Rue

Because I have seen children first hand taken by terrorists and indoctrinated at 6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17 and make the decision to stop what they are doing. Because I have seen the courage of children say no to terrorists and I have seen mothers say no to terrorists. Because I have seen people dying rather than go along with terrorists. Because I have witnessed the worst in people and have seen in that darkness a light of hope come about of it. Because I do not and will never allow people like you to make excuses for the moral failure of terrorism. Because I have seen children walk away from their abusers. Because if an abused child goes on to be an abuser making excuses for his abuse will only empower him to commit more violence and abuse. Because I have worked first hand with the abused and no the only way to break the cycle of violence is to never make excuses for it. Because violence and.or terrorism have no excuses, ever0the moment you excuse-you condone. Because your reasoning, your excuses has forced men far better than me as well as myself get blood on our hands we can never wash out. Until you want to join me cleaning toilets do yourself a favour and stop asking questions you don't want answers for.

Yah and you and Omni can lecture this board on how Kadr's dirty hands magically become clean once his Charter rights are violated. Ooh you told me. Lol.

You again repeat your lie. If the Supreme Court was given a reference and asked to comment on whether the doctrines of clean hands and public morality should apply to reduce the amount awarded to a nominal amount-they would have to address the issue. Of course they haven't, they have never been asked to. Again you engage in a bold faced falsehood and state Charter rights violations pre-empt the doctrine from being applied. The court never said that. The court would never say that. The legal issues that find whether the Charter was violated have nothing to do with the legal issues that determine whether Kadr's hands are dirty as I have shown. The two concepts are not dependent on one another. No the wrong the government did, can not and did not wash Kadr of what he did. It didn't magically make his grenade disappear, his terrorist activities disappear. Your contention shows how you lied to me. You claimed the law states the violation of the charter cleanses a dirty man's hands, now you try weasel your way out of your lie saying you can come on this board and infer based on your subjective pronouncement not the law, that Kasr's hands magically become clean once his Charter rights are violated. That is a bald faced lie. A murderer let out on a technicality and who goes free can not then sue the estate of the person he killed for inheritance. That is a fundamental and basic principle of law in this country and always has been. For you to suggest it is not the case and continue to lie and now get caught red handed with no proof and now having to admit you inferred your claim but you clearly can't prove it with actual legal wording, says it all. You want to pose as a lawyer and presume to lecture me on the law? Move on with your bold faced misrepresentations. You want to send Squid or Hot or Eye to belittle my profession be my guest but you lied and you misrepresent the laws of this nation and that is why I defend them. This country has morals. The Charter never extinguished them. The two co-exist. One does not cancel out the other. The Charter is not a tool to enable being a criminal for profit or terrorist for profit. Trudeau has decided to use it that way.. Trudeau chose to refuse to ask the Supreme Court to rule on the applicability of dirty hands as to the amount of the award. The violation of Kadr's charter rights never and does not preclude considering what the amount of his award should be. Most probably had the moral coward Trudeau raised the issue Kadr would have been awarded legal costs but nothing else. Omni for you to state as you do now the "court did not have to" is not a legal argument or legal fact or legal principle-it is your subjective inference based on your politically partisan bias not the law. You now show you lied. There's no ruling to that effect. There's no wording from a Judge that says that-all we have is you and your inference. Get it clear your inferences are not the law they are your subjective opinions and may I say deeply ignorant ones. The doctrine of clean hands ais not extinguished or magically pre-empted by another party's wrong-doings.

Wow that was a zinger. Listen Squid, I did not come on this board and raise the fact I am a lawyer, insecure people like you do. You want to pose as if you understand a law you didn't read I will challenge you on that. Go read the convention from the UN on torture.

In regards to your first comment I have never denied there were child soldiers in Africa so spare me the moral righteous crap Bwana the great white saviour who toured Africa. Spare me Rudyard Kipling. The Supreme Court of Canada has never spoken on the doctrine of clean hands, public morality and the applicability of s. 1 of the Charter to the Kadr case. You again lie and fabricate and to date have not provided your supposed cases, case, law, etc. Go on Omni I am still waiting. You think you can weasel your way out by demanding I prove something does not exist? Lol. Right. You claim it exists Omni prove it or stop lying-I have produced the doctrine of clean hands. Nowhere does it state dirty hands are cleaned by the wrong doing of others and you are well aware of this. WE did not pay off a child soldier,-Trudeau paid off a terrorist who you call a child soldier. Don't presume to tell me what Trudeau did and who he did it for. He did it for his Liberal cronies who want to get elected again. There's no we. Don't use that Bwana elitist tone with me and presume to tell me what a child soldier is. Kadr was and remains an unrepentant terrorist. You are nothing but some presumpotious missionary only now you claim to cleanse the sins of Kadr not with a Bible, but the Charter. How noble of you. How righteous tat must make you feel. Let me astate this Bwwana had you actually been to Africa you would know the difference between a child soldier and a terrorist. Yah I know they all look the same to you right Bwana? Until you produce the law that magically cleans Kadr's hands spare me the righteous missionary shtick.

Actually he doesn't match the very definition of the term and you would know it if instead of you bluffing you read the actual convention definition. Next you and your Kadr entourages keep mentioning he was tortured. His claim of torture was that a light was left on his room 24 hours a day and he was forced to wash floors. That's how full of crap he and you are. Torture. How about you spend one day with me and see what burns look like or bruises or other wounds from actual abuse. Yah I know you are an expert on torture. You deal with what Hudson Jones calls facts.

In regards to this thread, it is in fact you and an entourage of Kadr apologists who rant without facts . Here you are chalenging me for having no facts and in the same breath spew a non factual subjective opinion out as what? You state, and I quote,"Kadr was put in a situation he had no control over...." and was and I quote.. "just like the soldiers you see in Africa". When were you in Africa? When did you ever see a child soldier in Africa? Where the hell do you get off in one breath telling me I rant without showing facts when in the very next gulp you do the same. In fact that's your m.o. on this board, to pass off high almighty morally righteous subjective rants as if they are gospel. Next I don't devalue the law, I uphold it which is precisely why I have argued the failure of Trudeau to not ask the Supreme Court to reference public morality and the clean hands docytrine has soiled this country and devalued its laws. You would have this country engage in moral cowardice and lack of morality and pay off a terrorist rather than challenge the amount awarded to him precisely because you have no morals. You equate a terrorist as a victim. My point has been made abundantly clear and its clear to 70% of Canadians. You want to pretend you don't understand it? Lol. Show me one word out of my posts where I have condoned breaking the law. One word. As usual you make a false allegation and try misrepresent the argument I have presented which is the exact opposite and calls for a reference to moral values when considering the amount to be awarded. Its clearly a concept your pro terrorist apologist partisan views pretends can't be understood. You want to complain about lack of facts go ask Omni for the law he claims magically removes the applicability of the clean hands doctrine? Finish it. Explain to me How two wrongs establish a right. Explain to me with facts how the violation of the Charter magically washes Kadr's hands of its blood. Lecture me. Patronize African child soldiers while you are at it Bwana and sip on your tea as you discuss these misunderstood children to me.

That makes no sense. They lied about their age Peter precisely because they were underage,, 14, 15, 16, 17. Go look it up yourself. My father got in the air force just as he turned 16. He gave a forged birth certificate. It wasn't hard to change the date. No one called them victims. No one defined them as child soldiers. No one made excuses for them and called their parents abusers. You don't get the analogy. What I am arguing is by calling Kadr a child soldier, he's put on the same moral plane as such people. He is not. The closest analogy we might have for Kadr is youth in the Hitler Youth Groups when they engaged in attacks against Jews, Romanos, people the Nazis targeted. The moral status and culpability of such youth has been addressed. You can read the history books yourself. Many said they had no choice when they joined up, many say they did. Making excuses for not having done the right thing after the fact does not address the moral values violated, it simply makes excuses for the violation. The excuse won't make the act less immoral.

Abe Lincoln once said, " You can not have the right to do what is wrong!." It doesn't take a US President to tell me that the fact our government violated the Charter and should be admonished for that, doesn'tabsolve Kadr of what he did. Teddy Roosevelt said, “Knowing what's right doesn't mean much unless you do what's right." Most of us in this country know what is right and that is no terrorist for any reason should be compensated in a manner that undermines our basic fundamental moral values. Its bloody wrong to pay a terrorist no matter what the reason. You want to address the consequences of violating the charter-do so-set up a legal procedure to deal with Canadians who engage in terrorism abroad-Trudeau has not. You don't use a pay out to avoid the above. The very reason the flawd G Bay process was created was to try address the lack of laws to treat terrorists. Bush's laws may have violated the US Constitution and therefore our Charter but at least he tried to do the right thing. What do the Kadr apologists offer other than moral cowardice to this situation? They claim there was torture-then why not ask the UN, the same UN Eye finds convenient to use as a shield to address why the convention on torture as it exists now is meaningless and in fact did not define Kadr's treatment at G Bay as torture. Alleged sleep deprivation from having alight in his cell never turned off and his having to wash floors does no constitute torture, neither does ilengthy interrogation with no physical contact, which is the basis of his torture claim. The same UN Eye uses as a moral shied ican not create a convention for the treatment of terrorists precisely because it is moraly bankrupt and controlled by terrorist regimes. Go look who sits on its human rights council. This is what we get, Eye hiding behind the UN which is morally bankrupt as his moral shield. Yah what a place to hold up as a paramount of moral virtues. You ask me Ann Frank got it right saying: “Look at how a single candle can both defy and define the darkness.” Kadr's case should have been a time to test the very limits of the Charter and its coming into conflict with basic public moral values and finding a way to define both. Rather then lead and seize this opportunity in a legal reference to define the scope of public morality in relation to Charter violations, Trudeau fled-he ran like the coward he was making the pathetic excuse he could have lost so he surrendered. What a cowardly spineless thing to say let alone hide behind as an excuse for being morally bankrupt. Oh Mummy it was so hard so I ran. Mummsy give me a breast to suck on I can't handle the adversity. Does it surprise me he ran and now his spineless groupies frightened of Kadr, so frightened in fact they try turn him into a cuddly Panda Bear to defuse their fears make excuses for Trudeau? Nope/I have seen frightened chillden and abused women all too often turning their tormentor into a Saint to deny their true feelings and fears. Its a coping mechanism. Its common. Its a denial-avoidance reaction. I was brought up a Jew. We can't accord to deny like that. If we did we would not have survived this long. Our moral collective continues because we choose to look the monster of humanity straight in the face and say, no we will not make excuses for it we will overcome in spite of it. The people who died so this country could be what it is today, did the same thing. In their memory I will never accept what Kadr did or paying him off as a moral choice. It never was, nor shall it ever be in spite the cowardice of the government of the day. The right thing will prevail. The memory of the soldiers who died so I can live as I do will never be forgotten.

So no law, case, statute from Omni to back up his false comment that the law said or says Kadr has no dirty hands. Not a peep from the Kadr apologists on how a good Muslim like Omar accepts blood money in direct contradiction to the Koran and has notgiven it to the widow as the Koran says he should. Not a peep. Not a peep from the sheltered, privileged, elitist Kadr apologists. Oh but one does notice typos. . Its unbelievable the petulance and affluence of those born with a silver spoon taking the freedoms of this country and the underage soldiers who died to achieve it for granted and putting Kadr on the same moral plane as those brave underage soldiers let alone the victims Kadr and his terrorist cell caused. Must be something to be so sheltered as to not know the difference between a terrorist and a soldier and to come on this board and insult soldiers for putting their lives on the line to take down terrorists. Must be something that in a world where terrorists are killing millions someone like Dre doesn't notice that but does notice typos. Must be something to be so smug and soft and sheltered that the entourage on this forum supporting Kadr have no clue what a moral plane is let alone what moral values are and put terrorists on the same level of moral value as soldiers and the victims of terrorists. Must be something to lie over and over pretending there is no issue of dirty hands, of public morality that had to be and has to be questioned as to this pay off. That something is called moral cowardice- to be specific the fear these Kadr apologists and Trudeau and his spineless government have to do what was right and challenge the amount of pay out because of the consequences it brings. . Moral cowardice shown by this Trudeau regime is nothing but the fear of opposing what they know was wrong-this pay off.. Moral cowardice argues oh well we would have lost and paid 40 million if we did that. That was a pathetic lie. A pathetic moral coward spinning his lack of leadership, his lack if integrity, his fear of doing the right thing which was to raise the public morality issue. Trudeau just sold this country out like he has running up billions in debt. He doesn't give a damn of anything but what makes it easy for him in the moment. Its all about doing the do good thing for a photo op. That's not leaderhip. That's spineless organ sucking. Yah you bet his act is hard to swallow. Moral cowardice I is what Trudeau demonstrated, the fear of doing what is right because of the consequences It is that simple.

Yah you have no idea. See this is why I like you and your contributions to such discussions. You don't have the integrity to debate anything I said but you will come on and try act like some donkey over a typo. It speaks to how you have nothing to contribute and nothing to debate. Yah I know you didn't understand that either. How about you come on this forum like Omni and misrepresent the law repeatedly and then not have the balls to back up the misrepresentations with the law you claim exists. How about you join Eye and the rest of your entourage calling Kadr a child and a soldier engaged in battle. Go on knock yourself out. You know where to find me, typos and all. At least I make an effort to debate the issues what about you editor? You even know how to spell Kadr and terrorist?

Keep repeating it over and over, the boogy man is still in your bed. WTF is the matter with you thinking if you deny what Kadr is it makes him and what he stands for harmless? You have any idea how many 14, 15 year olds went underage to WW2 and died so this nation would not be destroyed by the very values you now take for granted? The price was paid by legitimate child soldiers. You are ignorant of your country's history. You are ignorant of the difference between such brave men and what Kadr did and still stands for and you won't be the one inevitably who has to put a bullet between the eyes of Kadr or someone just like him in years, days to come. WTF is the matter with you..

That makes no sense again. There is no international convention on the treatment and prosecution of terrorists. I suppose at this point your fabrications should be clear to anyone. On the one hand you claim any attempt to prosecute him would be illegal then in this breath say they should have prosecuted him legally. No disconnect with your arguments. You just say whatever pops to mind at the moment convenient to your b.s. .

False. You continue to misrepresent. Again you lie. Present the law that says his hands were not dirty. Go on. I have asked you to repeatedly and you repeatedly do not provide any law because none exists. I am calling you out as a liar on the above statement. No law exists to say that. I have produced the doctrine of dirty hands that makes clear what its predicated on. There is NO case, no law, no statute that says his dirty hands were clean. Go on put up or shut up. You keep repeating the same falsehood over and over with zero proof.. Provide the law or cease and desist with your lie. To anyone who cares, the doctrine of dirty hands can be found easily and this fiction Omni engages in that violating the Charter cleaned Omar Kadr's hands is an out and out lie. There is no case law, no statute, no regulation, that states this.

I want compensation for having to repeat the doctrine of dirty hands on this thread over and over to Kadr apologists. No I do not want tickets to watch Omar on the next edition of Dancing with the Stars. Its only a matter of time until he is a political analyst on CBC., has a reality show and starts franchises across Canada of Omar's Fine Middle East Cuisine. Canada. Such a warm and welcoming country as long as you are not a soldier or follow the law.

1. Two wrongs would not make a right in law so your entire response is illogical, and idiotic for that reason. 2. The finding of whether Kadr had dirty hands, to justify lowering his award to a nominal amount, is not dependent on, predicated by, or determined in any way by the fact that the Canadian government was found to have violated the charter. The determination of his dirty hands is only determined by his actions leading up to and during his apprehension. You again misrepresent the doctrine of clean hands thinking if you repeat this crap over and over it what becomes legal? In law, you can't profit from a wrong-doing. It may get you out of incarceration but it does not permit you to profit, until now, thanks to Trudeau covering up what Chretiens did and refusing to follow his mandate to fully challenge the award's amount. Get it clear-you Eye, Jacee, the whole lot of you, the fact the Charter was violated was one issue. The Supreme Court could have admonished the Canadian government for that and awarded a nominal amount to Kadr to acknowledge his hands were dirty. Neither party was above criticism for their actions.

Eye, Hudson Jones, Omni, Marcus, all of you terrorist apologists who have come on this board on this thread and in past threads accused others of being anti Muslim-go on answer the issue raised the whole lot of you hide from. If Kadr is a good Muslim and not a Muslim terrorist, why does he not follow his faith and take the money he was awarded and give it to the widow and her children and the other wounded soldier. Please tell me. You are all experts on Islam-explain why its basic precept of not profiting from violence is being ignored by Kadr. Explain how the Koran in fact says he should give the money to the widow and children. Go on have the integrity to explain. Who any of you. Hah. Your silence as to Kadr violating basic Muslim sharia law as to charitable intent speaks for itself. Its the same dishonest silence you engage in refusing to acknowledge the concept of dirty hands and how it would have been applicable here had a reference to the Supreme Court of Canada have been made about it. Not a peep from the lot of you. Just pathetic apologies, condonation and child fantasy scripts. What's Kadr's excuse now hmmmm? Who is coercing him now from handing over the money?

Now spit it out. Who are the CSIS-CIA trolls on this board. Provide names or will you leave that as a passive aggressive cowardly accusation? Enough with your smeers. If you call people out for disagreeing with you CSIS CIA trolls then that makes you an Al Quaeda terrorist using your logic. Spit my way I will send it back.The fact that you apologize and condone what Kadr does and I find that repulsive does not make me a CSIS troll. It makes me like the majority of Canadians-disgusted this bastard walks free and set for life while thousands of soldiers are at the poverty line improperly taken care of since their return home many with painful lingering illnesses and injuries.

The above is a false statement. The Conservatives made it clear they wanted a reference as to the dirty hands doctrine so you are not looking at reality, you are fabricating a false position of the Conservatives-that's not reality-that's your subjective partisan distortion so you can put your reality to bed. By the way your proclamation that you feel this thread doesn't say anything intelligent when you disagree with something simply reflects your closed mind. You came on this board, engaged in racist stereotypes of whites as bigots and have made numerous pronouncements that anyone who disagrees with you is a bigot. This is why I take pleasure in staying on this thread as long as you morally righteous, terrorist supporting apologists stay on the board. You want to applaud and condone a terrorist, I have the right to call that terrorist what he is, an unrepentant immoral, manipulative killer-a person who with malice, intent and premeditation set out to deny the people of Afghanistan their right to live in a peaceful country. I call him out for what he is, a terrorist invader and part of one of many terror cells that were created to deny any or all laws and simply impose their own religious views with violence, torture. terror and death. Not one of your lot has the integrity to say what Al Quaeda stands for and what Kadr was doing when caught. You engage in fantasy that he was a soldier, a child and you pretend the doctrine of clean hands is not applicable when it still is and the only reason its not pursued is because of cowardly partisan Liberals covering up what Chretiens did.

No. Yan't process the actuak legal argument. Had the Trudeau government fulfilled its proper mandate it would have asked fo r a reference as to whether the amount should have been nominal or an actual large number. It would not have meant the Charter was not violated. The only good who does not undwerstand the legal issue that was at stake is you at this point and your buddy Omni who pretends to ignore it by refusing to acknowledge it. This reference has nothing to do with left or right wing political partisan views. It is in fact a non-partisan issue dealing with the integrity of the court system and avoiding the appearance of undermining that integrity. Your reference to goofs is fabricated. They do not exist anywhere but in your mind when you raise them to stereotype an imagined group who you think disagrees with you. You then project on them your convoluted and illogical comments including your misunderstanding of what the actual legal issue was and projecting your incorrect misunderstanding on those you stereotype. If you don't understand what the doctrine of clean hands is go find out before you make such nonsensical comments that show your ignorance of it. That issue is not and is not dependent on the Charter having been violated. It only has to do with Kadr's behaviour at the time of his apprehension and before it. How many times does it need to be repeated he determination of charter violations and the determination of the applicability of dirty hands are not one in the same issue and are founded on separate sets of evidence. Another graduate from the Omni School of Law.

Quite with the intellectual disghonesty. Once again you misrepresent. You are fully aware the Supreme Court was not asked to deal with the doctrine of clean hands, the principal of public morality and s.1 of the Charter let alone the ppgg clause's application. Its kind of hard to deal with facts, when some dishonest slimy politician refuses to present them for reference. How long you going to play this dishonest omission of the reference? You think at this point you fool anyone with your pretending that Trudeau made a political decision to refuse to bring these issues for consideration to the court? Courts tend are asked to address legal issues. The facts relate to the legal issues but are not presented alone. They must be attached to a legal issue to be presented for the judge to them comment in their relevance. You continue to misrepresent the legal process. Now you play this bull sheeyat that Judges consider facts as if they consider the facts in a vacuum. Stop lecturing people when you don't have the intregrity to present the legal process in an accurate and truthful manner.

1. I have a problem with you being unable to tell the difference between the current UN Convention on Child Soldiers and this individual who expressed a personal subjective opinion that is neither a legal opinion or has any legal status. 2. I have a problem with the idiot you quoted and he is a complete and utter idiot because the facts are clear Kadr chose to remain in Afghanistan and knew exactly what he was doing. 3. I have a problem with the UN and the idiots like the one you quote who precisely because they play partisan politics will not call terrorists terrorists-do not differentiate them from child soldiers and who represent corrupt nations run by terrorists and tyrants. 4. I have a problem with the entire UN which long ago failed its mandate to be a neutral third party and come up with a convention as to the treatment of terrorists. 5. I have a problem with you and your entourage on this forum engaged in fiction and fantasy trying to deny Kadr was a terrorist and equate him to being a soldier let alone a child let alone a child soldier. Get back to me when you understand what a legally binding law is and what the difference between that and a subjective political partisan opinion is. It clearly zips past you at this point. Here let me help: Omar was a good boy. His making bombs, oh come now it was just leggo.

The above comment is not only ludicrous in its extreme but cognitively challenged by such extreme pro terrorist bias as to serve to warn anyone on this forum what your agenda is. You want to make unilateral pronouncements because you support terrorist activities that anyone who does is not is ludicrous and extreme? Lol. You came on this thread to denigrate the value of Speer's life for all to see. You used passive aggressive references to suggest he's not worth more in value than Kadr and to suggest Kadr was engaged in "battle", i.e., an honourable war. Kadr was a terrorist. He was killing innocent civilians using terrorism as part of a terror cell that had illegally invaded Iraq. A battle? What a phony attempt to equate what he did as an honourable soldier in a confrontation covered under the Geneva Convention. He was not involved in legal war. He was not following conventional rules of war. He was not dressed in a soldier's uniform engaging in legal war rules. He was a sniveling coward hiding in ambush and threw a grenade. Battle, firefight. You've never been to war. You've never been attacked by a terrorist. You have never been shot at, spit at, had a grenade thrown at you. You weren't there. You have no clue what a soldier goes through trying to locate a terrorist in a pile of rubble or hiding in a crowd of civilians using a civilian guise. You sit thousands of miles from the violence and crime cheer leading what Kadr did posing as as a war analyst. Your words drip in support of a terrorist engaging in terrorism, pure and simple. You come on this forum to cheer lead Kadr as an honourable soldier on the same moral plane as Speers until you then denigrate Speer's life value. Go on cheer lead terrorists and paint them as honourable soldiers engaged in battle. Pathetic.

You as usual provided no facts just a spin.

You have a problem? He was not a child soldier. He was a terrorist, Go read the convention. You need that repeated again?