Okay, good to know, I stand corrected.
However, that seems kind of nonsensical to have them do dual duties and then have rules about them being non-combatants while also being armed and allowed to engage. If situations like in this story are to be prevented (which is apparently desired since there's rules about it), it doesn't make sense to have them be armed and also off-limits, that just creates confusion. Strategically, a military might as well just throw red crosses on everyone's arms and then complain about war crimes every time they get shot.
You're basing this on the fact his holding a gun in some pictures?
Yes. He's basically sleeping with his rifle in one picture. Through their manipulative use of language, CBC is trying to portray him as a medic and not a soldier/combatant as those images suggest.
This is likely being done to portray this as if it was some sort of a war crime, although they don't use explicitly say that, but it is implied given that combat medics are not supposed to be shot at.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_medic#Geneva_Convention_protection
According to the Geneva Convention, knowingly firing at a medic wearing clear insignia is a war crime.[2]
So by not calling him a soldier which he apparently was, CBC is misleading the public as to what he was doing there. Sure he might have been performing the duties of a medic, but if he was also performing the duties of a soldier, then he doesn't have the stated protections that are afforded to combat medics.
Language matters.
You've got the wrong section. That's sections 5 (tricking someone into going aboard under false pretense and then putting them into military service with a hostile power when they get there).
I meant that section as to CBC misrepresenting the guy as a medic, which may incite other Canadians to also go and be "medics" in Ukraine. Seems like they're mincing their words here for a reason. It's very dishonest.
In plain English: It's ok as long as you're not joining the armed forces of Canada's enemies, or the enemies of Canada's allies. Ukraine is Canada's ally, so you're legally ok to join their army.
While I understand the purpose of such a law in a real nation that is unified (Canada is neither of those at this point), this seems like a very illiberal law for current year Canada as it's basically saying that Canadian citizens are obliged to agree with who the Canadian government has declared to be an enemy. The Canadian government had no problem watching Russian-Ukrainians getting killed by their own government from 2014 to present, so I find their moral claims lacking with respect to this conflict.
Regarding who the Canadian government has declared to be an enemy, with the current firearms confiscation, climate change nonsense, mass immigration extremism, and various other agenda items of the federal government, they've literally declared an assortment of Canadian citizens to be their enemy as well, they just haven't resorted to military action (yet) and have kept it within the realm of cowardly lawfare.
Thank you for explaining section 5. I would think that friendly foreign state should be defined instead of being left out like that.
LMAO
Third, the timing is uncanny. This is the part about which ‘debunkers’ intentionally mislead readers. Justin Trudeau was born on Christmas day, 1971. In order for his father to be Fidel Castro, his mother would have to be somewhere close to Cuba in March and April 1971.
She was.
In April 1971, the Trudeaus took a long “second honeymoon” all around the Caribbean. According to Wikipedia, they visited one island they declined to disclose. It is the only island they did not disclose. From Wikipedia:
Not sure I would call those virtues but yeah he's correct.