drummindiver

A Walk Among the Tombstones. Horrible, horrible. I've read a lot of Lawrence Block's novels at the cottage as good downtime fodder and enjoyed this book as such. I expected this movie to be an easy, entertaining watch, but it didn't even live up to that. Droning, mindless, boring. Liam Neeson was horrible, the other casting was sub par. Don't waste your time.

delete

I agree with BG. Why have a state funeral for a person who's entire political agenda was the decimation of the state? Hypocrisy at it's best. I doubt JP would agree either.

As were mine. History. Let it go.

The USA Canada`s enemy.

K. Uh, this is a Kadhr thread, so let's stay on topic for a change. As a civilian, he murdered an ally. He is convicted of that as well as of terrorism. Even Kadhr says he did it. He is in Gitmo where he allegedly was waterboarded. Of course, the Liberals will believe a convicted terrorist and murderer, so let's actually suspend belief and say he was waterboarded. Moving on, he is now, to the applause of, again, the Liberals in the crowd, getting out of jail. To all accounts, a changed, non-radicalized individual. Which proves, of course, is that if what he said is true, waterboarding works. All convicted terrorist murderers should be waterboarded. Less money to incarcerate, and as all the Liberals on here keep shouting, he's not radicalized anymore. Seriously, it's a win win for everyone. (/sarcasm)

He also confessed in Canada. Linked in previous posts. So he has confessed in at least two countries. News reports he confessed in Afghanistan. At the scene. So, you are saying the court documents from the pre trial are all lies?

So pay for nothing except the privilege of paying union dues, the only thing a union can guarantee?

He confessed..IN CANADA! Was he being tortured IN CANADA? If so, by whom? His psychologist, Dr.Nhan Lau? Look, clearly you ARE being obtuse. Clearly, even if he did plead guilty to escape torture in Gitmo, he was not being tortured while being interviewed by Canadian psychologist Dr. Nhan Lau at a Canadian institution as part of his assessment to receive bail. In Canada. . As I have clearly stated. Numerous times. Clearly, this does not fit your agenda of the "damned muricans" picking on innocent Omar. Clearly, no amount of evidence will deter you. Even Omar himself admitting it. In Canada. While not being tortured.

You are obviously being purposely obtuse. He admitted, while in Canada, at a Canadian institution, while not being tortured, that he did indeed throw the grenade. I know this does not fit your agenda. He is a convicted murderer, as he should be. He is a leftist media darling in Canada, which is beyond repugnant. Continue to be obtuse, it makes no matter. He clearly, and unequivocally admitted to a Canadian doctor that he did indeed throw the grenade. No "damn muricans" involved.

Omar, whatever dude. You seriously freak me out.

And when MH is a moderator, he can. A facilitator is someone who helps a group of people understand their common objectives and assists them to plan to achieve those goals without taking a particular position in the discussion. According to the International Association of Facilitators, facilitators: Take a strategic and comprehensive view of the problem-solving and decision-making processes and selects, from a broad array, the specific methods that match the group’s needs and the tasks at hand Support the group’s social and cognitive processes, freeing the group members to focus their attention on substantive issues Are trusted by all group members as a neutral party who has no biases or vested interest in the outcome Help the group understand the techniques being used and enable the group to improve its own problem-solving processes Facilitators assume a position of responsibility that influences group outcomes. While facilitators should assume responsibility for the group process, they should not attempt to apply content expertise. Conversely, a moderator is an individual who presides over an assembly, meeting, or discussion. A forum moderator oversees the communication activity. They monitor the exchange between participants and move discussions from one topic to another to keep conversation organized. If the tone of a forum becomes hostile or starts to move in the direction of personal attacks, the forum moderator usually has the discretion to address the issues. Moderator duties are as diverse as the forum topics themselves. Some moderators are virtually invisible; they surface only when situations arise that do not seem likely to resolve themselves. Other forum moderators are always there, ready to intercede at the smallest hint of discourse. Public forum moderators often have to enforce many rules of conduct and decorum.

sigh "Try to keep up with the facts" Thanks. Please read my previous three posts, as you don't seem to understand them. He was in Gitmo. Agreed. He pled guilty, we'll agree to disagree as to why. After leaving Gitmo, he is in Canada, yeah? He was in Canada, doing pre trial assessments, when he said he threw the grenade. He did not have to say he threw the grenade to the psychologist to get out of the Canadian institution where he was definitely not being tortured. Ok? We are not talking the Gitmo confession here. We are talking the Canadian, in a Canadian institution confession. Ok again? Court documents released at his bail hearings state this is what he said, in a Canadian institution. Not during torture. Definitely not during torture. Ok?

Again. This February he spoke to a psychologist at Bowden Institution, near Calgary, about how he had thrown the grenade and for eight years believed he had killed the U.S. soldier, and how he came to hope that it was not his grenade that killed the soldier. The psychologist’s report was in court documents made public at his bail hearing which saw him freed this month. He was not in Gitmo, he was in a Canadian institution, talking to a Canadian doctor. No one coerced this from him. He admitted of his own free will that he threw the grenade.

The kind of human that is debating one issue. You are debating another issue (with all your usual rhetoric, I may add). Your "what kind of human" remark is uncalled for, but due to your leanings, will go unmentioned by the powers that be. I honestly think you have a mental issue that forces you to drone on about the American governments' foreign policies. I truly do not think you can stick to a thread's issue without reverting to your agenda.

Really? We're using the Ken Ham "were you there" argument? July 14, 2014 Omar Khadr loses his bid to have his war-crimes convictions tossed in a military commission appeals court decision. He will now have to wait even longer to make his case to a regular American court. Oct. 31, 2010 Jurors sentence Khadr to 40 years in prison for war crimes but a pre-trial deal limits the actual sentence to eight years. DOES IT MATTER? In the court of public opinion – yes. In court – likely no. Until the latest revelations, the common story was that, since Khadr was the only survivor in the compound, he must have thrown the grenade. But prosecutors do not have to prove he threw the grenade for his conviction of "murder in violation of the laws of war." Similar to the domestic charge of "felony murder," Khadr could be found guilty for being armed in the compound (similar to an armed bank robber who can be convicted of murder even if he did not shoot the gun that killed). Khadr's only defence would be he was unwillingly in the compound or didn't take part in the fighting. If acquitted, he still faces charges of spying, providing support to terrorism, attempted murder and conspiracy. While I think it is necessary to stick to the facts about this case, I see a new argument rather than a chasm between pleading guilty and being guilty. What we do know that is a fact is that Mr. Khadr was convicted of war crimes including murder. He pleaded guilty to murder, spying and terrorism charges at a U.S. military tribunal as part of a 2010 deal that included a sentence of eight years – of which only one additional year was to be spent in Guantanamo before he was eligible to be returned to Canada. He did so with the advice of Canadian and American lawyers. This February he spoke to a psychologist at Bowden Institution, near Calgary, about how he had thrown the grenade and for eight years believed he had killed the U.S. soldier, and how he came to hope that it was not his grenade that killed the soldier. The psychologist’s report was in court documents made public at his bail hearing which saw him freed this month. "He acknowledges throwing a grenade, but still hopes it wasn’t the grenade that killed U.S. soldier Christopher Speer." We are not talking about Gitmo here. We are talking in a Canadian institution. I'm sure OGFT and Omar will somehow blame the "damn muricans" or "terrorist hooligans", the USA, of somehow forcing Kadhr's confession in a Canadian institution. Regardless. He threw the grenade. He killed. He is convicted. Those are the facts.

Kadhr threw the grenade. Kadhr is Canadian. Killing an American ally is murder. These, again, are the facts. Again, keep trying to spin it so it was those "damn muricans" fault.

What you find derailing may not be what others find derailing. Hence this thread.

Do I know who Skippy is? Of course I do. I can't believe you know what the words you are using actually mean if you are using them in reference to him. Even as a C I don't like him. Regardless. Many other adjectives are far more apt.

Agreed. I wasn't slagging you for it, as in your position I am sure my biases (not that I have any rolls eyes and laughs) would come through also.

I posted, and had deleted, and given a warning point, about the Ontario Liberal government tabling laws that allowed non trained, almost any agency to conduct no warrant or reason entry in a thread that was complaining about warrantless entry from trained federal officers. I was told, after complaining that it was certainly relevant to the thread, to start a different thread. While I realize Charles and Michael have a hard job, I do think sometimes their biases come through. (just reread...sorry for the atrocious grammar)

Yes I have. Pierre Polievre hardly comes across as an ass kisser IMO.

Yeah, cause JT hasn't invoked a little nepotism along the way.

Isn't "obsequious sycophants" a superfluous extraneous tautological redundancy?