Canadian Politics Redux

PJ_Soul

Don't read this if any hint of positive coverage of the PM makes you mad, lol.
Just an interesting article about how Canada is navigating the Trump admin re US-Canada trade relations.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/world/canada/canadas-trump-strategy-go-around-him.html?mc=adglobal&mcid=facebook&mccr=CA&subid=LALs&ad-keywords=NYTGCanadaNews&referer=http://m.facebook.com/

dignin

Happy 150th. Hope you all have a fun day.

oftenreading

And a happy Canada Day to you too, dignin, and everybody else. its shaping up to be a beautiful day here. 

PJ_Soul

Oh, I almost forgot to celebrate Christy Clark's demise in BC politics here!!!!! I am so happy to see her go!!!! Why a fucking lying, schmoozing, gredy, corrupt scumbag, thank God I don't have see her shit-eating smile all over the news anymore. Yaaaaaay! No more Christy!!

oftenreading

So what are people thinking about the offered payment to Khadr?

Two links here to articles in the G&M

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/odious-khadr-payout-is-the-penalty-for-being-lax-on-the-rule-of-law/article35551200/

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/us-soldier-widow-to-seek-injunction-to-halt-ottawas-payout-to-omar-khadr/article35540496/

Personally, I agree that Canada was complicit in violating his rights, as the court has twice found, and thus he has ground for compensation. I am a strong believer that the legal system needs to operate absolutely cleanly and transparently at all times, given the enormous power it has. Similarly, that's why I also don't complain when accused individuals "get off on a technicality" because police or lawyers have broken the law in the course of prosecution - if your job is to uphold the law, then you'd damn well better be following the law to get there.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

oftenreading said:

So what are people thinking about the offered payment to Khadr?

Two links here to articles in the G&M

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/odious-khadr-payout-is-the-penalty-for-being-lax-on-the-rule-of-law/article35551200/

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/us-soldier-widow-to-seek-injunction-to-halt-ottawas-payout-to-omar-khadr/article35540496/

Personally, I agree that Canada was complicit in violating his rights, as the court has twice found, and thus he has ground for compensation. I am a strong believer that the legal system needs to operate absolutely cleanly and transparently at all times, given the enormous power it has. Similarly, that's why I also don't complain when accused individuals "get off on a technicality" because police or lawyers have broken the law in the course of prosecution - if your job is to uphold the law, then you'd damn well better be following the law to get there.

Classic Canada.

I get the principle of what you are saying, but this case is atypical. Khadr was soldiering against the US (and Canada for that matter). In my mind he lost his rights as a Canadian citizen when he took up arms against us (albeit by extension). 

oftenreading

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

So what are people thinking about the offered payment to Khadr?

Two links here to articles in the G&M

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/odious-khadr-payout-is-the-penalty-for-being-lax-on-the-rule-of-law/article35551200/

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/us-soldier-widow-to-seek-injunction-to-halt-ottawas-payout-to-omar-khadr/article35540496/

Personally, I agree that Canada was complicit in violating his rights, as the court has twice found, and thus he has ground for compensation. I am a strong believer that the legal system needs to operate absolutely cleanly and transparently at all times, given the enormous power it has. Similarly, that's why I also don't complain when accused individuals "get off on a technicality" because police or lawyers have broken the law in the course of prosecution - if your job is to uphold the law, then you'd damn well better be following the law to get there.

Classic Canada.

I get the principle of what you are saying, but this case is atypical. Khadr was soldiering against the US (and Canada for that matter). In my mind he lost his rights as a Canadian citizen when he took up arms against us (albeit by extension). 

No one loses human rights regardless of who or where they are. If it is against our laws to treat a minor as he was treated, then it's against our laws, regardless of whether you agree with his political beliefs or not. That's my point - we can't pick and chose when we follow the rule of law. 

oftenreading

And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it 

HughFreakingDillon

settlement seems like a slam dunk to me. child soldiers are a no no. 

Thirty Bills Unpaid

oftenreading said:

And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it 

Sure. 

It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.

Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.

Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.

HughFreakingDillon

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it 

Sure. 

It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.

Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.

Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.

he was 14. a child that age can easily be manipulated into the situation that an older adult would not have. 

oftenreading

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it 

Sure. 

It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.

Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.

Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.

Since the legal system generally deals with people who haven't followed the law, I don't find your argument that by not following it he has given up the right to  its protections to be compelling. 

Thirty Bills Unpaid

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it 

Sure. 

It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.

Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.

Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.

he was 14. a child that age can easily be manipulated into the situation that an older adult would not have. 

15.

Maybe I'm wrong. But certainly not 8.

And his case is hardly one of being manipulated. Let's not pretend he's the poster child for child soldiering. As I said, he is suitable for the category, but his situation as a 'child soldier' is far different from African children as young as 7-8 years of age scared into soldiering after being taken from their village, watching their parents and peers mutilated, and fed drugs among a variety of other methods employed to solciit loyalty.

Thirty Bills Unpaid

oftenreading said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it 

Sure. 

It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.

Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.

Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.

Since the legal system generally deals with people who haven't followed the law, I don't find your argument that by not following it he has given up the right to  its protections to be compelling. 

Of course you wouldn't.

The legal system is there as a safeguard for people. It wasn't developed to protect and reward criminals as much as you favour it doing so.

HughFreakingDillon

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it 

Sure. 

It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.

Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.

Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.

he was 14. a child that age can easily be manipulated into the situation that an older adult would not have. 

15.

Maybe I'm wrong. But certainly not 8.

And his case is hardly one of being manipulated. Let's not pretend he's the poster child for child soldiering. As I said, he is suitable for the category, but his situation as a 'child soldier' is far different from African children as young as 7-8 years of age scared into soldiering after being taken from their village, watching their parents and peers mutilated, and fed drugs among a variety of other methods employed to solciit loyalty.

no, he's also not 3. so what? not all child soldiers are of the same mold as you keep stressing. 

14. 15. doesn't matter. he was a minor. if he engaged in a sexual relationship with an adult, you'd consider him a victim of manipulation at that age, would you not?

the perception that he was a willing participant doesn't matter. he cannot be considered mature enough to be able to form his own intent and ideas in that type of scenario. 

under international law, he was a child soldier and detained at guantanamo and tortured. again, a slam dunk of a settlement. 

Thirty Bills Unpaid

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it 

Sure. 

It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.

Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.

Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.

he was 14. a child that age can easily be manipulated into the situation that an older adult would not have. 

15.

Maybe I'm wrong. But certainly not 8.

And his case is hardly one of being manipulated. Let's not pretend he's the poster child for child soldiering. As I said, he is suitable for the category, but his situation as a 'child soldier' is far different from African children as young as 7-8 years of age scared into soldiering after being taken from their village, watching their parents and peers mutilated, and fed drugs among a variety of other methods employed to solciit loyalty.

no, he's also not 3. so what? not all child soldiers are of the same mold as you keep stressing. 

14. 15. doesn't matter. he was a minor. if he engaged in a sexual relationship with an adult, you'd consider him a victim of manipulation at that age, would you not?

the perception that he was a willing participant doesn't matter. he cannot be considered mature enough to be able to form his own intent and ideas in that type of scenario. 

under international law, he was a child soldier and detained at guantanamo and tortured. again, a slam dunk of a settlement. 

Tortured?

He was treated medically after being seriously injured and then detained following a squirmish where he killed someone.

I believe this case and settlement centered around the fact that he was not afforded the opportunity to be accompanied by an adult when initially interrogated and admitted to his activities in the conflict?

I might have to brush up on things if I have this wrong.

* Hmmm. It appears I did have this wrong on the torture end of things. I'm talking more than I am listening right now. Sorry.

oftenreading

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it 

Sure. 

It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.

Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.

Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.

Since the legal system generally deals with people who haven't followed the law, I don't find your argument that by not following it he has given up the right to  its protections to be compelling. 

Of course you wouldn't.

The legal system is there as a safeguard for people. It wasn't developed to protect and reward criminals as much as you favour it doing so.

It's there to protect both sides, both the accused and the accuser. It's designed that way because otherwise it's useless as it simply pre-judges guilt, something that is unfortunately a common occurrence. 

oftenreading

"He's a bad guy so he doesn't deserve the protection of a fair legal system" 

How did we find out he's a bad guy?

Because the legal system decided he was, while ignoring its own rules. 

Kind of a vicious circle. 

Thirty Bills Unpaid

oftenreading said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it 

Sure. 

It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.

Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.

Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.

Since the legal system generally deals with people who haven't followed the law, I don't find your argument that by not following it he has given up the right to  its protections to be compelling. 

Of course you wouldn't.

The legal system is there as a safeguard for people. It wasn't developed to protect and reward criminals as much as you favour it doing so.

It's there to protect both sides, both the accused and the accuser. It's designed that way because otherwise it's useless as it simply pre-judges guilt, something that is unfortunately a common occurrence. 

Disagree. 

It is there to protect the innocent. And, once it has been established you are not innocent, the law should not be working for you anymore in my mind.

HughFreakingDillon

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

oftenreading said:

And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it 

Sure. 

It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.

Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.

Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.

Since the legal system generally deals with people who haven't followed the law, I don't find your argument that by not following it he has given up the right to  its protections to be compelling. 

Of course you wouldn't.

The legal system is there as a safeguard for people. It wasn't developed to protect and reward criminals as much as you favour it doing so.

It's there to protect both sides, both the accused and the accuser. It's designed that way because otherwise it's useless as it simply pre-judges guilt, something that is unfortunately a common occurrence. 

Disagree. 

It is there to protect the innocent. And, once it has been established you are not innocent, the law should not be working for you anymore in my mind.

no, it is not there just to protect the innocent. it is to keep society fair and balanced as much as possible.