March 29, 2015

International law should never trump Canada's best interests

Brian LilleyArchive

Are Canada's strikes against the terror group ISIS against international law as some claim?

Does international law trump Canada's best interests?

And who makes international law, anyway? Who gets to vote on it?

Be sure to share your point of view in the comments!


JOIN for more news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

GET INVOLVED in our 100% grassroots crowdfunding campaign and help us bring you more fresh content every day!

READ Brian Lilley's book CBC Exposed -- It's been called "the political book of the year."

You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-12-26 10:17:56 -0500
<a href=“”">">test</a>
commented 2015-03-30 14:34:17 -0400
Mr. Mulcair and Mr. Trudeau are “grasping at straws” with the goal of garnering more electoral votes in the 2015 federal election. An interesting point of reference from the UN: “UN General Assembly and Security Council Resolutions, including the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, call for specific actions to be taken by all States and underscore repeatedly that terrorism must be fought by all parties, by all means, at all times, by whomever and against all perpetrators.”
commented 2015-03-30 14:00:06 -0400
So far Harper is the only one to tell Putin he should get out of the Ukraine.
Has any one else in the world said that to Putin’s face?
The bear flinched and went home. harper schooled him. Shep and the beard just apologized. Putin is their friend and ally.
commented 2015-03-30 13:10:31 -0400
Tom Green, what good is championing the rule of law to our adversaries when we can so easily disregard them when it serves our own interests? It makes Canada look like it only supports the rule of law when it’s convenient for our own political interests.
commented 2015-03-30 11:11:03 -0400
William we are not attacking a sovereign state. Ukraine is different. Russia invaded and abbrev part of the Ukraine.
commented 2015-03-30 10:52:19 -0400
The problem is Harper had no problem citing the importance of international law when condemning the actions of Russia in Ukraine but seems willing to ignore it when dealing with Canada’s military action in Syria. Hypocrisy at it’s finest.
commented 2015-03-30 08:01:55 -0400
The only resolutions binding on UN members are those signed under Cpt 7 by the Security Council. The only enforcement they have is NATO. The ICC can convict for war crimes which means any signatorss of Universal Jurisdiction can issue arrest warrants if the convicted should travel to that country. Otherwise they cannot touch you.
commented 2015-03-30 07:51:15 -0400
Yes I have argued pulling out of the UN for years. We boycott the Durban Conference Now it is time to dump the UN. They are the most useless body of murders on the planet. NATO is also a waste of space. We need to form a new body of Western countries with like minded values rooted in democracy and rule of law.
You only need to look at Ukraine to see how useless the UN is.
commented 2015-03-30 07:38:20 -0400
True North, Truer words were never spoken.
commented 2015-03-29 22:52:18 -0400
The U.N. has devolved into an international collection of anti-capitalists, anti-west, anti-freedom of speech, anti-Christian socialists bent upon our destruction. Canada should be leading the exodus of western nations from this group of islamo-nazis as quickly as possible. No rules or regulations masquerading as ‘international law’ should have any jurisdiction over Canadians and should be rejected out of hand.
commented 2015-03-29 21:23:17 -0400
UN is comprised of third world dictators who should all be shot. We can defend ourselves from them as well.
commented 2015-03-29 21:04:17 -0400
@ George Dyer
You’re right about the UN. They have turned straight into a VIP club for countries. I guess that would make them a country club, lol. But a war in the traditional sense was one nation against another. This is an idealism war, made manifest. The borders aren’t as drawn as they were before, so the strategies must change accordingly to save face with other nations. The best course of action, from my point of view would be to get the intel on the ISIS bases of operations and perform surgical precision strikes, with the permissions of Syria and Iraq. Since Iraq has already called for help, we’re halfway there. Mind you, I’m no strategist so this is only an idea.
commented 2015-03-29 20:26:39 -0400
This is an exract of a comment that I posted some time ago:

“. . . I’ve also been listening to discussions lately regarding the legality of this initiative. This is (also) absurd. Wars are neither legal nor illegal, they are simply wars. To the best of my knowledge there is no court in our world that has the authority to put forward an opinion to declare any war legal or illegal . . .”

In any case, the United Nations is not a court of law, it is a club. Violating a U.N. Article would be like not wearing a tie in a restaurant that requires ties to be worn. Of course, my caveat: When you get free legal advice you’re getting your money’s worth.
commented 2015-03-29 18:56:43 -0400
NDP or any other opposing party will say anything, as long as they think it will resonate with fellow followers and influence those who are swing voters. Say it enough and some people may actually believe it, even those who say it.
commented 2015-03-29 18:21:42 -0400
the UN over run by dictators and cited by fools… canada should take the lead in pulling out of this international joke..
commented 2015-03-29 18:18:42 -0400
What is International Law, anyway? Does it come from the UN? The Geneva Convention? Treaties between two or more nation? Come on, Tom, Justin, define International Law for me. The trouble is, I’m pretty sure I know what their definition would be; any resolution voted on and passed by the UN. Assuming that would be their definition, I’m simply going to repost a portion of one of my earlier posts regarding the UN: “The quality and integrity of any organization is entirely dependent upon the quality and integrity of its members. The UN is moribund, way past its “best before” date… if it ever had a “best before” date. How can any organization be an agent for peace and fairness in the world, as long as that organization is dominated by the world’s most evil totalitarian dictators and despots? This isn’t rocket science, people. This is a no-brainer! The only reason for Canada to remain in the UN is to have our voice heard on the world stage… and then promptly ignored! Is it worth it, particularly with the blatant hypocrisy of constant ridiculous censures against Canada for human rights violations? No, it isn’t worth it! We should have washed our hands of that corrupt organization years ago”. That’s more true today than ever before. Perhaps Mulcair should resign as opposition leader and get a job at the UN, representing his other country… France!
commented 2015-03-29 18:14:04 -0400
It is simply impossible to trust the UN anymore. Its agenda is ever expanding , and some members who have a seat at the table of the security council include some very questionable players. Canada no longer even has a seat at that table. We had better be very wary about allowing our sovereignty to be given over to an international police force. Name me a country who would actually be willing to do that when the chips fell against them? If everyone else is fighting dirty it would be suicide if we were to keep our gloves on. Mulcair has his head in the clouds and the boy wonder has his where the sun don’t shine.
commented 2015-03-29 17:53:36 -0400
Angry Tom and the Boy Blunder are able to evoke emotion from the ignorant by appearing to have a legal argument against a government action. This phenomenon is happening more frequently with some success as judges become more political and less interested in the intent of the law. The Liberals had this in mind when the Charter was pieced together, then it became a sin to use the notwithstanding clause to affirm the intent of a bill or law. Only Quebec was not admonished for using it, the French fact was created and now only people who are “bilingual” are allowed to be the leaders of the country because of the French population. Once again we have a legal argument used for political manipulation. I believe it can be demonstrated that both the Liberals and the NDP are using these specious international law arguments as part of their election campaign because they are coming up short on acceptable policy ideas. International law should never supersede national interests because the arbitrators of that body of law all have their own national interest foremost in their minds.
commented 2015-03-29 17:31:19 -0400
Considering how much the Liberals and NDP like worshiping every word and breath of the unelected court judges, especially the Supreme Court, you would think they would be silenced that the Judge Advocate General states that Canada’s actions against ISIS are legal as defined by article 51 of the UN charter. The opposition parties certainly are two faced.
commented 2015-03-29 17:25:57 -0400
Trudeau and Mulcair make me sick, neither one have shown they can be given the responsibility of Governing this great country.
They seem to have zero compassion for the slaughtering going on over there but care more about trying to make Harper look bad and in the process make themselves look like cold, heartless buffoons,tripping over themselves to see who can Harper bash the most.
Using their logic then everyone there is going against International Law, all the countries fighting ISIS butchers,maybe they would like everyone to leave ISIS alone and let them butcher their way around the world
I hope Canadians turn against these two buffoons and give Harper another majority .
commented 2015-03-29 17:22:07 -0400
The NDP is an active member of Socialist International – read here
The UN is a pile of crap organization that dovetails groups like the above. These animals are big advocates of big government, bureaucracy, and legal obstruction so the ones at the top can do what they want in the name of….
Mulcair will do a fine job splitting the left vote with Stoner. And that’s all he’s really good for.
commented 2015-03-29 16:47:43 -0400
It is not up to Tom Mulcair to press charges, it is up to the government of Syria to do so. Trespass that is condoned is not trespass .
commented 2015-03-29 16:39:23 -0400
When ISIL declared war on Canada, who was complaining about it being unlawful? When somebody declares war and picks a fight with a country, it is simply their doing. To have Mulcair seek refuge in international law for these hyenas, it amounts to a coward finding excuse for his cowardice. And it is not lost on anyone that the NDP has not voted in favour of any Canadian combat mission in the entire history of their party. They find they now just need an excuse.
commented 2015-03-29 16:35:20 -0400
The UN has become controlled by corrupt anti western unelected bureaucrats, they have no credibility anymore.
commented 2015-03-29 16:30:33 -0400
Of course I agree with Brian. What does ISIS care about “international law”…or any other terrorist group and/or dictatorship for that matter?