Yes, I know that’s a stereotype, and know plenty of smart ones. But their supreme court at least is populated by half-wits.
A federal policy that bans Canadians from listing Jerusalem, Israel, as their birthplace on their passports does not violate the Charter of Rights, the Federal Court of Appeal said Tuesday.
The ruling came in the context of a three-judge panel decision that the Canadian government was not required to allow 19-year-old Eliyahu Veffer, the son of a Toronto rabbi, to amend his passport to indicate that his birthplace, Jerusalem, was part of Israel.
“There is no discrimination here,” the judges wrote in the decision released late last week.
Veffer still maintains the freedom to express his faith and his subjectively held views as to the status of Jerusalem; he is just not able to do so in his Canadian passport.”
But Jerusalem, Israel has been a perfectly objective address since 1947:
…at the end of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, Jerusalem found itself divided between Israel and Jordan (then known as Transjordan).
The ceasefire line established through the Armistice Agreement of 1949 between Israel and Jordan, cut through the center of the city from 1949 until 1967, during which time West Jerusalem was part of Israel and East Jerusalem was part of Jordan.
So, if the guy was born in West Jerusalem (probable, that’s where most Jewish Israelis live), he was indeed born in a city internationally acknowledged as part of Israel.
If the judges have problems with international armistice lines, they’d have to flag Tibet, Poland, Russia, Germany, Bangladesh, and great slabs of India and Pakistan as “subjective” nations.