Rue

You have her mixed up with the Muslim extremist terrorist beliefs of Kadr, his family and Al Quaeda. Isn't it special how you engage in a passive aggressive anti Christian insult against Betsy while posing as a moral saint on this thread. She's not a religious freak because she's a conservative Christian I will say it again liberals like you are the worst of bigots. You engage in passive aggressive bigotry in your words posing as enlightened This thread is about Kadr not her.

I stand corrected!

Why? That makes no sense,. He's run up trillions in a debts saying his government is not concerned with the costs he has incurred. Why would he not be concerned about trillions he's run up in debt, and only Kadr's legal bill? Next since when is the cost to defend the integrity of the entire Canadian legal system not WORTH it? What crap. Keep spinning,

You didn't read the article. It clearly was misrepresented. These simulations do not nurture violence or racism. As well for someone who supports Hamas, Hezbollah, Al Quaeda, the Taliban. Islamic Jihad, et al your feigned indignation of a culture nurturing violence and racism is a joke. You support cultures that nurture violence and terrorism and anti-Semitism and racism and sexism-its your entire platform on this forum. Anyone can read it for themselves from your past posts and the support you give for terrorist beliefs especially if you think they are anti American, anti Israeli, anti Western and anti-Jewish.

Its also incredibly ironic someone like you who did not read the article comes on this thread posing as some moral saint outraged at others. You aren't worth the energy to spend more words on.

Your quoting from neo Nazi sites is to be expected. Its the extent and clearly the limit of your reality.

Your using this thread to engage in anti-Semitic attacks on Jews speaks for itself. Its why Taxme you have no credibility an dyour passive aggressive shtick with the "just asking" is worn. You are a one trick pony when you raise your hatred of Jews. Its not veiled by using the words "just asking''. If I have the choice of being most hated for being a Jew rather than being "loved" as you are I will take the hatred. The things you stand for are the things I will die fighting and you are a dime a dozen with your attempts to use this thread to piss on Jews.

I would expect an anti-Israel like you to engage in such intellectual dishonesty, remove this story from its actual context, and misrepresent it. First let's take the quote you deliberately misrepresented and removed from its actual context so people can you deliberately cut it to make it read differently then what it actually said: "It’s important for Gat that his clients know why he decided to open his academy to tourists. “One day, I sat there wondering whether a Jew in the death camp of Auschwitz could have ever dreamed that an academy like this would ever exist in Israel and that it would train members of the German army,” he tells them. “And then I said to myself that I am going to open this place to the public to show what a long way the Jewish people have come in 75 years.” It went on to state in the article: ' "... But today, they understand the importance of what we do here,” he says. “People who do our programs come out with a much better understanding of this country. They become ambassadors for the State of Israel. " As his instructors like to point out, it’s not only Israeli soldiers who operate according to the army’s “purity of arms” doctrine, which stipulates that soldiers will maintain their humanity even in combat. So do their attack dogs. At a live demonstration, the visitors watch as Zeus lunges at a “terrorist” wielding a knife, forcing him to the ground while tearing into his padded coverall. But once that knife is dropped and the threat is eliminated, Zeus backs off. “Even the dogs in the IDF value human life,” the instructor says." ' You misrepresented the above not providing it for the actual context . You in fact went to paragraph two of the article and removed the following words: "– for which the group from Hong Kong has signed up – includes a simulation of a suicide bombing in a Jerusalem marketplace, immediately followed by a stabbing attack, a live demonstration with attack dogs and a sniper tournament" You then went to the full words and context I have reproduced which can be found under the heading, "The Shadow of Ausschwitz and removed the following words from its full context that I have embolded and then you falsely tacked them on to the other words you also falsely removed from their full context: "The first tourist group to arrive at Caliber 3 on this Friday morning includes, in addition to the dozen or so visitors from Hong Kong, several Jewish families from New York and Los Angeles. After an introduction from lead instructor Eitan Cohen (described by his boss as “the top in Israel” in krav maga), Gat makes his entrance dressed in full military gear. To the sounds of loud applause, he’s introduced as “the colonel who has commanded 10,000 soldiers in the Israeli army.” It’s important for Gat that his clients know why he decided to open his academy to tourists. “One day, I sat there wondering whether a Jew in the death camp of Auschwitz could have ever dreamed that an academy like this would ever exist in Israel and that it would train members of the German army,” he tells them. “And then I said to myself that I am going to open this place to the public to show what a long way the Jewish people have come in 75 years.” You deliberately removed and cut and paste two segments of wording from their original full context to appear as if they were connected and to lend the false representation that the people running these simulation centres were teaching people its fun to kill. In fact the true purpose of these sessions as the session leader stated is to show the reality of terrorism and what has to be done to defend against it. Its not portrayed as fun. That Sir makes you a bald faced liar. You deliberately mislead because your agenda is to come on this forum and find pretenses to piss on Israel. You are now exposed for what you did and no it does not surprise me you act as if you are some morally righteous saint patronizing evil blood thirsty Jews. The only difference between you and the piss on Israel entourage you attract is you pose as some morally righteous purveyor of moral values indignant in the face of blood thirsty Jews. I call you out as using this thread and your exercise as a pathetic attempt to engage in raising anti semitic stereotypes of Jews as being bloodthirsty. Go on protest your innocence. The stink and misrepresentation is there for all to see.

I DON'T NEED TO SLOW DOWN YOU NEED TO STOP FALSE QUOTING what I said. I edited my original draft on the board. You are now going to use that edit to say you responded to the first draft not the one I edited and pretend the crap you produced is what you responded to.. Oh I get the game Omni Fabricate crap and pretend I edited it to avoid your response. My post and your attempt to restate it with garble is there for all to see. You think if you false quote me and then repeat the same idiotic statement and tell me to slow down it makes your assertion less idiotic? My point is clear and I will state it again. You are engaging in nonsense. There has never been a previous case precedent from which to form a legal opinion as to whether the doctrine of clean hands can not be used to reduce an award for a Charter violation to a nominal amount. NEVER. Without a precedent no one can know or NOT know if it would apply in Kad'rs case until it would be referred to the Supreme Court. Trudeau openly stated he pre-empted the dirty hands reference because he felt it cheaper to avoid pursuing it not because he thought it wasn't legally applicable. You want to pretend he based it on a legal opinion. No lawyer without a precedent could tell him it would not be applicable. There is no basis in law for such a conclusion. Anyone who is a lawyer would know that which is why you deflect and try ridicule whether I am a lawyer or not. You know you are caught fabricating bull sheeyat so the personal attack. I only brought up I am a lawyer after you and Hotty and others ridiculed me for being one and when you now pose as legal experts insulting not just my professional status but the integrity of our legal system and what it actually stands for. I could care less what you think of my status but I know a crap artist when I read one and you Sir are a crap artist who gets caught repeatedly passing off things as legal concepts when they are clearly only your subjective spins. There is no legal opinion that states the doctrine of clean hands would not apply to amend a Charter violation compensation award to a nimonal amount. NONE. There was most probably a political order from Trudeau's office saying get rid of Kadr, the longer it stays in court the worse we look. Trudeau chose to keep his memos on this case secret. This is a man who came to office claiming unlike the Conservatives he would be transparent. Like hell he was. He made the decision to pay off Kadr in secret. One day the extent of his partisan considerations for paying off Kadr will come out. I and many argue this is about Trudeau politics trumping and pre-empting a dirty hands doctrine reference because he placed his own partisan political needs before the integrity of the law. He pre-empted protecting the integrity of the law by refusing to reference the clean hands doctrine to reduce Kadr's amount of compensation for political reasons. There is no case that exists discussing whether clean hands and public morality doctrines can apply to reduce charter right violations remedies. Until its referenced and until we get a court ruling to that effect, what Trudeau has now done is expose this country legally to future terorist claims for compensation. You play all the games you want Omni, what I said is clear to anyone reading it who does not play partisan politics with this issue. Both Harper and Chretiens are equally as liable for the Charter violations. Its not a partisan issue. It was turned into one by Trudeau and you. It started with Chretiens and Harper inherited the violations and at his juncture did not want Kadr back knowing he would be released. He is upfront his decision was political. You pretend Trudeau's and Chretien's were not. That Sir makes you a spinner, a shrill and a pretty bad one at that, By the way next time you want to throw back parsing errors read my edited copy before you jump. YOU SLOW DOWN and read the edit. You clearly have nothing substantial you can challenge so you not I rush to play on typos I make to avoid the inadequacy of your contentions. I make typos yes. Good for you pointing that out. Guhd for ewe.

Nonsense. Absolute nonsense. The fact situation with Kadr and the application of the dirty hands doctrine has never been put to a court in the past so there is no precedent. This means no one can not know whether the doctrine would be applicable or not until after a Judge decides whether its applicable in a reference. Your ignorance of the law and star decisis (case precedent) and how law is determined is painful to read. What the DOJ and any lawyer would know is the dirty hands doctrine has never been raised where someone seeks a remedy for a Charter violation and Trudeau's refusal to raise it leaves it open for other terrorists now to believe they will be compensated until such a reference is made. Trudeau lacked the integrity to finish what Chretiens set into motion. You lack the integrity to stop acting like you understand how lawyers practice law. Enough. .

Clearly you did not and feel oppressive circumstances is torture so the courts must have concluded the same thing. They never did and you like Omni show you can't differentiate your subjective inference from actual court wording.

Only a Judge could decide that not you. However I appreciate you feel your word is law.

Spider try as they might to spin torture out of words that never refer to torture that the courts said torture is exposed. The two, SQUID AND OMNI have clearly been caught spinning and fabricating words the courts never said, The inference sleep deprivation is torture is their inference. As a lawyer I would say to you given the very wide application the Charter gives its application it would probably define sleep deprivation as cruel and unusual punishment but whether it would be sufficient to justify ignoring the doctrine of clean hands when considering the amount to be awarded we will never know thanks to Trudeau. I can tell you the UN convention does not define sleep deprivation as torture. I think we all know that extreme sleep deprivation causes pain and death and would be torture. We also niw. Its used all the time in interrogation by police and in labour negotiations, Fatigue is a tactic used to make people less resistant yes. When it crosses the line to become torture is a complex one not the automatic assumption Squid and Omni make because it suits their political agenda. Omni and Squid assume what they do because they unlike Judges that can jump to subjective conclusions based on unproven assumptions. Courts would need objective evidence including psychiatric and psychological reports and Kadr's being cross examined and full cross examination of the interrogators before they would have a sufficient basis to then consider whether the sleep deprivation claimed if it did happen, was torture. This is why while the courts can say the legal system in Guantanamo was oppressive which no one denies, but they can't say it was torture without more than Kr's self serving statement or even simply knowing he was interviewed every 3 hours which interestingly they did not take judicial notice of. I personally as a lawyer understand getting a statement by undue coercion is unacceptable. I am not sure in this case the coercion claimed went too far but I think there were other sufficient violations of the charter. Bottom line, there is no proof of torture just Kar supporters assuming it.

Nothing in the above did anything but prove my point. You have no wording as to torture or determination of torture. Not a damn word. The only weasel words is you trying o spin an interpretation from the above words as to something it did not say.

You sir are the wilfully ignorant one. Produce the wording from the court decision that said Canadian officials knew he was being tortured, It does not exist and never did. You now fabricate, Provide the evidence Canadian officials provided and the wording of the court reffering to it in their decision to determine torture. It never happened. Never. It does not exist. You haven't read the decision just like Omni has not, You two spin assumptions based on subjective political opinions not actial law or legal facts or the wording of the court. You want to call that weasel words? Put up or shut up.

No it was not and repeating your subjective opinion doesn't fool anyone. The doctrine of clean hands was never referenced in court and so we will never know what the amount would have been reduced to a nominal amount, Trudeau pre-empted that reference because he engaged in moral cowardice. He claims he did not go further because he wanted to save money....this coming from someone who has placed this country into debt in the trillions. He is a liar. He did not want to proceed further because he didn't dare have Chretien's mistakes aired and revisited. Your legal opinion now that you clearly fabricate the words of courts is a joke to me and I hope others. Your blind liberal partisan bias is there for all to see to the point you were willing to fabricate and pass off your opinions as court wording. Nuff said.

Sp the courts did not say what you claimed but you don't have the integrity to admit you lied.

There is a major difference. The fact you don't understand it and the law's application does not make it weasel words-it just means you don't understand the difference,. "Oppressive circumstances" was a reference by the courts used to refer to the entire legal process at Guantanomo violating his Charter rights NOT torture. No torture was ever proven. I have never said or argued Kad'rs Charter rights were never violated. I explained they were in other threads long before Omni came on this thread posing as a legal expert lecturing others on what he claims the court said. In fact you have now proven he lied and he only weasel words come from above trying to justify his lies. There remains no proof of torture. Kadr refused to testify as to it and be examined and cross examined. It was never proven and because of that it is false to say he was paid for being tortured. He was not. T he violations of his rights as I explained came from lack of disclosure of the evidence against him and length of time to get him to trial as well as other procedural violations.

Squid do you know what the difference is between a subjective opinion piece written by a columnist and actual fact? Clearly not. This columnist wrote an opinion piece offering her subjective opinion that she feels being woken up every 3 hours is torture. She has no proof Kadr was woken up every 3 hours. She assumes this is what happened because Kadr who never testified as to this, was said by his lawyers to have claimed that. They raised that defence on the last day of the trial when they determined his confessions would not get him released -so they back tracked and now asked for the confessions to be thrown out on the grounds they were coerced. The lawyers and Kadr confessed and made no retractions until it no longer served his purpose. This is the same Kadr who can't remember what he was doing in Afghanistan at the time of his being apprehended but could remember he was Canadian. This is someone who claims he was tortured as a basis to then argue his testimony was coerced but never allowed anyone to question him as to his coercion. Kadr has engaged in repeated admitted manipulations and a self serving arguments. You believe him. I don't. I believe he's a pathological liar and killer and is playing you. Yes there were sufficient violation of his Charter rights making the entire process inadmissible in Canada. No there is no proof he was tortured other than his say so. The opinions of columnists simply assuming what he said is true is not fact or proof of anything other than their subjective sympathy for him. Sleep deprivation IF PROVEN under our Charter given that our courts give the Charter the widest application possible would most likely be considered cruel an dunusual punishment a violation of the Charter rendering evidence obtained from it inadmissable. but that is a moot point as there were numerous cviolations of he Charter other than th alleged and unproven sleep deprivation that rendered the entire process unconstitutional. When determining the amount Kadr would claim for entitlement to pain and suffering he would need to prove his damages. Simply stating he was not allowed to sleep in itself is not a slam dunk argument of torture worth 5 million and I say 5 million because the government claims it paid 5 million for legal bills. The question of what his alleged pain and suffering was/is worth in terms of money was never pursued. It was assumed by our government in secret without any transparency. It was hidden from WE Canadians, you know WE Canadians, Ask Omni what that means, He seems only to use it when he refers to people that he thinks agree with him. Certainly extreme sleep deprivation can be shown to cause brain damage other serious symptoms and lead to pain, suffering and death. Where it gets that extreme to constitute torture depends on each fact situation that is proven. Millions of people are sleep deprived by their young babies or work stress or other stress. We know they cope.. In court it would come down to competing psychiatric/psychological testimony as to whether the deprivation once proven was to such a degree as to constitute measurable for damages. Even if an amount could be established, and say it was 5 million as it was, this still did not preclude the courts from still having to ask, given he was involved in criminal actions, does not the doctrine of clean hands and doctrine of public morality then operate to say, while you were entitled to 5 million, you don't get it because our laws can not allow you to profit from engaging in wrongdoings. Kadr being 15, being brainwashed, using any romantic concept you want to make him innocent was not and it doesn't make his engaging in crime in Afghanistan not a crime. It may get him released early-it may entitle him to specific treatment as to how long he stays in a jail. but it it doesn't automaticalluy entitle him to compensation if his hands are dirty and they were because the acts he engaged in inherently and necessarily were dirty. Legal defences to get one released do not erase the action's inherent nature only the release date. A murderer released on a technicality can't then inherit his wife's estate when he killed her. This is precisely why OJ Simpson was found not guilty in criminal court, but culpable in civil court for wrongful death and not entitled to benefit in writing a book entitled "IF I DID IT". The entire lot of you Kadr groupies don't want to acknowledge the inherent nature of what Kadr did. You live in a fantasy world he's innocent. He's not innocent. His government phacked up in how it handled him, but it doesn't make him innocent. You and your entourage romanticize Kadr because the truth staring you in the face is to scary to accept and that is Kadr despises you, spits on you, and wants you and everything you stand for to blow up. Go on hug him. Kadr is capable of rehabilitation but not as long as people like you throw money at him and tell him he's a victim. By so doing you enable him to avoid taking responsibility for what he did. You reinforce him as a victim and entitled to what he wants. Our court should have said to him in a reference-no Omar, you get nothing but they were never given that opportunity because Justin Trudeau engaged in the moral cowardice defence. This moral coward argued it was cheaper to pay him off rather than do the right thing, Yes this he would have you believe, Justin Trudeau oh so fiscally responsibke over Kadr while at the same time bankrupting this nation with out of control spending. The government was wrong and so must acknowledge its legal procedures were wrong., however what Kadr did is not erased by giving him money. Brainwashed people don't magically turn Canadian when caught-manipulators do. Raising the the torture defence only when he realized his confession would not get him released-was manipulation. Claiming he was a victim because of his Muslim beliefs but refusing to follow them and give his compensation to the widow as Muslim beliefs would require him shows manipulation, Kadr knows right from wrong and plays it for his advantage, By the way you want to quote McLeans, go back and read their article on his family. See where he comes from and understand, he's in contact with them and he fundamentally believes in everything they believe in The 5 million won't turn him into a cuddly boy it enables him to continue being a terrirust. That blood on his hands aint coming out no matter how much money you throw at him. It will only come out when he shows remorse and he doesn't have to, not when he's got groupies like you turning him into a martyr saint. .

How does one google what does not exist? Go on, if its so east to google it, get it and show everyone how wrong I am. I can't google what does not exist. Your shtick of pretending something exists and refusing to produce it is pathetic Omni and its now given the repeat nature of your responses, pathological.

Your continuing to misrepresent and fabricate what the court said is pathological. You falsely stated the Supreme Court of Canada stated Charter violations rule out the doctrine of clean hands and doctrine of public morality or even a s.1 Charter being raised to argue the award should only be nominal. You falsely stated the Supreme Court made a ruling based on evidence that Kadr was tortured, Now you repeat the falsehoods. You've been repeatedly asked to provide the words you claim people won't read and you can't because they don't exist then you write the above pretending people who point out you fabricated the words won't acknowledge words that don't exist. Omni the shtick is done. So is any credibility you once hand. Its one thing for Marcus and Hudson Jones to try pass off subjective opinon as fact. We see that all the time from Hot Enough, now you. You pass off your subjective beliefs as to how you want the law interpreted as wording from court decisions but you know damn well the wording does not exist. Save it Omni. Some of us read. This arrogant pretention, this attempt to bluff about things that don't exist, its done like dinner. Your inability to provide the words shows loudly you fabricate and try pass off those fabrications as actual court rulings. Your subjective partisan views of what you want the law to be and how you think it should be applied is fantasy, no more no less. Put up or shut up. Produce the wording. You can't.

Have you found the link to the evidence of torture yet Marcus? Would you please hurry. I need to call Donald Trump and tell him before he finds out we paid Omar.

I do which is why I acknowledge the Charter was violated and he's entitled to his legal fees. Its also why Trudeau and you should respect the law and understand what the doctrine of clean hands and the doctrine of public morality are there to uphold basic respect for the law and so as fundamental principals are not extinguished by the Charter when considering any amount of damages. Zip over your head.

I would agree with you except you should read some of his 9-11 conspiracy crap . . He's a scientist you know.

Actually no, YOU have a song though you keep singing all the time, "Oh Canada we stand on guard for Omar." As for your last question what's with all you attempts at dating on this thread. First Hotty and Taxme now you? Here let me spell it out for yah, no sweetie we are not.