Federal Liberals, Justin Trudeau, Brand Names & Khadr Money Payoff

August1991 · July 12, 2017

7 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

I don't disagree there. All I'm saying is that centrist voters will not be obsessed about it for years. Ultimately, JT did not cause this problem. Previous Lib and Tory admins did.

Spanky, you're correct IMV and this is the key point: Justin Trudeau did not cause this problem. But he solved the problem using his "sunny ways" and I wonder whether that solution in this case will become toxic. So, the question is whether the "Justin Trudeau" brand name will be damaged.

Justin Trudeau borrowed the phrase "sunny ways" from Wilfrid Laurier who was, despite his phrase, at heart a pragmatist (at Laurier's first cabinet table, he was the only French-Canadian).

There are two tells for me that both Trudeau Jnr and the federal Liberals are worried: his use of the argument, a few days after the payoff, that the Charter protects us all and the vigorous posting online of fanatical Liberals in defence of the decision.

Edited July 12, 2017 by August1991

SpankyMcFarland · July 12, 2017

In terms of damage control, the Libs should continue their low key 'it's regrettable but our hands are tied, what are you going to do' approach. Maybe some of the older Libs (hi Ralph) should gently throw themselves and Martin under the bus as well for their handling of the affair way back when.

August1991 · July 13, 2017

Spanky, the problem is not "Liberal damage control"; it is whether this Khadr saga will now damage Trudeau personally, make him toxic. His "sunny ways" just made him give, Oprah style, $10 million of taxpayer money to someone - a person whom many Canadians consider to be a traitor/terrorist. I can imagine the shouts at his public appearances in the future: "Hey Mr Trudeau, give me $10 million!"

When Harper gave $10 million to Maher Arar, neither the Liberals nor NDP were going to criticise/raise the issue in the future. With Khadr, there are at least 30% of Canadians who will remind everyone else that Justin Trudeau has the power to cut a cheque of $10 million for one person.

=====

With all that said, unless the NDP choose a viable federal leader, and as long as Trudeau maintains his virtue-signaling left wing patina, it will be very difficult/impossible for Scheer to win in 2019. Harper managed a majority in 2011 only because Layton split the left vote against a lousy, centrist Liberal leader.

The federal Liberal apparatchiks - eg. Gerald Butts - know perfectly well that because of Trudeau, Liberal numbers are holding steady at 40% and the NDP is in the low teens.

Khadr ain't gonna change that.

Edited July 13, 2017 by August1991

August1991 · July 13, 2017

Postscript

When it comes to paying money to someone, I am always reminded of Jack Nicholson's comment about prostitutes - I paraphrase: "I didn't pay them to come and have sex with me. I paid them to leave afterwards."

Stephen Harper used taxpayer money to pay Maher Arar $10 million to go away, leave. The federal Liberals are paying Omar Khadr $10 million to go away, leave. Justin Trudeau has agreed to this because of his "sunny ways".

But will Khadr in fact go away? And will this decision affect Trudeau's belief in "sunny ways"?

Edited July 13, 2017 by August1991

Hudson Jones · July 13, 2017

The title of this thread is either disingenuous or it's made out of ignorance.

There was no "payoff".

Canadian courts ruled three times that the Canadian government broke the law when it came to handling Khadr. Trudeau had to clean up Harper and Martin's shit.

The question is whether or not people will be able to understand what really happened or continue with the wrong narrative that August and some others keep repeating.

The Conservatives don't need any specific reason to dislike Trudeau, besides the simplistic US vs THEM corner they've pit themselves in. I suspect that Trudeau's brand will be damaged among some of the groups who supported him. He has failed to deliver a few key promises, like: 1) electoral reforms, 2) fixing the environmental assessment process that Harper gutted, 3) phasing out $3 billion+ fossil fuel subsidies

bush_cheney2004 · July 13, 2017

7 minutes ago, Hudson Jones said:

....Canadian courts ruled three times that the Canadian government broke the law when it came to handling Khadr. Trudeau had to clean up Harper and Martin's shit.

You forgot Chretien...it started with Jean Chretien.

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/07/08/liberals-two-faced-on-khadr

Edited July 13, 2017 by bush_cheney2004

August1991 · July 13, 2017

13 hours ago, Hudson Jones said:

...

Canadian courts ruled three times that the Canadian government broke the law when it came to handling Khadr. Trudeau had to clean up Harper and Martin's shit.

....

No Canadian court ever ruled that Justin Trudeau had to give Khadr $10 million of taxpayer money.

=====

And as B_C notes above, it was Chretien that lobbied to have Benazir Bhutto release Khadr (father) from custody in Pakistan. And it was Chretien who allowed the US to send Khadr (son) to Gitmo where he was "tortured". (By that definition, every time I fly long-haul on Air Canada and the plane is delayed - Air Canada is "torturing" me with sleep deprivation.) Indeed, it was under PM Chretien (once justice minister to Trudeau father) that Canadian government representatives assisted in this torture of an infant Canadian citizen.

It was Harper, BTW, who allowed Khadr (son) to leave the torture chamber of Gitmo and return to Canada.

======

As brand names go, it is the federal Liberals that are covered in Khadr sh*t. The question is whether Justin Trudeau will now get covered too.

Edited July 13, 2017 by August1991

jacee · July 19, 2017

On 13/07/2017 at 4:06 PM, August1991 said:

No Canadian court ever ruled that Justin Trudeau had to give Khadr $10 million of taxpayer money.

=====

And as B_C notes above, it was Chretien that lobbied to have Benazir Bhutto release Khadr (father) from custody in Pakistan. And it was Chretien who allowed the US to send Khadr (son) to Gitmo where he was "tortured". (By that definition, every time I fly long-haul on Air Canada and the plane is delayed - Air Canada is "torturing" me with sleep deprivation.) Indeed, it was under PM Chretien (once justice minister to Trudeau father) that Canadian government representatives assisted in this torture of an infant Canadian citizen.

It was Harper, BTW, who allowed Khadr (son) to leave the torture chamber of Gitmo and return to Canada.

======

As brand names go, it is the federal Liberals that are covered in Khadr sh*t. The question is whether Justin Trudeau will now get covered too.

If Trudeau wanted to cover the Conservatives in some more shit, he would have fought the settlement in court and forced Harper to testify.

eyeball · July 19, 2017

On 7/11/2017 at 3:51 PM, August1991 said:

I'm really interested/curious to know what the political damage, specifically to Justin Trudeau (not the federal Liberal brand name) will be for this Khadr money/payoff.

First, the federal Liberal brand name was tarnished with Paul Martin. Then, demolished with Dion and Ignatieff. (I met and spoke with both Dion and Ignatieff; under the circumstances, both smart guys.)

Second, to the pleasure of all federal Liberals across Canada, Justin made federal Liberals electable: the Vogue guy. Under Justin, Federal Liberals were doable again.

Third, but now with this payoff, I suspect that Justin Trudeau is toxic.

Am I wrong?

=====

I'm abroad now, outside of Canada, and what bothers me is that Canada's federal Liberal Party has largely been a civilising force in Canada.

Justin Trudeau can do stupid things; but we together can get along. The federal Liberal Party must return to, not sunny ways, but pragmatic politics.

As the father famously said: "No more philosopher king."

Its the damage to our country the reaction to Omar Khadr is causing that interests me most. That he's a lighting rod is an understatement but what's really understated is how Canada's brand name is being tarnished by both Liberal and Conservative parties because of their inability to get along.or share any responsibility for Khadr's treatment. How Canada describes and portrays Omar Khadr to ourselves and the world is as integral to justifying our conduct in the War on Terror and preventing charges of war crimes against Khadr's persecutors and against government officials for the things they did did in our good name.

Canadian Conservatives appear to be bent on making Khadr's settlement a never ending issue and it will likely play a key role in the next election. I hope the stupid bastards tear the country to pieces myself. I know I certainly have no sympathy for Trudeau or the Liberals. When JT referred to having no choice but to settle and said 'no matter how uncomfortable it makes us' he was basically pleading 'but but but the Charter' as an excuse. The craven coward is as willing to throw our Charter under the bus as any right-winger.

As much as I regret seeing Khadr being used as a political football I hope the silly bastards use of him this way forces the far deeper and so far undebatable issues such as the root causes and blowback and the entire War on Terror and our involvement into the harsh acrimonious light of a laser beam.

The whole country needs to shit or get off the pot. There's no sunny way out of the corner Canada has painted itself into. Why should there be?

Edited July 19, 2017 by eyeball

eyeball · July 19, 2017

On 7/11/2017 at 5:42 PM, capricorn said:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/majority-of-canadians-disagree-with-khadr-deal-poll-1.3497886

Looks to me like the majority of Canadians disagree with the monetary compensation.

These Canadians need to experience the sensation of having the Supreme Court rub their noses in our Charter the way the Conservatives have. Perhaps the Conservatives believe that forcing Canadians to likewise humiliate themselves will push them closer to agreeing we need to get rid of our filthy Charter and its left leaning bias once and for all. This is indeed a never-ending issue that will keep Canadians screaming at each other for decades.

The terrorists are definitely winning.

Edited July 19, 2017 by eyeball

eyeball · July 19, 2017

On 7/11/2017 at 5:48 PM, SpankyMcFarland said:

I don't disagree there. All I'm saying is that centrist voters will not be obsessed about it for years. Ultimately, JT did not cause this problem. Previous Lib and Tory admins did.

It's more accurate to say that Canada did this to itself. As free people in a democracy we're all responsible for the actions and inaction of our government and country, especially when we're abroad and strutting up and down the global catwalk like we had a clue.

capricorn · July 19, 2017

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

These Canadians need to experience the sensation of having the Supreme Court rub their noses in our Charter the way the Conservatives have.

At least this time you're not advocating hitting them on the side of the head with shovels as you did in another post.

eyeball · July 19, 2017

5 minutes ago, capricorn said:

At least this time you're not advocating hitting them on the side of the head with shovels as you did in another post.

I mean the same thing when I say that.

I must remember to use the /sarc off function more often.

August1991 · July 20, 2017

15 hours ago, eyeball said:

...

Canadian Conservatives appear to be bent on making Khadr's settlement a never ending issue and it will likely play a key role in the next election. I hope the stupid bastards tear the country to pieces myself. I know I certainly have no sympathy for Trudeau or the Liberals. When JT referred to having no choice but to settle and said 'no matter how uncomfortable it makes us' he was basically pleading 'but but but the Charter' as an excuse. The craven coward is as willing to throw our Charter under the bus as any right-winger.

.....

It is Justin Trudeau that appears to be bent on telling us endlessly that everyone, anyone, from anywhere in the world can come and live in Canada.

His father never said such crazy nonsense. His mother occasionally did. But never his father.

=====

I suspect that many older (open-minded) English Canadians will now begin to view Justin Trudeau more as his mother and less as his father. (That's what would potentially make the Justin Trudeau brand toxic.)

In federal ridings of French Canada (outside Quebec), the federal Liberals will be fine.

In Quebec? Outside Montreal - the federal Liberal MPs must now worry. And I'm curious.

Edited July 20, 2017 by August1991

August1991 · July 20, 2017

15 hours ago, eyeball said:

These Canadians need to experience the sensation of having the Supreme Court rub their noses in our Charter the way the Conservatives have....

Eyeball, give it a break. From Donald Marshall to Steven Truscott to Donald Coffin, what was the total compensation?

Omar Khadr is no Donald Marshall - and everyone born before October 1970, older than Justin Trudeau, knows this.

Edited July 20, 2017 by August1991

eyeball · July 21, 2017

On 7/20/2017 at 1:17 AM, August1991 said:

Eyeball, give it a break. From Donald Marshall to Steven Truscott to Donald Coffin, what was the total compensation?

Omar Khadr is no Donald Marshall - and everyone born before October 1970, older than Justin Trudeau, knows this.

Me give it a break? Good luck with that - I'm not talking about compensation for Khadr, I'm talking about punishing Canadians for allowing their government to act so irresponsibly and do such awful things in our names.

Canada's fine for reparations to Muslim countries we've helped molest.should be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

August1991 · July 22, 2017

13 hours ago, eyeball said:

.....

Canada's fine for reparations to Muslim countries we've helped molest.should be in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

So, according to you eyeball, compensation to Khadr is a small part of the reparations we in Canada (the West in general, I suppose) should pay to Muslim countries for our "molestations" of their countries.

=====

eyeball, maybe this is the Big Divide in western societies nowadays:

-there are people like you that believe that the West "molested" foreign countries, other people, non-westerners.

-and then there are people like me that believe that the West has only defended itself, trying at most to shine some light on ignorance.

=====

Many, many years ago, I was travelling abroad (in Bulgaria of all places, before the fall of the Berlin Wall - in Soviet times) and I recall a conversation n English with a young Bulgarian woman. We were discussing colonization by an Imperial power. I explained that French-speaking North Americans fell under a British regime in 1760. For about 100 years, until 1860, no ship from France ever landed in Quebec. Nevertheless, these colonized people managed to survive and even adopted (sadly, as I thought) some of the habits of their Imperial colonizers.

She answered that Bulgarians were colonized by Turks (the Ottoman Empire) for 500 years. While she admitted that Bulgarians adopted some Turkish habits, she explained that Bulgarians largely avoided anything Turkish - even for 500 years.

And then she said something that has bothered me to this day. She said (more or less), "Maybe the reason French-Canadians adopted some English habits is because English culture is superior. We Bulgarians were colonized by an inferior Turkish culture."

At the time, I was astounded/astonished/offended to hear someone claim that one culture was superior to another culture.

With age & time, I have come to realize that this young Bulgarian "anglophile" may have been right in some ways. Societies can be compared. (BTW, we exchanged a few letters for a year or so but I have no idea where she is now.)

=========

To return to the OP, I fear that our current PM may naively believe, as I did years ago when talking to this young Bulgarian or maybe you eyeball, today, that all societies/cultures are the same and equally valid.

Pierre Trudeau never believed such nonsense.

Edited July 22, 2017 by August1991

drummindiver · July 22, 2017

On 11/07/2017 at 8:07 PM, Omni said:

Politically, who knows, we shall see. But your use of the term "payoff" undermines the credibility of you argument. Trudeau didn't create the circumstances that led to an ongoing court case, but settling it was probably a smart thing to do, and you try to make it sound like some sort of back room hi jinxs.

It was backroom hi jinks. That's what you call secretive agreements being made against your countries wishes/interests.

Omni · July 22, 2017

5 hours ago, drummindiver said:

It was backroom hi jinks. That's what you call secretive agreements being made against your countries wishes/interests.

So your approach would have been to ramp the price up a few more million in legal fees. NO Thanks.

drummindiver · July 23, 2017

21 hours ago, Omni said:

So your approach would have been to ramp the price up a few more million in legal fees. NO Thanks.

No to kidnappers.

No to terrorists.

I'd rather my tax dollars fighting this pos than making him a millionaire, even if it cost the ridiculous amounts JT claims.

scribblet · July 23, 2017

So in a legal case such as this, does the gov't hire additional lawyers, do they not use their own lawyers.

Rue · July 24, 2017

On ‎2017‎-‎07‎-‎13 at 2:27 AM, bush_cheney2004 said:

You forgot Chretien...it started with Jean Chretien.

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/07/08/liberals-two-faced-on-khadr

A 10.5 million out of court settlement is not a payoff. You are being disingenuous or ignorant. Just because someone is paid millions doesn't mean they were paid. Next you will suggest because Kadr is a terrorist he's a terrorist. When will you stop? I mean you are outrageous.

.

Edited July 24, 2017 by Rue

Rue · July 24, 2017

On ‎2017‎-‎07‎-‎13 at 2:23 AM, Hudson Jones said:

The title of this thread is either disingenuous or it's made out of ignorance.

There was no "payoff".

It took you one breath to demonstrate what you accused others of.

So which one is it- ignorance and being disingenuous that has you contending paying Kadr 10.5 million isn't a pay off.

Edited July 24, 2017 by Rue

Rue · July 24, 2017

On ‎2017‎-‎07‎-‎19 at 7:41 AM, jacee said:

If Trudeau wanted to cover the Conservatives in some more shit, he would have fought the settlement in court and forced Harper to testify.

Earth to Jacee calling. If Trudeau pursued the case, the decision to leave Kadr in Guantanamo would be clearly exposed as having been made by Chretiens then prolonged by Martin. Its doubtful if not possible for Harper to be supeonae'd given a complexity of rules that oblige him not to disclose certain information he was privy to in court. If they could get around that, his testimony would then be made private and you'd never know about it.

He's already stated publically he felt the dirty hands of Kadr took priority over the Charter violations- the very issue Trudeau is hiding from and avoiding.

Keep up Jacee. Its not that hard.

Edited July 24, 2017 by Rue

Rue · July 24, 2017

On ‎2017‎-‎07‎-‎22 at 0:00 PM, Omni said:

So your approach would have been to ramp the price up a few more million in legal fees. NO Thanks.

Your attempt to pose as fiscally responsible supporting a government incurring trillions in debt and millions in legal fees to prevent our soldiers from getting appropriate benefits is what Hudson Jones would say is either disingenuous or ignorant. But hey I know, the grammar is incorrect.