Peter F

We can set everybody free, in fact should set everybody free, if they are found not-guilty of the crime. Thus trials.

Perhaps you have a point there, Argus. I'll get back to you on that... I agree. Liberals couldn't give a shit either. But I havn't seen the con's falling over themselves to fix things either. Hell, they can't even come up with 1000 troops, or helicopters, and are still quite pleased to extend the mission on and on and on. Both the Libs and the cons are perfectly content with committing our troops to missions they are not equipped/manned for. If it was up to me, the boys and girls wouldn't be there...so you're wrong. I obviously do care.

1) Which international law did he break? and if so why is he not before an International court? 2) There certainly would, in a timely manner one would hope. Justice delayed is justice denied and all that Researching the Khadr family is a waste of time. Omar khadr should be held responsible for his own actions, not those of his brothers sisters aunts uncles or parents.

No, you are not alone. I find it astounding that a leader of the opposition would pawn off such an important speach (even if, as a member of a minority party) aimed to get the majority party to enter into the war, entirely to an underling. I think it shows Harper to be a callous and without concern to the well being of Canadians in general and our Armed Forces in particular. All can be sacrificed to the goal of gaining power. That the press were asleep is no surprise. I wouldn't call it asleep though, I call it being willfully blind.

Your right. Whats the point of an opposition if there is a majority government? We may as well pack it in and have a one party system. It would be soooo much more representative.

Of course not. They'd be killed if they ran for such positions. Who knows? Perhaps some have already been killed by the US government for doing so. I doubt if jbg would be able to provide an example of this government policy. I suspect because there is no such policy as he alleges. But that could be my anti-americanism coming out...

And Jbg is doing what? Invoking American history and practice as an example for us to follow. We shouldn't be Canadian, according to him - at least not Canadien - we should be like Americans. and because I disagree I'm anti-American? Must we agree with everything Americans say? Is that your point? Lordy. Why this need for American approval?

I do not know if he speaks English. I do know he is a Canadian citizen whose parents dragged him around to pakistan, afghanistan and perhaps other places as well and left him in the care of his fathers cronies when he was fifteen. And during all that time and the time to come, he was a Canadian Citizen. edit to add: This government is expected to intervene and assist every other Canadian Citizen held in foriegn lands, hell, we'll even invoke Canadian citizenship to justify why we are in a War On Terror (Canadian citizens died on 9/11). Nobody asks if those Canadians can speak English or play hockey. But for Omar Khadr - no, because we think his parents are/were scum.

I understand. In the USofA people are killed for doing what we allow in Canada. I promise not to behave in such a manner should I ever become an American citizen. Til then blow it out ur arse.

As I understand it, the Quebec courts apply the Canadian Charter (if relevant) when it comes to cases concerning Federal law (criminal law would be part of that). When the cases before them concern Quebec civl law then they apply the Quebec Charte des droits et libertés de la personne. See Tremblay vs Daigle for example of an interesting mix of the Canadian Supreme Court interpreting the meaning of the Quebec Charte des droits et libertés de la personne, and why (in that particular case) the Canadian Charter of Rights did not apply and why the Quebec charter did.

Khadr is a Canadian citizen wether you think he should be or not. Thats why Canadian government functionaries were allowed access to him in Guatanamo. He's 100% as Canadian as I am. Y'see, I never played hockey either. Radsickle's right,

No plagarism here. This is original Topaz thought. The Chris Rock routine suggested making bullets extremely expensive - not illegal.

the key phrase being: "...when the Southern states seceded..." . Until that occurred their Senators were making many long gracious speaches but not about farewell. So you see, having secessionist politicians is perfectly fine in both our nations.

“You might as well talk of humanizing hell! War is the essence of violence. Moderation in war is imbecility.” - Admiral Jackie Fisher RN, at the time of the 1907 Hague Convention

Perhaps they would...if they were an American political party. But they're not.

Well Yah. Poverty, corruption, murder and mayhem go hand in hand with misery. So do traffic accidents; the deaths of beloved pets; Alzhiemers; jilted lovers and a myriad of many other things... So 'progressives' are wrong and the West is doing enough because guys like Osama Bin Laden and Tim McViegh exist in the world? Why is it that in your world the jerks get to set the standards? Because Israel and the USofA are not - not - terrorists. They are more-or-less democratic in nature and tend to respond to criticism/opinion polls. I don't think Osama and other terrorists give two shits about what I think or what a whole bunch of Western 'progressives' think or even what you think or wether Roger Ebert gives them a thumbs down. Do you understand the difference between the two entities - democratic nations and terrorist organizations - and why criticism of a nations government may actually have some sort of effect whereas criticism of terrorists has no value or effect whatsoever?

Goodness, jbg. The terrorists crime wasn't lack of concern for grinding poverty...the crime was murder - forty times over. Yet you insist on going on about how this will inhibit foriegn investment in Pakistan and what an idiot the terrorist is for not realizing that. Hows about the guy was an idiot for not having any sense of humanity towards his fellow men? Hows that for a personal failing? Now there's something to criticize him for. ... Foriegn investment... Perhaps your anger would have been lessened had the terrorist just silently murdered 40 people in thier beds. That would have been a better thing eh? Absolutely! Where do I pick up the tour package?

jbg, its just a guess, but I perhaps the guy who blew up the Marriot didn't give two shits about foreign investment. A shocking belief, I know. You are mistaken to believe that that persons actions are reflective of the beliefs of an entire nations population. I will go so far as to say: Very foolish to believe so.

double post

This is hilarious! The more we spend the safer we are. from Wulf's post nr11 of this thread: military expenditures 2000 from CUA world factbook 2000 U.S.A. Military expenditures - dollar figure: $276.7 billion (FY1999 est.) Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 3.2% (FY1999 est.) Canada Military expenditures - dollar figure: $7.4 billion (FY97/98) Military expenditures - percent of GDP: 1.2% (FY97/98) Wow! all that military sure saved the USofA from terrorists!

Oh. I wonder what arbitrators are for...

Ah. I suspect you are correct; There are no such sharia courts in the land as far as I know. What I was referring to was arbitration. Thats everywhere. Should folks involved in a dispute choose some Imam or other to arbitrate according to sharia law - and as long as that arbitrators decision not contradict the laws of the land then sharia law can be used to resolve the conflict. This is probably unusual but not new.

Everywhere.

Times Online (source of foxnews link in ghosthacked post above) There is nothing new here. Britons and Canadians can use Sharia courts to settle thier disputes if they so desire. Or any other agreed upon arbitrator.

I see. And when have we ever had this "credible military" that wasn't little to stop the Russians? Since when has Russia claimed Canada's north? Answer to both questions: Never.