Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, jacee said:

Omar Khadr "defected to AlQuaida" ... at 10 years of age???!!!

"He should not be entitled to the full protection of Canada’s charter of rights and freedoms."

Every Canadian, guilty or innocent, at home or abroad, is entitled to best efforts to uphold their Charter Rights.

Where does the Sun find these stupid people to write such stupid stuff??

 

Well, he probably had a little peach fuzz on his upper lip by age ten so he was clearly an adult.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 2.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Your a dick.....she lost her husband, her children lost their father, who was serving his country, as a medic I might add....Omar and his family has been nothing but a burden to the country, soaking i

He should be in prison for life. The notion this piece of garbage gets any money makes me puke. This is an unrepentant terrorist with a family who endorse and support terrorism and he's given an obsce

It would be interesting to know what would have come out if this case had been argued in court, it's curious to wonder what the Trudeau Liberals are trying to hide by paying Omar off and trying to mak

Posted Images

40 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Chretien and the Liberals are as right-wing as any Conservative, as equally evidenced by their focus on the distribution of power.

All I can say to that one is - Toto - I'm not in Kansas anymore

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Try applying the post French revolutionary definition to the term right wing.

If you people can reach as far back as the 4th century to justify your positions when it comes to people like Khadr then I can reach back as recently as the 17th when it comes to justifying mine.

Edited by eyeball
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jacee said:

 

Trudeau is just doing what the GoC is ordered to do by the courts. 

You are factually incorrect. Neither Trudeau nor the GoC were ordered to make any monetary award by any court. In fact this matter was still before the courts in a civil suit and no determination of damages, if any had yet been made. This was purely a Liberal decision and they've publicly stated that to be the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, AngusThermopyle said:

You are factually incorrect. Neither Trudeau nor the GoC were ordered to make any monetary award by any court. In fact this matter was still before the courts in a civil suit and no determination of damages, if any had yet been made. This was purely a Liberal decision and they've publicly stated that to be the case.

Exactly, there is a huge difference between being "ordered" to do something and "willingly offering" to do something - you'd think this would be obvious common sense.

The gov't should have fought it to the very end and if they lost, pay up the money and tell Khadr to stick the apology up his ass.  At least there is some dignity in that, at least the armed forces would know that the government doesn't kiss ass to terrorists.  I could be more ashamed of our Prime Minister right now.   

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/6/2017 at 8:57 AM, jacee said:

Because ... Harper.

BS, he was caught under Chretien's watch, it was Chretien's government in power when members of CSIS went to interrogate him. Chretien did nothing at all. After Chretien the situation was inherited by Martin, who also did squat about it. Under Harper the terrorist POS was repatriated to Canada. So in your world of alternate reality the guy who had him repatriated is the creep but the Liberals who did jack are the good guys?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, AngusThermopyle said:

BS, he was caught under Chretien's watch, it was Chretien's government in power when members of CSIS went to interrogate him. Chretien did nothing at all. After Chretien the situation was inherited by Martin, who also did squat about it. Under Harper the terrorist POS was repatriated to Canada. So in your world of alternate reality the guy who had him repatriated is the creep but the Liberals who did jack are the good guys?

Harper was a full supporter of the US/UK war crimes and terrorism. He is a war criminal himself, having taken part in the illegal invasion of Afghanistan and providing support for the Iraq illegal invasion. Though he later said the Iraq invasion was a mistake. Clear, unequivocal proof of their being war criminals. Why don't these war criminals go to jail?

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, hot enough said:

Harper was a full supporter of the US/UK war crimes and terrorism. He is a war criminal himself, having taken part in the illegal invasion of Afghanistan and providing support for the Iraq illegal invasion. Though he later said the Iraq invasion was a mistake. Clear, unequivocal proof of their being war criminals. Why don't these war criminals go to jail?

Probably because it was Chretien who sent us into Afghanistan, not Harper. Probably also because the Afghanistan mission was a UN and NATO approved mission, therefore by any meaningfull or realistic standard was not illegal as you falsely claim.

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, AngusThermopyle said:

You are factually incorrect. Neither Trudeau nor the GoC were ordered to make any monetary award by any court. In fact this matter was still before the courts in a civil suit and no determination of damages, if any had yet been made. This was purely a Liberal decision and they've publicly stated that to be the case.

The gov was already found to have violated Khadr's rights.

Courts do encourage parties to come to agreement out of court.

But you're right, the Libs could have refused to do so.

Then the court would have imposed a settlement, possibly for the full $20m + court costs.

Then you'd be yelling at them because they didn't try to settle it for less!

Some people just like to complain.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, AngusThermopyle said:

Probably because it was Chretien who sent us into Afghanistan, not Harper. Probably also because the Afghanistan mission was a UN and NATO approved mission, therefore by any meaningfull or realistic standard was not illegal as you falsely claim.

Chretien is also a war criminal, just like Harper. There was no UN approval for either Iraq or Afghanistan. You defend the equivalent of the war crimes of the Nazis. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jacee said:

The gov was already found to have violated Khadr's rights.

Courts do encourage parties to come to agreement out of court.

But you're right, the Libs could have refused to do so.

Then the court would have imposed a settlement, possibly for the full $20m + court costs.

Then you'd be yelling at them because they didn't try to settle it for less!

Some people just like to complain.

You are making assumptions and you know what they say about that. In this case you are once again incorrect, that's sort of habitual with you isn't it. In fact even if they had lost I would not have liked it but I would have applauded their effort to do the right thing. The right thing being to not reward terrorists.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, hot enough said:

Chretien is also a war criminal, just like Harper. There was no UN approval for either Iraq or Afghanistan. You defend the equivalent of the war crimes of the Nazis. 

Really, what was this then?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Assistance_Mission_in_Afghanistan

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AngusThermopyle said:

You are making assumptions and you know what they say about that. In this case you are once again incorrect, that's sort of habitual with you isn't it. In fact even if they had lost I would not have liked it but I would have applauded their effort to do the right thing. The right thing being to not reward terrorists.

??? The gov was already found liable. So they knew they were going to lose this lawsuit.

But you think the Libs should have let the court decide the payout, even if it ended up being double what they were able to negotiate?

That's baloney. You'd be screaming that they should have settled.

I have no time for your petty partisan nonsense.

 

Edited by jacee
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, AngusThermopyle said:

You are making assumptions and you know what they say about that. In this case you are once again incorrect, that's sort of habitual with you isn't it. In fact even if they had lost I would not have liked it but I would have applauded their effort to do the right thing. The right thing being to not reward terrorists.

This is a study in total confusion, but I will allow that it is a routine Angus study in total confusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jacee said:

??? The gov was already found liable. So they knew they were going to lose this lawsuit.

But you think the Libs should have let the court decide the payout, even if it ended up being double what they were able to negotiate?

 

 

Yes I do indeed believe they should have fought it, thus sending a strong message that they do not condone the situation that led up to this. It would have been the right thing to do. Instead they did the opposite of the right thing and sent a very unfavorable message.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, AngusThermopyle said:

You are making assumptions and you know what they say about that. In this case you are once again incorrect, that's sort of habitual with you isn't it. In fact even if they had lost I would not have liked it but I would have applauded their effort to do the right thing. The right thing being to not reward terrorists.

I would have to agree with jacee on this for sure. Doing what you call the right thing could very well have cost the taxpayer double, and I would imagine the DoJ lawyers advised the current government of this based on the prior decisions of the SC.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hot enough said:

This is a study in total confusion, but I will allow that it is a routine Angus study in total confusion.

Whatever, whenever you're shown to be wrong you resort to your usual tactic of obfuscation or denial. As such everything you post is obfuscation and denial.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AngusThermopyle said:

Whatever, whenever you're shown to be wrong you resort to your usual tactic of obfuscation or denial. As such everything you post is obfuscation and denial.

And I'll agree with you on that. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Omni said:

I would have to agree with jacee on this for sure. Doing what you call the right thing could very well have cost the taxpayer double, and I would imagine the DoJ lawyers advised the current government of this based on the prior decisions of the SC.

That is where we differ. I for one do not put a price on doing what is right.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AngusThermopyle said:

Whatever,

 

That's very juvenile, Angus.

Quote

whenever you're shown to be wrong you resort to your usual tactic of obfuscation or denial. As such everything you post is obfuscation and denial.

Stop whining and show your proof that the invasions of Iraq and A were not war crimes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AngusThermopyle said:

That is where we differ. I for one do not put a price on doing what is right.

You're concluding what is the "right thing" because it suits your opinion, which your right. Others around the table may conclude that he was denied his rights, and for a long time, and therefore has a right to at least some compensation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




×
×
  • Create New...