U.S. Army whistleblower Chelsea Manning has been denied entry to Canada.
In a letter Manning posted to Twitter, the Canadian government told her she is barred from entering the country. The letter states that Manning is “inadmissible on grounds of serious criminality for having been convicted of an offense outside Canada.”
so, i guess canada has permanently banned me ? ????? @CitImmCanada denied entry b/c of convictions similar to "treason" offense ??? pic.twitter.com/xp0JOEEOGd
— Chelsea E. Manning (@xychelsea) September 25, 2017
Further down in the letter, it says that “if committed in Canada this offense would equate to an indictable offense, namely Treason described under section 46(2)(B) of the Criminal Code of Canada, punishable under section 47(2)(C) of the Criminal Code of Canada, for which a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment may be imposed.”
Manning was arrested in 2010, after sending hundreds of thousands of military and diplomatic documents to WikiLeaks. Her disclosures led to a series of exposes by the New York Times and many other outlets, and exposed, among other things, a dramatically high civilian death count in Afghanistan, evidence of abuse by U.S.-backed Iraqi forces, and information about who was being held at Guantánamo Bay.
In 2013, Manning was convicted of six counts of espionage by a military court, but she was acquitted of “aiding the enemy” — the equivalent of a treason charge in U.S. military court. President Obama commuted her sentence before leaving office in January.
The Canadian Embassy could not be reached for comment.
Jameel Jaffer, a Canadian free speech attorney with Columbia Law School’s Knight First Amendment Institute, said he was disappointed by the decision.
“Obviously Chelsea Manning doesn’t present any danger to Canada’s security. And isn’t it clear that Canadians, like Americans, would benefit from engaging her in discussion and debate?”
Top photo: Chelsea Manning is seated in the back of a vehicle as she departs The Nantucket Project’s annual gathering on Sunday, Sept. 17, 2017, in Nantucket, Mass.
Have you never watched Border Security? We’ve kept out people for much lesser charges. We are not going to start changing the rules and making exceptions. Chris Brown still not allowed in Canada b/c of his assault charge – he’s no threat to his fans who he want to perform for. But rules are rules.
Trudeau….Macron = Canuck and french versions of Tony Bliar. Establishment greasers in progressive clothing.
Well Manning is a convicted criminal. Obama might have cut short her sentence (or she would not be even trying to go to Canada) but he did not remove her conviction. That Canadian border guard did their job just like with any other person with a felonious record trying to go to Canada. AS for the suggested “special dispensation” for humanitarian reasons.. what reasons would that be? So she could humanitarianly vacation in Canada or give speech she is being paid to give. If going to Canada is such a big deal for her maybe she should have thought about the ethics of breaking US espionage laws on ‘ethical’ ground and what limits a conviction might put on her. I thinks she might find that she has problems leaving the US and going to many other countries that will not welcome someone with her record. She is not the first person with a criminal conviction turned back at the Canadian border – go stand at the border and watch how many people are turned away because of records in the US.. , she got the same treatment as 100’s of others. She is not above the laws of either the US or Canada even if she lucked out and wormed a commute of her sentence out of Obama… please note he only commuted the sentence – so she did not have to serve the full sentence – he did not pardon her. Until she is no longer a convicted criminal under US law Canada has every right to ban her from ever entering their country and that is exactly what they should do. She is no different then any other convicted criminal that Canada turns back every day of the week and if they make an exception for her then they are going to have to make an exception for many other people. just because she is ‘famous’ (infamous) does not give her anymore rights to an exception then does anyone else wanting to visit Canada!
Is this a bad time to mention militant Zionist lockup on narrative via hidden domestic terror?
https://exposeintelligence.blogspot.com/2015/08/homeland-security-organized-stalking.html
This article makes it seem like Manning was singled out for a ban, which is obviously not the case. Completely disingenuous. As other commenters have stated, anyone with a criminal record is routinely turned away at the border, including Canadians trying to enter the U.S.
Agreed.
In particular, Mr. Jaffer, the quoted attorney, either is completely outside his realm of knowledge in talking about Canadian admissibility laws, is being wholly disingenuous, or is quoted in a manner that strips away necessary context (making the authors quoting him disingenuous).
To put it in perspective, Chelsea Manning shouldn’t expect to be able to get into Canada if she showed up at the border with a recent misdemeanor DUI, much less with a felony conviction.
Dear USA,
keep your criminals on your side of the invisible wall. They are NOT welcome here.
Regards, Canada
Dancing Justin Trudeau again betrayed his humanistic image of inclusion and love he sold to Canadians in his election campaign.
Instead he included war and loved corporate profits while Indian youth suicides continue in a rhythm of music.
Oh Canada! what the hell happened to you.
TURDeau has admitted he smoked pot and is now legalizing it. He is ok for now with diplomatic immunity but after that he can be turned down at the US border.
“Obviously Chelsea Manning doesn’t present any danger to Canada’s security. ”
Ummmmm why not?
Ummm How?
Chelsea tweets? I’m so done with her, and anyone else who tweets.
So there, bitches!
I love Chelsea so much, I hope she does not become discouraged . God loves her for what she did.
It’s Canadian law: if you’re convicted of a felony, you can’t get into Canada. They have a process whereby you can get special permission. But if you have a felony DUI, an assault charge, robbery, etc., you can’t get into Canada. I understand Chelsea is a different case, with her actions being seen by some as heroic and by others as treasonous, but no matter which way you lean, she was convicted of a felony in the U.S. and is subject to Canada’s restriction.
It goes well beyond “felony DUI”: the default Canadian border rules are that a single misdemeanor DUI is a problem for 10 years past completion of the sentence (i.e., if the person gets a couple years of probation, it’s from when the probation ends). Multiple misdemeanor DUI’s can be an issue at the border until a person goes through the process of “applying for rehabilitation” with the Canadian government.
And the U.S. State Department website outright tells Americans: “Anyone with a criminal record (including misdemeanors or alcohol-related driving offenses) may not be able to enter Canada without first obtaining an approval for rehabilitation well in advance of any planned travel.” https://travel.state.gov/content/passports/en/country/canada.html
I can’t get too outraged about this. I was refused entry into Canada 20+ years ago because I had a DUI on my record.
funny how people still have this vietnam-era rose tinted view of this place; canada is still a shitty colonial western country full of shitty western people. we have health care (for now) but both past and current dumb fucks (eaubama currently) are moving slow and steady to erode any social safety nets that were set up in the pre-nafta period. makes me wonder where the 40% tax i pay on my beer is going.
But wait, you forgot, if you really are a “shitty western country,” then you’re also “exceptional.” The patina of exceptionalism can’t be rubbed off once you have it – get used to it. True reality has a “glimmer” to it all its own.
I coined a term for the Canadian “look down our nose at everyone while ignoring our own bullshit” attitude
Canadescension
You coined a term, Mikey? It shows you’re USeless.
Somehow this little bit of fascism from our northern neighbor, 3rd largest weapons supplier to Saudi Arabia, does not surprise me.
Bell, Canada’s largest telecom company, has called on the government to support radical copyright and broadcast distribution reforms as part of the NAFTA renegotiation. Their proposals include the creation of a mandated website blocking system without judicial review overseen by the CRTC and the complete criminalization of copyright with criminal provisions attached to all commercial infringement. Bell also supports an overhaul of the current retransmission system for broadcasters, supporting a “consent model” that would either keep U.S. channels out of the Canadian market or dramatically increase their cost of access while maintaining simultaneous substitution.
http://tm.durusau.net/?p=76448
How is this fascism?
Haven’t you heard? Everything you dislike is fascism and everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
If Trudeau doesn’t intervene, he’s just a cheap Obama clone.
that ship sailed long ago. hence “eaubama”. see his pathetic anti-BDS ranting for another example.
Maybe Trudeau will sing an Al Green song, I mean a Neil Young song, and close the door quietly behind him.
So much for rockin’ in the free world. Let’s get it on…
The Canadian government knows best whether it has committed crimes that might be exposed by Ms. Manning. So I trust their judgment in this case.
Says the self proclaimed Fascist. Liberals having similar views take note!
Liberals do trust the Government of Canada – that may be because they’re gullible, or because they are the Government of Canada. Whatever the reason, I hope your comment will open their eyes.
Bravo!
Well said.
This is the procedure the border agency needs to take. By default, we don’t admit convicted criminals into Canada. As the letter states, she has a chance to appeal. That’s the proper procedure. It’s not up to our front line border security to make decisions like this.
It’s hard to disagree with that logic. Still, I hope there is genuinely a chance for Canadians to argue that disclosing secret information to benefit the public interest isn’t really Treason, and thus not only to let her in but to send a message in doing so.
There is. There’s both the appeal board, and I believe the option for the Minister responsible to use his authority to issue an exemption. Given the nature of the situation, it’s likely the appeal board could be convinced to grant one as well.
CBSA did exactly what they’re expected to do. It would have been shocking if she’d been allowed in, given what standard policy is on people with felony convictions.
I’m more worried about Julian Assange at this point.
Anyway, Canada isn’t what you think.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhpPW3F4Qyk
This has nothing to do with “pressure from the US Government”, and everything to do with standard practice and procedure. Has no one watched an episode of Border Security???
This headline is totally misleading and the writer has done a pretty terrible job too. Canada isn’t keeping her out because of their ‘treason law’, the Canadian government cited her treason CONVICTION, from the US. She’s a convicted felon, because she has been convicted of a felony, she’s ineligible. Just ask the tens of thousands of Americans with DUI’s or spousal abuse on their records who try and cross the border. She’s not being picked on, this has been the law for decades. Just because she had her sentence commuted does not mean that her record has been expunged.
You know what else is a felony, vote tampering, theft of public funds, lying to the public as a voted representative, bribery, breach of the logan act. None of these are getting charged and in fact those same scum balls are using your money to go around the world and make stock option for themselves as legal bribes. You take the time to tell us how guilty she is but I bet you voted last election for one of the main three parties. You are the very reason we are in this mess as you are too stupid to realize the government is playing a con game on you. They have been for over 50 years in Canada. The UN now rolls out draconian law in Canada to test its response. If Canadians act out, they know it won’t work anywhere else because people here are so passive and actually argue that we should pay more taxes. The 6th most taxed country in the world is rated dead last in many categories and falling off every single list of recognition they were ever on. This story is an example of how shitty we are and you are defending it. Would you bar immigrants right now from entering Canada because many have felony charges against them. A study showed the most law breaching organization in North America is the US congress with murder, rape, hit and run, drunk driving, burglary, entrapment, and you guessed it, TREASON charges…yet every single one can come to Canada right now. What logic is this? or is there any?
Yes, you’re totally right. Because I offered a valid explanation as to why she wasn’t admitted to Canada, I am, as you put it “the very reason we are in this mess as I am too stupid to realize the government is playing a con game on me.” Great insight. Thanks.
Meh, I hope the world wakes up to the fact that Canada is not the dream world Trudeau paints it out to be. We have some serious issues up here, and a leader who promises everything to the middle class, but really only delivers to the rich.
You guys elected your populist in Trump, we elected ours in Trudeau. Two trust fund weenies who’ve never really had to struggle for anything. Two dudes who say what they need to say to mollify their bases.
Sorry Chelsea, but in all honesty you’re not missing much.
Mikey, try waking up to the fact that your “Sorry Chelsea” (the felon) was lawfully denied entry.
These governments want to make life so impossible for her that she will commit suicide.
The psychopaths have won.
Really? I would think if she was truly a thorn in their side, govts wouldn’t be so patient
The US constitution forbid the government to enforce foreign laws within the US territory or to enforce US law abroad. (*)
It is possible that such a close is not part of the Canadian constitution but what’s about Canada sovereignty free of foreign influence? It is in the constitution and It is time for the Patriotic Canadian citizens to WEAK-UP!
(*) Needless to say the US constitution has been violated repetitively in many ways, particularly during the last 20 years This and other signs of decay are announcing the approaching end of the United States as a country.)
There is not much of a chance that Manning will repeat this offence (by leaking Canadian secrets).
It is the law.
Yes and laws are important. Is a law that basically punishes an offender for life a good law? It extends the punishment given be the court. Some cannot even vote after their prison sentences. Some pleaded guilty because they could not afford a lawyer. Can criminals never be forgiven?
Chelsea is not a criminal, she is a whistleblower. Big difference.
In your opinion. And I’m not saying I disagree, the problem is she has been convicted of a felony and anyone with that type of criminal record will not be admitted to Canada, or most other countries for that matter.
I agree, but Manning was convicted and has to live with that reality. My comment is extended to criminals in general (even though there are crimes that most people don’t want to forgive ever).
I will use your words in complete context… Would you be comfortable knowing, that a convicted, time-served and released child-molester/sex-offender moved in right next door to you?
Can criminals never be forgiven?
That is one of the crimes that most people don’t want to forgive ever. So when Manning is called a criminal (because Manning was actually convicted) she is grouped with those people and axe-murderers and what not. That is not fair and therefore a law that pools all into one group and prohibits entering a country is not fair.
Many criminals should have a chance to become ex-criminal after punishment.
“The Canadian Embassy could not be reached for comment.”
An embassy couldn’t be reached for comment????
What, was it out playing golf or on vacation or something?
It’s a shame Chelsea doesn’t contribute something vital to Canadian culture like a hockey player or someone. The Canadian government might have stood up to Washington over that.
HA! Unless Chelsea arrived in a private helicopter or owns an island, or is a serial tax dodger like Bono she won’t get Trudeau’s attention
Border Officials are simply doing their job. Chelsea is not being treated unfairly or differently than anyone else crossing the border. Border Officials routinely check anyone entering Canada. If you have a criminal record and your crime equates to a offence under the Criminal Code of Canada, you will be denied entry. Chelsea’s crime was commuted by Obama however, her crime was not pardoned. This means that she still has a criminal record. She is free to challenge the decision however, if they make an exception for Chelsea, they are setting a dangerous precedent for all future applicants challenging their refusal of entry at the border for having a criminal record (regardless of the charge).
Nelson Mandela was eventually admitted into Canada despite having a record. This wouldn’t set a new precedent.
Eventually, following his application for a temporary resident visa or waiver. I didn’t say this would be setting a “new” precedent, it would be setting a dangerous precedent. Criticizing border officials for following procedure…implying that they should have used their discretion and ought to have known that Chelsea posed no serious threat is irresponsible and as I said, setting a dangerous precedent. Chelsea can appeal the decision and apply for a waiver (just like Nelson Mandela ;) )
“the stasi are simply doing their job. if you don’t want to be sent to jail for your opinion then you shouldn’t have whispered it to your spouse next to the hidden bugging device we inplanted in your cat.”
that’s you. that’s how you sound.
I’m sorry, did you expect Chelsea to be treated differently than anyone else arriving at the border with a criminal record?
“The letter states that Manning is “inadmissible on grounds of serious criminality for having been convicted of an offense outside Canada.””
Powerful people in the US government are mad at you therefore we can’t let you in our country.
But we’re still a sovereign nation and all.
Not really the case. People are denied entry for reasons like this everyday. People convicted of drug felonies are in the same boat.
And DUI’s, and spousal abuse and on and on…
Seems like if they respect the conviction of a US court they ought to respect the pardon too.
She wasn’t pardoned.
Exactly, there was no pardon.
Here all this time I thought Obama pardoned him.
I stand corrected.
They may still have arrest warrants out for Dick and George, but they welcomed Henry with open arms.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/munk-debates/toronto-welcomes-henry-kissinger-accused-war-criminal/article4192522/?arc404=true
Trudeau and his minions are assholes.
This is an odd way to treat someone who committed no crime in Canada or against Canada, and who poses no current threat to Canada, either. Obviously the Canadian government is trying to lick The Donald’s boot as hard as possible.
See EM’s explanation above. It has nothing to do with committing a crime in or against Canada, and the US has the same laws (I believe most countries do): https://help.cbp.gov/app/answers/detail/a_id/760/~/entry-into-the-for-a-person-with-criminal-record-or-overstay%2C-waiver
Could it be that the U.S. government put pressure on the Canadian government ? It really wouldn’t surprise me. Just another way to suppress information.
I completely agree with you, I can’t possibly imagine the Canadian govt actually refusing entry in this one particular instance with everybody so abreast of what has transponded, on the basis of Chelsea being a threat to them or their security.
Just another act by the US govt to scare anybody thinking about leaking or reporting something horrible that our tax dollars are being used to do. Also intimidating sovereign nations into doing our bidding as well.
I hope that Chelsea appears via video broadcast at the event like Snowden did at SXSW.
They can’t stop us all.
Are you all serious with this? There’s no governmental conspiracy here, she’s a convicted felon, these rules have been in place for ever. Despite whether you believe she’s a whistleblower or a felon, she’s been convicted of a felony. I’m shocked there are this many people who lack critical thinking skills on this. The Canadian government, and pretty much every other government out there, including the US doesn’t welcome felons with open arms. If you’re so concerned, work towards having her record expunged, but don’t blame Canada for laws they’ve had on the books for decades.
transpired…
Unfortunately it is automatically the case for anyone with a criminal convicion in their history – no matter how long ago, no matter how minor, no matter the politics- and – whichever direction you are crossing in.
Before 9 11 it was a technicality they usually over-looked/didn’t bother checking – unless there was reason for concern, back when you could drive across with just a birth certificate or driver’s license, but we gave up that freedom to “keep us safe”.
What does he expect? Regular American citizens are denied entry to Canada for far far less, if you commit a simple drug offense in the U.S. , you’re inadmissible. The same goes for Canadians trying to enter the U.S. This isn’t anything new. The U.S. treats us Canadians no different. Basically if you have any type of criminal record, expect to have problems at the border going either way.
He? To whom are you referring – Chelsea Manning?
Does “expect to have problems” mean additional questioning or refusal?
Chelsea Manning is a whistleblower.
It means refusal. Any criminal conviction such as a 20 year old DUI or even an old posession charge will do it.
As for DUI, Negligent Driving, or Reckless Driving, Canada only goes back 10 years. I think this also applies to misdemeanor drug possession. Felony drug charges might be longer.
I guess all blanket statements – statements of fact – sound reasonable until you select a human for an example.
Well then! I hope they indict POTUS, so he is refused entry to all of his international properties.
We let G W Bush into the country as we have Kissinger, Cheney and Rumsfeld so we can certainly let this person in. Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld have all been found guilty of committing war crimes.
As I Canadian I can be banned FOR LIFE from entering the USA for admitting to having ever smoked marijuana IN MY LIFE at the American boarder. #landofthefree
You say that like it is a bad thing Scott. They only do it for your safety.
I have zero plans to ever go to the USA.
Yes, this is disappointing. But the facts of the matter are: if you have a criminal record in your country where you hold citizenship, Canada (or any other country) has the right to deny you entry. It’s just the law. Actually they can deny entry for whatever reason they want.
A waiver can be applied for by the person requesting entry. And approval to enter may be granted. End of story.
#sad
This is a pretty standard application of Canadian law.
Canada’s criminal code does define leaking as treason, and does impose a felony sentence for it. Canada’s immigration law does bar entry for persons convicted of offenses that would be felonies under Canadian law.
While one may object to Canadian law on the subject certainly, it cannot be an unexpected result that ms. Manning was denied entry. The law of Canada clearly bars her entry into the country.
The officer reporting to the relevant minister that ms. Manning is inadmissible to Canada is doing their job and correctly applying Canadian law to her case. If ms. Manning wishes to be admitted to Canada notwithstanding her inadmissibility under Canadian law, her request would properly need to be made to Ahmed Hussen, the relevant minister of the elected Canadian government, who, along possibly with Prime Minister Trudeau, would be the only individuals empowered to waive the law in her case.
Note: doesn’t apply if you’re Conrad Black
Since he was born in Canada and is a Canadian citizen on that basis, that’s a terrible and not at all analogous example to a non-citizen such as Manning.
Black renounced his citizenship to become a Lord.
I agree. My friend who has a DUI, was unable to enter Canada, because of that reason.
Canada seems no longer what it used to be. I am wondering what happened to the refugees who took care of Edward Snowden in Hong Kong. Last thing I heard was they were seeking refuge in Canada…
I’m curious what you think it used to be.