cannuck

Yes, his rights as a citizen were violated, I do not contest that. What I contest is that the government and the courts had no business in rewarding him to any extent beyond being allowed the incredible privilege and good fortune to remain in Canada as a free man.

I am not expert at the laws in question, so I can't really refute that statement. The vast majority of Canadians are aghast at what was done by the courts (and I can tell you with some certainty - at the behest of government) as well as government. If indeed there was a law that required him to be compensated (and there is not - it ALLOWS him to seek compensation) it would be horribly wrong and as it stands, allowing this particular award is seen to be wrong by most Canadians. The law is there to serve the citizens, and in this case (as in so many others) it is not doing that, so IMHO, it is wrong - or at least deeply flawed.

Unlike most of the people who simply have an opinion, I have been personally involved in investigating, funding and contributing in may ways to pursuing some of the travesties of justice that DID NOT IN ANY WAY FOLLOW THE LAW (Andy McMechan's case for one), many others related to crimes by elected officials, illegal farm foreclosures, etc. and have been personally acquainted with people who went after some very high profile cases. It is hardly only "my judgement" but very much a case of applying the actual laws of this country - very much contrary to the efforts of the crown. But, you are free to spin from out there is left field - after all, it is still a free country (until you're lot get finished with it, anyhow).

The courts in this country make a mockery of law most of the time. BUT, when it comes to civil, you have to remember that judges are nothing but lawyers, and participate freely in abusing the courts for things that are a long way from justice using the framework of "the law" as they interpret it. I have been directly involved in many cases that demonstrate this to an extreme. BTW: what the heck do you mean by "trusting the USA"????? You must be smokin' the good shit tonight.

To you, and Hudson Jones: yes, I will grant that awards have been given, but IMHO this is what the CIVIL courts have interpreted, not what is strictly in the code (just assuming here, but have never encountered anything to the contrary ). Enforcing the charter or rights does not mean that financial awards are due, or that would IN the law/charter. Once again, residential school settlements are coming from an agreement made by government, NOT from any requirement of the law. Finally, I can't let the last one go: I have been personally acquainted with those who finally prevailed in the prosecution of Mount Cashel and can tell you I have heard "right from the horse's mouth" exactly how many government institutions and agencies were directly involved first in placing children in care, secondly in denying the strong evidence of abuse, thirdly in a massive coverup and finally in destroying the career of the first RCMP officer who attempted to prosecute. You want to believe government(s) were very much complicit (and that child abuse and child sexual abuse was rampant in most orphanages in Canada run by churches).

because I was responding precisely to the statement quoted from this thread.

We should be so lucky. Maybe then we would enjoy leadership that stands up for Canada instead of al Queda

And, where in "the law" does it say we owe someone millions of dollars when their rights have been violated with the complicity of the government??? If that were truly the case, Andy McMechan would be a rich man today, as would every genuine victim of residential schools and even the orphanages operated by the Catholic cult???

You just described the vast majority of our aboriginal population

You make some valid points, but what is missing here is the fact that on one hand, one "side" of this debate wants him to be excused for his actions because he was a "child soldier". The other side points out he was a child terrorist, but this is all semantics. Yes, he was a legal minor. We have all ignored the detail that since he was a minor, his legal parents and/or guardians were responsible for his actions and care, and THEY failed in their obligations. His old man got his in Afganistan, but Mamma Maha the avid (even rabid) terrorist supporter and financier got a PASS from Canada!!!! Scheer has played and called this dead on the money. There is NOTHING in the law to financially reward a child terrorist for being a child terrorist. His reward was to be allowed to be a free man in Canada. What is totally disgusting is that his Mother is too (I believe).

neither is OK, but terrorists from Canada heading off to whatever-stan to kill CANADIANS, locals and our allies is just hunky dory with you. If you want to be so in line with the law, what about Mommy & Daddy's oath????

No, and I haven't been stoned either (in either sense). Ever been to an abortion clinic?????

I happen to like KSA a great deal - mostly because crime is simply not tolerated. When I get off of the airplane in Riyadh and i see the sign the "the penalty for dealing drugs is death", I definitely feel comfortable. I understand that when you want to make love to terrorists you feel some sort of tug at your heartstrings, but when you have know people and families who have been at the mercy of terrorists you might actually understand why there is really no other good solution for them. Funny: the left fringe of society gets all upset about suggesting a fitting end for someone who has freely chosen to kill as many people as they can with the most destructive weapons they can fashion, but then has absolutely no problem with murdering innocent Canadian children before they are even borne.

Sgt. Spears, the rest of the US, Canadian, Australian, British, etc. forces were part of a UN Security Council approved effort to engage those who attacked the US in 9/11 - expressly to eliminate the foundation of terrorism that was threatening several UN countries and thus world peace and security - and they were doing so at the invitation of and co-operation with the legitimate government of Afghanistan. The Taliban and Al Queda - for whom the Khadr's voluntarily left their adopted nation ( to go to a country NOT of their origin but one of their terrorist group's sites of invasion of another sovereign state - clearly violating their sworn Oath of Allegiance as naturalized citizens). Any attempt to legitimize or excuse what they were doing as being "soldiers" or "defenders" is purely BS. I might once again point out that CANADA had its citizens fighting on behalf of the alliance forces in defense of the peace and security of many other nations without the balls to stand up to the same terrorists they are now being attacked by. The Khadrs may have killed some Americans, but they could just as easily have been attacking Canadian forces. Trying to hide this behind the "child soldier" defense is similarly disgusting. The little crapbag was not forced into this situation, he went by all accounts extremely willingly and knowledgeable (and thoroughly trained) about what his purpose was. Deportation is far too good for the surviving Khadrs, a firing squad would be far more appropriate.

physical commodities, manufacturing, energy mostly related to transportation and heavy industry.

when I am asked the difference working in other countries, I have three standard replies: 1. An American will arrive in your country loudly proclaiming what you must do to conclude a deal, he will want to sign a contract and go back to his American chain hotel and wonder why you would be so stupid as not to want to be just like him. A Canadian will arrive and just listen to what you have to say for a while, try to understand your use of whatever language you share, try to understand your culture - usually by living among locals, gain your trust and try to structure a deal where everyone comes out with something they want. 2. In any crowd of business people: the Yank will be the loud one and the Canuck will be the one with no balls. 3. (Of companies travelling the world) Every American company will tell you that they are the best in the world at what they do - and a few percent of them actually are. A Canadian company will apologize for being Canadian, but will, maybe one of the 3 times, actually BE world caliber and at or near the top of the heap. The reason is: Canadians for the most part actually follow the rules in both business and science. American follow only the money.

I can not help but LMAO every time I see the Dumm.....er....DEMocrats scurrying around in frantic attempts to dump Trump. They are so busy with that obsession, they are not noticing how well he is assaulting the half-wit policies of globalizing leftiness that has crippled the USA. Yes, Trump says and does some contradictory and bizzare things, but overall, he is the first leader of the USA in a very, very long time to even begin to grasp how deep the doo-doo is for his country. What I think the media (also totally pre-occupied with Trumpiness instead of trying to understand and grasp the real issues) has missed is that the people are no where near as ignorant as those with a vested interest in what Trump skillfully keeps unbalanced. If I was on the fence, Trump telling the globalists to stuff the Paris accord pushed me off the middle. Getting comfy with Putin at the G20 was yet another signal that there is some delicate and intelligent diplomacy at hand to try to bring stability to a world that could easily fall back into an "us and them" superpower standoff.

Gee, I am sorry I missed this thread, glad I finally noticed it. When making presentations to Senate hearings of the USVI, we pointed out the exact problem that they have relative to Puerto Rico. In that case, the last election was bought by Hess to dump PDVSA and their environmental obligations related to the Hovensa refinery. USVI is far worse off relative to Puerto Rico on a per-capita basis, and with no resources to plunder (as is case with Canada - as someone asked why we can float debt). The reason that PR wants statehood is simply financial.

I think the debate in this thread is very close to representative of Alberta politics today. However, the NDP will pay dearly for the misery they and the co-incident collapse of oil prices inflicted on the province during their tenure. I have to concede that Nutjob has walked a much more centrist line and has kept her looney fringe largely in check. The reason IMHO that they got votes last time around was not only was Alberta sick of the PCs as noted above, but they had drifted so far left that it was a bit confusing as to what the hell the difference was to the NDP or any other train wreck.

"HIGHER" standard???????? Geez, give me a break. The courts have demonstrated time and again that the two-bit ambulance chasers will provide whatever political result their masters find expedient. Answer me this: where was the outrage when Andy McMechan was jailed???????? As even you must admit, the outrage that the vast majority of Canadians and even outsiders feel over this shows that Goodale stepped far, far over the line on this one. No, I don;t mention Turdeau, as anything beyond brushing his hair and teeth are up to his handlers and beyond his grasp.

Thanks for putting that straight. I had indeed forgotten that the actual government of this county - the one and only "nation" involved - has isolated funds from transactions and royalties related to treaty land entitlements. If one was to do the accounting for what Canada as the one and only "nation" involved has given in financial benefits to aboriginal entities over the last century (especially the last few decades) that number dwarfs the value of those trust amounts by several orders of magnitude. Most of the early treaties simply granted permission to use crown lands for hunting and fishing. They were negotiated with Great Britain, who wrote them simply to pacify the aboriginal population so they could continue to occupy the land to exploit resources. The tribes that were displaced had no system of land registration so did not "own" anything by any conventional means. Not that the British had no intention to honour such treaties, but there is simply no way that what they wrote is relevant to today's world - nor could one expect them to have that kind of foresight. If one wishes to be fair, it falls onto the British who profited for centuries from exploiting her colonies to build "the Empire" to make restitution, not Canada. Later treaties with "the Dominion" started to imply things that do exist under modern law and convention, but to carry that forward, the time to have these disputes over land occupancy and "ownership" are long gone. If these "nations" had any objections, it would have been up to them to order their defense forces to remove the intruders first under THEIR legal and diplomatic legal system and failing that by ordering the military defense to remove what they considered invaders. Of course these did not happen because those properties of nationhood simply did not exist - and they fail this basic test at that point in time. Thus, everything cedes to the successful squatters.. Of course, the idiotic "government of Canada" seems to refer everything to the "constitution act" and some nonsense implying that we no longer come under the British North America Act - all ignoring the fact that this crap has never been ratified by the Government of Quebec - as is required by law. So, they have no status IMHO to be giving away the rights and properties of those who would collectively BE Canada to a group of people making these ridiculous claims. Finally, the issue of what constitutes the "first inhabitants" that seems to be at the root of the Indian's argument is very much up for grabs. AND, IMHO, irrelevant

This is pretty much the status quo for many reserves. I could cite dozens of similar situations. but probably best if I refer to some I know of first hand. One of my clients sold a substation to serve three reserves in Norther Ontario a while back. When we got there to assemble and test the transformer, we were directed to an area OFF all of the reserves, in the middle of nowhere. When questioned, the response was that if it was to be put on any one reserve, they would simply shut the power off to the others if the lost a hockey game or something similar. We shipped the switchgear building pre-assembled, just needing to be landed and connected to the transformer and local distribution network. A year later, the bill was still not paid, and when our guys went to see what was going on, turns out the bands had trashed everything and there was nothing salvageable. Fast forward another couple decades, and a friend was dealing with governments about putting in adequate drinking water supplies. The agencies were very clear that the plants would have to be put off reserve and water piped over the line. It would have to be operated and maintained by someone...er...gee, I have to be politically correct...NOT LIVING ON RESERVE - or it would simply be left unattended or worse yet destroyed. These things are simply a fact of life. When you take a population and make it dependent - and fund it very heavily - you get a bunch of people who have nothing else to do but either sit around and reproduce and stay stoned or learn to whine and lobby for the handouts that feed the beast. Doesn't matter if we are speaking about reserves in Canada or inner cities in the USA (or Europe). Pretty much EVERY other small community in Canada has only a tiny bit of the problems typical to reserves or inner cities. Reason? Everyone is too busy working to build and support their families, communities, business and infrastructure.

Count me among those who could not believe the Khadr family was allowed back into Canada, never mind allowed in the first place. Massive failure due to our relentless drift to the left - regardless of WHICH party is in power at any point in time. So, if there is a fickle finger to point, that is where it goes first and foremost. Yes, we did indeed sign onto the child soldier treaty, but Omar Khadr was not a soldier, he was a terrorist - so in my understanding, it does not apply. Further, the UN treaty as I understand it applies to children FORCED into service. Khadr was a very willing participant executing a terrorist attack beside his Father. In a criminal case in Canada, such acts would likely have a minor elevated to be tried as an adult, but of course, the UN would never want such a thing in their headlong charge into globalism. So the next finger to point in order of rank would be the courts that served as the handmaiden to Rotten Ralphie. Why do I reserve such vitriol for Mr Goodale?? Well, it seems the courts did his bidding when Mr. Justice Ross Whimer ruled that "there is nothing that would compel a farmer to seek a licence to export his barley" then had Andy McMechan locked up for months for taking his tractor seized by customs for an offence that the courts clearly ruled had not taken place. Lest we forget, judges are but lawyers with political backing - a class of people who's ethics are prostituted for a nickel by definition. Add to that, our current Minister of "Public Safety" (there's a laugh, bring some more terrorists in, makes me feel REALLYY safe) is nothing but another petitfogging ambulance chaser himself. Finally, the only reason Khadr didn't get the 72 virgins as did his old man is that some American medic saved his life. As Father-in-law to an officer who is a decorated Afgan vet, the insult to how we treat terrorists vs. our own servicemen is sickening beyond belief. I have finally reached the point where I am ashamed to call myself a Canadian.

I have lived and worked on and off reserves with aboriginal leaders and individuals for most of the last 50 years. I have been very well acquainted with previous Treaty Commissioners. I have done business with many, many bands, councils and individuals at my expense and risk. So don't sit in your liberal fantasy world of some big city asshole factory and try to tell me what the frick the damned issues with Canadian aboriginals are.

They are called "tribal councils" because they are from different TRIBES. It has nothing to do with the 49th parallel (see Jay Treaty), but merely the fact that the diverse cultural and linguistic groups are speaking English due to the presence and dominance of the immigrant European population. You seem to thing there is some magic box of money that the aboriginals left behind in trust with the Government of the Dominion. They left nothing except their land in agreement with the English government of the day. In case you didn't notice, we are CANADA, not frigging ENGLAND any more, so any dispute they have and any compensation they seek should come from Her Frigging Majesty. Canadian trust funds are right here for all to see: http://www.fin.gc.ca/fedprov/ftf-eng.asp EVERY penny within came from the work and contribution of OFF RESERVVE Canadians. You would have to provide some evidence that these (VERY public records) funds have been tapped for general revenue - even though each and every one CAME from general revenue. The concept of Canada selling "their land" is based upon the notion that there was any legal title to convey - and there was not. They suffered from incompetent leadership that listened to the lying English (just as we, India, Australia, etc. did as well) and moved them from where they were to where they are. If you look at how many billions every year we pay into the Indian Industry (a good chunk of which lands in the pockets of Chief and Council, but precious little ending up with anyone at the end of the line) is suqandered, it is time to simply say "enough is enough, and we are far, far past enough". Instead of focusing on their abject failure as a society and culture, aboriginal groups should be grateful to England and France for not using the US version of genocide as public policy in their colonies and to Canada for being so stupid as to perpetuate the endless waste of money on a population that enjoys privilege that is not afforded to any other Canadians (except for maybe Omar Khadr).