International Woman takes child from Saudi father and the US backs her.

she'll have a hell of a lot more granted to her living life here, than in SA.

True. She can stay in the spotlight, post on onlyfans, and rake in more dough by letting Dailymail, Huffpost, and others know that she's paying for her "legal battle" by being on onlyfans. Free advertising.

She's not ugly by any means. Would be a quick way to make bank and possibly give her enough funds to disappear to a country that doesn't give a shit about Saudi court rulings.
 
What side do you guys take here? I am pretty uncomfortable with this story. It seems like the mother ran off with the kid from Saudi Arabia and our government is letting her ignore the rights of the father. They had a legal custody agreement. He agreed to let her go to the US with the kid and kept the kid there.
If the tables were turned and a Chinese man ran off with a kid to China we'd want the kid back. What do you guys think?


https://www.yahoo.com/news/american-woman-lost-bitter-custody-134745380.html

  • In 2019, Bethany Vierra lost custody of her daughter to her Saudi ex and was trapped in the country.

  • While her case made international news, she faced intimidation and harassment in the kingdom.

  • She told Insider how she and her child managed to escape to the US and remain there.

  • Visit Insider's homepage for more stories.
Is normal

  1. Judges routinely deport Canadian citizens (children) from Canada. Yes this sounds strange. A Canadian citizen deported from Canada? (But doesn't the Charter s.6 protect every citizen's right to remain in Canada?)
  2. Judges hate it when I use the word 'deport'. They much prefer the phrase 'return'. Its so much more clinical don't you think? When you're in the business of deporting Canadian citizens, its always best to pick the most inoffensive phraseology. Nothing to see here folks, just a little 'removal' operation. (But didn't Taschereau, Kellock and Fauteux call it a deportation in 1950?)
  3. The entirety of the 'return' game in Canada is run by the provinces under provincial children's law statutes. Deportation ('return') beyond the territorial boundary of the province, is somehow permissible because it is apparently a trifling detail of parens patriae jurisdiction. (But , I thought Hogg taught us that provincial jurisdiction is strictly territorial?).
  4. There is an international convention (Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of Child Abduction) which calls for return of 'abducted' children to the place from which they were 'abducted'. If you are a signatory, Canadian courts thereby assume the 'abduction' and summarily order the 'return' - to be dealt with in the original jurisdiction. McLaughlin loves this statute so much that she purported to immunize it from the Charter. (Balev para 35)(But aren't all of our extradition treaties regularly struck down by the Charter? Why is Hague given Charter-immunity not applied to any other piece of legislation or treaty in Canada?)
  5. Ontario judges love this Hague Convention so much that they apply it's outrageous provisions to non-Hague countries such as Dubai. In other words, Dubai will not send a child ,abducted from Canada, back to Canada, but Ontario judges think nothing of summarily ordering a Canadian citizen child back to Dubai, regardless of the fact that the mother cannot follow.(more)

https://www.canliiconnects.org/en/commentaries/71387

2733

2734

2735

2736

2737

2738

2739

2740

2741

2742

2743
 
Last edited:
True. She can stay in the spotlight, post on onlyfans, and rake in more dough by letting Dailymail, Huffpost, and others know that she's paying for her "legal battle" by being on onlyfans. Free advertising.

She's not ugly by any means. Would be a quick way to make bank and possibly give her enough funds to disappear to a country that doesn't give a shit about Saudi court rulings.

you talking about the child?
 
For all that we know, it’s the woman that’s fucked up. I’ve seen enough bullshit from women to believe without solid evidence.
 
Last edited:
Is normal

  1. Judges routinely deport Canadian citizens (children) from Canada. Yes this sounds strange. A Canadian citizen deported from Canada? (But doesn't the Charter s.6 protect every citizen's right to remain in Canada?)
  2. Judges hate it when I use the word 'deport'. They much prefer the phrase 'return'. Its so much more clinical don't you think? When you're in the business of deporting Canadian citizens, its always best to pick the most inoffensive phraseology. Nothing to see here folks, just a little 'removal' operation. (But didn't Taschereau, Kellock and Fauteux call it a deportation in 1950?)
  3. The entirety of the 'return' game in Canada is run by the provinces under provincial children's law statutes. Deportation ('return') beyond the territorial boundary of the province, is somehow permissible because it is apparently a trifling detail of parens patriae jurisdiction. (But , I thought Hogg taught us that provincial jurisdiction is strictly territorial?).
  4. There is an international convention (Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of Child Abduction) which calls for return of 'abducted' children to the place from which they were 'abducted'. If you are a signatory, Canadian courts thereby assume the 'abduction' and summarily order the 'return' - to be dealt with in the original jurisdiction. McLaughlin loves this statute so much that she purported to immunize it from the Charter. (Balev para 35)(But aren't all of our extradition treaties regularly struck down by the Charter? Why is Hague given Charter-immunity not applied to any other piece of legislation or treaty in Canada?)
  5. Ontario judges love this Hague Convention so much that they apply it's outrageous provisions to non-Hague countries such as Dubai. In other words, Dubai will not send a child ,abducted from Canada, back to Canada, but Ontario judges think nothing of summarily ordering a Canadian citizen child back to Dubai, regardless of the fact that the mother cannot follow.(more)

https://www.canliiconnects.org/en/commentaries/71387

2733

2734

2735

2736

2737

2738

2739

2740

2741

2742

2743
And they all lived happily ever after
 
Nah, I'm with the Saudi's. She knew what she was getting into. Saudi Arabia is better for the child anyway. Why the fuck would she come to a country where supposedly everything's racist, sexist, homophobic according to the left? She won't even know what gender she is in Soyattle Washington. Woman just wanted a free meal with a rich man. She shouldn't be rewarded for her mistakes.
 
I'm not gonna read that whole thing but in general, fuck Saudi Arabia. We do freedom better here, especially for women.

If we were to act in order to get someone out of China it's because we do freedom better than them too.

Fuck em both.
 
What side do you guys take here? I am pretty uncomfortable with this story. It seems like the mother ran off with the kid from Saudi Arabia and our government is letting her ignore the rights of the father. They had a legal custody agreement. He agreed to let her go to the US with the kid and kept the kid there.
If the tables were turned and a Chinese man ran off with a kid to China we'd want the kid back. What do you guys think?


https://www.yahoo.com/news/american-woman-lost-bitter-custody-134745380.html

  • In 2019, Bethany Vierra lost custody of her daughter to her Saudi ex and was trapped in the country.

  • While her case made international news, she faced intimidation and harassment in the kingdom.

  • She told Insider how she and her child managed to escape to the US and remain there.

  • Visit Insider's homepage for more stories.
I'm torn between my firm belief in fathers rights, and my equally firm dislike of the kingdom of Saudi.
 
In 999/1000 cases like this it's a muslim man kidnapping a child to a muslim country, wich in many cases will make their lives miserable.
In this case it's the other way around and since it's about a girl, you can be sure her life will improve in the west, compared to SA.
And the irony makes me chuckle.
 
Don't care about the idiot mother, but the daughter has a right to be safe. The Saudis are criminal scum and should be treated as such
 
Is normal

  1. Judges routinely deport Canadian citizens (children) from Canada. Yes this sounds strange. A Canadian citizen deported from Canada? (But doesn't the Charter s.6 protect every citizen's right to remain in Canada?)
  2. Judges hate it when I use the word 'deport'. They much prefer the phrase 'return'. Its so much more clinical don't you think? When you're in the business of deporting Canadian citizens, its always best to pick the most inoffensive phraseology. Nothing to see here folks, just a little 'removal' operation. (But didn't Taschereau, Kellock and Fauteux call it a deportation in 1950?)
  3. The entirety of the 'return' game in Canada is run by the provinces under provincial children's law statutes. Deportation ('return') beyond the territorial boundary of the province, is somehow permissible because it is apparently a trifling detail of parens patriae jurisdiction. (But , I thought Hogg taught us that provincial jurisdiction is strictly territorial?).
  4. There is an international convention (Hague Convention on Civil Aspects of Child Abduction) which calls for return of 'abducted' children to the place from which they were 'abducted'. If you are a signatory, Canadian courts thereby assume the 'abduction' and summarily order the 'return' - to be dealt with in the original jurisdiction. McLaughlin loves this statute so much that she purported to immunize it from the Charter. (Balev para 35)(But aren't all of our extradition treaties regularly struck down by the Charter? Why is Hague given Charter-immunity not applied to any other piece of legislation or treaty in Canada?)
  5. Ontario judges love this Hague Convention so much that they apply it's outrageous provisions to non-Hague countries such as Dubai. In other words, Dubai will not send a child ,abducted from Canada, back to Canada, but Ontario judges think nothing of summarily ordering a Canadian citizen child back to Dubai, regardless of the fact that the mother cannot follow.(more)

https://www.canliiconnects.org/en/commentaries/71387

2733

2734

2735

2736

2737

2738

2739

2740

2741

2742

2743

Wow! That is seriously fucked up.

The title of this thread calling the Mother a "woman"... it's kind of cringe. Why would the media do that?
 
Back
Top