your laws.

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Athens:
So you are saying the United States has more Authority on what happens in Canada then Canada does? We didn’t kidnap this guy, he came here on his own. He is now subject to our laws. This reminds me of comments that many American guests spit out at the hotel I work at. We take a photocopy of ID of every guest that comes in and some Americans just love to claim that is against there 1st Amendment or one of them not sure with one and there rights are being violated. I usually have to point to the Canadian flag and remind them they are not in Kansas any more. There rights are back where they came from. We have our own laws, and if the US has or does something we don’t agree with we will exercise our rights as a country to deal with it as we wish while in our boarders. Such as Canadians visiting the US are subject to your laws.

The difference is that we are supposed to be allies...yet nasty canadians do everything they can to push the relationship by isulting Americnas, stomping on Bush dolls and sheltering criminals.

[Athens]

Originally posted by dcolton:
The difference is that we are supposed to be allies...yet nasty canadians do everything they can to push the relationship by isulting Americnas, stomping on Bush dolls and sheltering criminals.

The insulting goes both ways!

The Bush doll was on a show that makes fun of every one, including ourselves. And one persons actions don't mean all Canadians are like that. And we are not sheltering criminals because our laws don't say they are criminals. Why should we bow down to Washingtons every wish when they are in conflict with our laws and ways?

[dcolton]

Originally posted by Athens:
The insulting goes both ways!

The Bush doll was on a show that makes fun of every one, including ourselves. And one persons actions don't mean all Canadians are like that. And we are not sheltering criminals because our laws don't say they are criminals. Why should we bow down to Washingtons every wish when they are in conflict with our laws and ways?

When you are dependent upon a nation and when our security allows you to invest your money into socialism...yes, you shoul pucker up and kiss my black arsehole.

As for the bush doll...if that was such a joke, why did the canadians get si upset at Triumph the Insult fog?

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by Athens:
[B]So you are saying the United States has more Authority on what happens in Canada then Canada does? We didn’t kidnap this guy, he came here on his own. He is now subject to our laws.

This isn't about 'what Canada does' nor is it true that wanted fugitives on either side of the US/Canadian border (or those of any set of friendly nations for that matter) are only subject to the laws of that nation. Contrary to your imagination that US and Canadian authorities are out to defy each other at every turn because you imagine everyone in your government shares your blind Bush hatred, is simply not the case.

US and Canadian authorities cooperate all the time in matters of exchanging fugitives in each other's jurisdiction. A person CANNOT simply hop up to Canada with any wild claim of being persecuted in the US, and not be subject to extradition by Canadian authorities. The reverse is also the case. Your argument has nothing to do with Canadian law, the issue isn’t about this person breaking Canadian law, it’s about him breaking US law, and the fact that yes Virginia, Canada and the US DOES have an extradition policy based on respecting each others laws. Again, if you think defiance of this has anything to do with independence, you’re the one who doesn’t know what the word means.

I have to say, dcolton makes a good point. What is it with Canadians lately? If I were to judge by the sheer pettiness I see displayed so often by some Canadians, I’d have to gauge the level of national insecurity up there to be on overload lately. Of course it’s unfair to judge merely by a few representatives of a nation, so I’ll assume it’s only the few, not the many that are so deeply insecure they feel the need to go on the defensive constantly over any US/Canada issue.

[Athens]

Originally posted by dcolton:
When you are dependent upon a nation and when our security allows you to invest your money into socialism...yes, you shoul pucker up and kiss my black arsehole.

As for the bush doll...if that was such a joke, why did the canadians get si upset at Triumph the Insult fog?

The USA is as dependent on us as we are to the USA, and what security, Washington if anything is causing us more security problems then its fixing. Pissing off the entire world and making yourself targets puts us in much more danger. How many Canadians got killed at WTC, 25ish?

and whats the Triumph fog thing?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE:
and the fact that yes Virginia, Canada and the US DOES have an extradition policy based on respecting each others laws.

I believe the US/Canadian extradition treaty is a dual criminality treaty. That means it's not just a matter of respect. In order to honor a request to extradite, the US Citizen would also have to be charged in the US with something that would be criminal if committed in Canada. Presumably desertion is criminal in Canada also, so my guess is in this case he could be extradited.

However, formal extradition is pretty rare between friendly countries. Most likely he will just be informally handed over at the border, which as you say, is not uncommon (in both directions). That said, if the Canadian authorities really want to piss the US off, they could just ask him to leave Canada before the US makes a formal extradition request. But that would be escalating a routine matter to an international crisis. Most likely, he'll be on the first bus home. Athens might even be able to wave to him as he passes through Windsor on his way to Leavenworth.

[Athens]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
I believe the US/Canadian extradition treaty is a dual criminality treaty. That means it's not just a matter of respect. In order to honor a request to extradite, the US Citizen would also have to be charged in the US with something that would be criminal if committed in Canada. Presumably desertion is criminal in Canada also, so my guess is in this case he could be extradited.

However, formal extradition is pretty rare between friendly countries. Most likely he will just be informally handed over at the border, which as you say, is not uncommon (in both directions). That said, if the Canadian authorities really want to piss the US off, they could just ask him to leave Canada before the US makes a formal extradition request. But that would be escalating a routine matter to an international crisis. Most likely, he'll be on the first bus home. Athens might even be able to wave to him as he passes through Windsor on his way to Leavenworth.

why would i want to wave to him when he gets the boot out?

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Athens:
why would i want to wave to him when he gets the boot out?

I don't know. If you like you can flip him off for me.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
I don't know. If you like you can flip him off for me.

And for me too

[spacefreak]

Can you give him a weggie on my behalf?

Actually, that might be considered battery up there. On second thought, maybe just moon him for me.

Thanks.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
I believe the US/Canadian extradition treaty is a dual criminality treaty. That means it's not just a matter of respect. In order to honor a request to extradite, the US Citizen would also have to be charged in the US with something that would be criminal if committed in Canada. Presumably desertion is criminal in Canada also, so my guess is in this case he could be extradited.

True, but I would imagine that most matters of extradition would be over cases that are a crime in both nations. I don’t think anyone bothers with extradition over spitting on sidewalks and the like.

There’s this pretense sometimes floated that US and Canadian laws are so vastly different, but most any crime that would have authorities chasing a fugitive in the US, would also be a crime in Canada. And I’d venture a guess you’re right, desertion from Canada’s military is probably as illegal as it is here.

[Athens]

Originally posted by SimeyTheLimey:
I don't know. If you like you can flip him off for me.

the jerk is wasting my tax money