dialamah

He was a child soldier, recruited while under 18 and captured while under 18. Here's info on child soldiers: Regardless of how children are recruited and of their roles, child soldiers are victims, whose participation in conflict bears serious implications for their physical and emotional well-being. They are commonly subject to abuse and most of them witness death, killing, and sexual violence. Many are forced to commit violent acts and some suffer serious long-term psychological consequences. The reintegration of these children into civilian life is an essential part of the work to help child soldiers rebuild their lives. The UN's declaration on child soldiers include this clause: States will demobilize anyone under 18 conscripted or used in hostilities and will provide physical, psychological recovery services and help their social reintegration. Both Canada and the US signed onto this agreement. In Khadr's case, neither Canada nor the US made any effort to offer recovery services, or reintegrate him into society. UN agreements are not legally binding, so that hardly matters - although I daresay if the child had been not-Muslim, these details would have mattered. Still, Canadian and US laws were broken in Khadr's case. Multiple court cases on both sides of the border demonstrated that. Khadr got the payout because of the injustice meted out by the Canadian government. It wasn't about a "speedy trial" at all. There's also evidence that he didn't kill anyone, though we'll probably never know for sure. Continuing to insist that Khadr's payout was unjustified ignores many facts. It also suggests that you'd be ok with a "shithole country" justice system, where facts don't matter, laws are applied randomly, and people can be made examples of, regardless of their guilt or lack of it.

Christianity has only "progressed" in the last 100 years or so. In Canada, the Catholic Church was still (often violently) imposing its beliefs, with government support, on indigenuous children until at least 1960 - "for their own good". Some Christian sects around the world still impose Christianity by the sword (or machine gun, as the case may be). Until the 80s, it was legal in Canada to rape your wife because Christianity held that a woman owed her husband sex. In 1960 in Canada, a woman had to get her husband's permission for birth control - and to open a bank account - because women are subject to men in Christianity. An American woman could not hold property in her own name until 1900, and it was legal to beat your wife until 1920. Gay people in Canada were still being arrested in the 70s, and still being beaten and sometimes killed in the 80s- because Christianity disapproved of gay people. And yes, Western society has progressed, but its been in spite of Christianity, not because of it. Every step towards equal rights for women, gays, indigenous people, Christianity fought hard against**. Islamic countries may be "behind" Western countries but they're not that far behind - maybe 50 years, maybe less. **This doesn't mean every Christian, btw; many Christian people also supported equal rights.

Europeans spent something like 300 years fighting over whether Europe would be Catholic or Protestant. Other factors were at play, but imposing religion was a pretty important aspect of these wars. Also, the Crusades were all about making sure the Euopeans religion of choice was imposed on people in the Middle East, regardless of their preferences. Territory/gold may have been the goal of kings and generals, but the people were there for God.

I've been watching historical documentaries of late. Europeans have been aggressively waging war for centuries, only apparently giving it up in the last century or so. There was often no provocation for these wars, other than imposing some form of Christianity throughout Europe and later, to gain territory and impose Christianity on any "barbarians" they ran across. So tell me, exactly how many US, Western allied troops haven't been somewhere in the Middle East over the last 60 years.

No, they cannot cause its not true. CBC Radio One and its French counterpart ICI Radio-Canada Premiere are popular talk radio services. It is the most popular English-language radio format with 13% of English tuning shares while the French-language service has 17% of French audience tuning shares. Together, they represent 13.1% of all weekly average radio tuning hours. CBC TV has 19% share of French viewership and 10% share of English viewership, according to the CRTC. https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/publications/reports/policymonitoring/2019/cmr6.htm#a1.4

If there was a plague that decimated the ME, Africa, India and China, would Europe/North America hesitate to invade? Not likely; they're not even hesitating now in the ME. Of course, apologists for Western military action pretend they're offering "democracy" or something, but its pretty much horseshit. The more the West "helps", the more instabilty there is and the more we have refugees fleeing that instability, even coming to our country. You can tell yourself all you want that Islam is the aggressor, but to do so you have to close your eyes to where the "Christian" nations are putting their armies.

But not you, right? You agree that Khadr was entitled to that money because justice is subjective and anyone can do anything, so long as they can come up with a reason for it. Like "Well, I think the other side has already behaved badly so I'm going to throw ethics out the window and lie about my impartiality."

Yabbut, justice is subjective, so it doesn't matter if Trudeau is guilty of ethics violations and using his office in a completely inappropriate way. No doubt, he had a completely justifiable reason for it and that should be enough to let it slide. If its good enough for McConnell, it should be good enough for Trudeau.

Yabbut, justice is subjective so what does it matter if Trudeau violated a few ethics.

Yabbut, justice is subjective so he didn't do anything wrong. Also, justice is subjective so the Canadian government did nothing wrong in awarding him 10 million for our failure to follow our own laws.

Wiggle wiggle wiggle. Imagine that I had an agreement with my kids that they'd get an allowance for taking out the garbage and doing the dishes, and that they could do whatever they wanted in their rooms. What if I then threatened to withhold their allowance for not cleaning up their rooms, only relenting when reminded of our existing agreement? Giving them their allowance a day later wouldn't take away from my original intent - to ignore the agreement and use extortion to get something I wanted, but wasn't actually entitled to. Sure, I can try to excuse myself by saying "What's your problem? You got it didnt't you?" Yeah, they did - but my actions still speak to my ethics and trustworthiness, as well as what I'm willing to do get my own way. As a parent, attempting to screw over my kids when it comes to their allowance isn't illegal. But when it comes to a world leader trying to extort action that will benefit him personally, it doesn't matter if he relented shortly after. It is indicative of his character, and it's also illegal according to the laws of the United States. I don't understand how you and others can continue to support someone so obviously unethical while condemning Trudeau for his ethical lapses.

I agree, and think this should apply to schools as well as residences for seniors, drug treatments centers, homeless shelters, halfway houses - any kind of institution that is operated by a religious organization. I suspect (though I'm not going to try to prove it) that all these organizations are heavily reliant on government funding; take away that government funding and their true desire for "charity" will be exposed. I also do not think that religious organizations should be given any tax breaks; most of them don't need it.

Thats not a good argument, unless you'd agree that only people who hate Canadians would criticize the Canadian government. Criticizing the actions of a country isn't also a declaration of hatred towards every person who is from that country, to say so is just dumb.

Stuff like that only bothers people who hate anyone who isn't exactly like them, aka racists, xenophobes, anti-Semites, islamophobes. You don't need to deny you are any/all of those things; who you are shines in the world for everyone to see.

I don't like that. I also don't like seeing other things - JW's and Mormons proselytizing on the street, Mennonite women and girls in their modest dress, Catholic priests in their robes. They all remind me of the ways in which Christian religions oppress women and sexually assault children, currently and throughout history. Still, most Christians are decent people -albeit misguided - so I'm not going to go out in the world to advocate for limiting or eliminating Christianity or Christians in Canada. That's what's #notCanadian.

Why would "any true patriot" be disturbed by seeing Canadians outside their window? We all have our crosses to bear, I suppose. I've never had a bad experience at the hands of an identifiable minority group; have had several bad experiences at the hands of White-skinned Canadian males and a few White-skinned, Canadian Christians. Still, I am not bothered by seeing white males or Christians outside in my neighborhood either, because I realize that a few bad apples in the barrel is not a reason to stop eating all the apples.

Says the guy who regularly posts hateful rants and insults against Muslims, brown immigrants, indigenous people, women who have power, progressives and Liberals.

@Rue Wish there were awards for posts, I'd give you one for what you've written.

If it's 'absolute nonsense', why are so many non-Muslim people also complaining about being unable to find decent housing at an affordable price? And why are you so rude? I expect that from Argus, not you. I looked on Kijiji for 'long term rentals in Toronto', and didn't find a single hit below $1350.00. I'm guessing that the one you found for "$650, renovated" was "per week" or perhaps for a room in a larger house, if you clicked into the actual ad - when I was looking for rentals for myself and for temporary workers for my employer, I was fooled more than once by a headline. And sure enough, when I limited my search on Kijijii to $1,000.00, I got a bunch of "rooms", and other types of shared accommodation. I've had a friend looking for almost a year for something (anything!) under $1,000.00; my granddaughter spent 3 months homeless trying to find something she could afford. She never did, finally took one for $300 above what she hoped/could afford, lasted a year and is now couch-serving, trying again to find something she can afford. Rental housing crisis Vacancy rate in Toronto hits 4-year "high" of 1.5% Rental scams. So yeah, you can claim I don't know what I'm talking about, but I'm kinda thinking it's not me who's talking out of their hat.

Really old news, too, from 2015. This particular discussion has already happened on MLW. But it's amusing to watch Canadian bigots complain about bigotry among some other group.

Often enough these ads for cheap, newly renovated, etc are scams. As she is only one of thousands across Canada, especially in Toronto and Metro Vancouver, complaining about high rent and crappy properties, I'd take that google search with a huge grain of salt.

Sorry I missed the smiley.

Did you even look at the link? Canada wide "wanted" is mostly "white" faces/names for sexual offenses and murder. Ottawa, according to Argus, is mostly not. (Alberta, for anyone who cares, has a lot of indigenuous on their list). But for some reason that only Argus knows, Ottawa stats "prove" that a certain subset of society is more prone to criminal behavior. If you rely on certain media for your news, thats undoubtedly true. If you dig deeper, you'll find stories of non-Pakistani gangs running child sex rings and child porn rings all around the world. Even in Canada. Never mind all the Western and European "sex tourists" who travel to countries where they can find children in brothels, or all the "white" guys featured on creep catcher's videos. Nope, not gonna do the work of finding stories featuring white guys for you. Your pattern of rejecting any evidence that contradicts your racist and Islamophobic views is too well established. Sexual exploitation of children is an horrific crime, regardless of who is doing it. Trying to prove a group of people of whom you personally disaprove is "worse" than your own group is just run-of-the-mill racism.

Didn't know there was a sixth pillar, so I looked it up. It seems there are only 5. So, I wonder what you are referring to, since you aren't in the habit of posting untruths.

Your memory is wrong. The crimes you scream hysterically about when committed by brown-skinned people you nonchantly dismissed as simply an expected part of human society when committed by white-skinned people in Western society.