October 11, 2024
Why, like it or not, we have to take in Jihadi Jack
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
If Letts gets to Canada, throw him in jail for life. But terrorist or not, he is a Canadian. And for that to mean something for all of us, we have to take him in.
If Letts gets to Canada, throw him in jail for life. But terrorist or not, he is a Canadian. And for that to mean something for all of us, we have to take him in.

You test your values with the tough cases, not the easy ones. And admitting Jihadi Jack is a Canadian (and thus our responsibility) is a tough case.

The Brits dumped Jack Letts in our laps when they quietly (almost secretly) revoked his U.K. citizenship a month or so ago.

Letts is more Brit than Canuck. He was born, raised and educated in the U.K. but has a claim to Canadian citizenship through his father.

Under international law, countries have a very hard time disowning one of their own citizens who has only one citizenship.

However, in the age of terrorism, several countries have passed laws allowing them to revoke their half of a dual citizen’s citizenship. They did this so they could force out new citizens who also still had citizenship in their countries of origin, typically Saudi Arabia or Jordan or Egypt, or some other terror-exporting Middle Eastern country.

So the Brits made Jihadi Jack our problem by beating us to the punch and yanking his British passport before we could pull his Canadian one.

[…]

See Also:

(1) Jihadi Jack in his own words

(2) 18 years after 9/11, we shouldn’t still be improvising solutions for the jihadis

Loading

Visited 28 times, 1 visit(s) today