kelownabomberfan

Personally I would like to see Khadr donate 10 million to a Canadian hospital so all of that money paid to a terrorist goes to healthcare.

My buddy's daughter plays soccer with Dickinson's daughter. Can confirm the weiner comment.

Honorable mention to the Roc, mostly because he didn't get beat like a rented mule this game, which was refreshing.

The Roc let a lot of people down last night.

I know this isn't saying much, but he's better than what you've got now.

ha ha - I'd have had to have had him in Grade 9, but yeah, I would be proud to be his dad.

Interesting theory that I agree with - Trudeau was in a hurry to settle this as if things went to court, it would be Chretien and Martin who would be dragged through the mud for not acting when they apparently had the chance to get Taliban Omar out of the hoosgow. They were the ones who caused this idiotic "Charter violation" and the higher ups in the Liberal party didn't want to see the Liberals dragged through the mud, so the back room deal was done, knowing there'd be people out there who would actually argue that "it could have been worse" and "the Supreme Court said he was owed money", both not true, but yet what we've seen argued here and elsewhere. As for PM's though, our current PM looks bad, that's for sure, but good to see a former PM trying very hard to do something about the massive amount of stench this horrible decision has caused with our neighbours to the South. This is what true leadership looks like: Former PM Stephen Harper reaches out to Khadr victim By Joe Warmington, Toronto Sun First posted: Thursday, July 13, 2017 11:30 AM EDT | Updated: Thursday, July 13, 2017 11:48 AM EDT First it was a Toronto Sun reader buying a full-page advertisement to apologize to Omar Khadr’s victims for the eight-figure settlement he received from the Canadian government. Now former prime minister Stephen Harper has reached out to the families to express his outrage. Upset about the Liberal government’s $10.5-million settlement with Khadr, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s predecessor picked up the phone Wednesday and called American soldier Layne Morris at his home in Utah. “Layne spoke with Prime Minister Harper today,” his wife, Leisl, said on Wednesday night. The call came just hours before lawyers for Morris and the widow of American special forces Sgt. Christopher Speer went into court to attempt to freeze Khadr’s assets with a view that the windfall could be applied to a $134-milllion American court judgment they won. It is believed Harper made a similar call to Speer’s widow, Tabitha, but neither side has confirmed. However, Leisl Morris said her husband had a good talk with Harper. “Layne had a little trouble matching schedules with Prime Minister Harper but once they did connect, they spoke for a little over six minutes,” she said. Her husband was thrilled by the gesture. “He was very nice,” she said of Harper. “Prime Minister Harper apologized for the payout to Omar.” And although he appreciated the former prime minister saying that, Morris said it was not necessary. “Layne told him he did not need an apology because he knows the heart of the Canadian people and understands it’s the government and the current prime minister’s doing,” Leisl said. She also said it “touched our hearts” that a “concerned” Canadian would spend their own money to take out a full-page ad in the Toronto Sun to let the families know not all Canadians agree with both the amount of the settlement to Khadr and the official apology. The man who took out the ad told me Thursday: “I am staying anonymous for now because it was meant to come from the sentiment of regular Canadians who feel this way and not just from one. I did it because I felt I needed to put my money where my heart was.” He said he also appreciated seeing similar commentary from Canadians from coast to coast, including from Harper himself. Harper has been critical on social media of the settlement. “The government today attempted to lay blame elsewhere for their decision to conclude a secret deal with Omar Khadr,” Harper wrote in a statement Friday. “The decision to enter into this deal is theirs, and theirs alone, and it is simply wrong. Canadians deserve better than this. “Today my thoughts are with Tabitha Speer and the families of all Canadian and allied soldiers who paid the ultimate price fighting to protect us.” And now Harper has expressed this sentiment directly to Khadr’s victims. http://www.torontosun.com/2017/07/13/former-pm-stephen-harper-reaches-out-to-khadr-victim

yup good job Jason Boltus. I was just shocked when I saw his picture holding a trophy as I couldn't believe he was still playing football, anywhere.

ok - awesome, you won, if that helps you sleep at night. Meanwhile, all Canadian taxpayers everywhere lost. Tabitha Speer lost a husband. All right, as I said, on to the game tonight. Go Blue! The definition of ‘Child Soldier’ has two parts: ‘Child’ and ‘Soldier’. No, he is not. At least, not according to the UN laws on the matter (or any other law I am aware of which defines who is, and who is not, a ‘soldier’). The UN laws were written in order to protect the innocent civilians who get in the way of a war first, then the protection of legitimate soldiers second. And, they are very clear on who is and who is not a ‘soldier’ (again – basic Wikipedia search provides clear answers – but much more material confirming this is easily available through any major search engine…): Omar Khadr, unfortunately, does not satisfy these qualifications. Not only was he not a part of a recognized military ‘chain of command’, and not wearing any ‘badges’ or ‘distinctive markings’ that could, even remotely, be construed as ‘uniform’ or ‘fixed distinctive marking’: the crime he is accused of having committed is against the laws and customs of war. ( I can expand on this, at length, if asked, in the comments sections.) Therefore, Omar Khadr DOES NOT satisfy the qualifications of having the status of a ‘soldier’. Therefore, he cannot be treated as a ‘soldier’: a ‘Child Soldier’, an ‘adult soldier’, or any other kind of ‘soldier’. This is a more difficult question – but there is a legal answer! Omar Khadr was aged 15 when he was detained by UN troops and when the premeditated murder of a UN non-combatant medic, which he is accused of having committed, occurred. Different people mature at different rates: at 15, some people really are still children while others are quite adult. Both individual maturing rates and cultural influences are important in determining if a 15-year-old is ‘an adult’ or ‘a child’. What does the law say? Omar Khadr straddled two cultures: In Canada, a 15-year old is, legally, a child. Still, 15-year-olds are able to become emancipated, and legally become adults. Under some circumstances, non-emancipated 15-year-olds are charged with crimes as adults – so the ‘legal precedent’ can be applied both ways: it is a bit of a legal ‘gray area’ in Canada. In Islamist culture, a 15-year-old is considered to be an adult, without any reservations. The Khadr family certainly considers 15 years of age to be ‘adult’ – that is the age at which their daughter was given away in marriage! It is obvious that in his own eyes, as well as according to the culture of his family, Omar Khadr is ‘an adult’. And, in our multicultural society, would it not be offensive to dismiss Omar Khadr’s minority cultural view of his status at that time? OK, ok – so, the ‘multiculturalism’ thing is kind of messed up – and we all know it. Let’s look elsewhere: What does the International Human Rights Law have to say on the subject? (The following is a cut-and-paste of what Wikipedia has to say on this: I usually like to paraphrase things, but I could not hope to make it more clear than they had…) Well, that seems rather clear: once a person has reached the age of 15, he/she cannot be considered to be a ‘Child Soldier’ – even though it’s better to recruit people who are over the age of 18…. 15-year-olds are ‘regular soldiers’! Omar Khadr HAD ‘attained the age of fifteen years’ – so he IS, according to international law, ‘regular soldier’! OK – so we are nowhere closer to the answer of what Omar Khadr actually is: but, I have (hopefully) demonstrated that whatever he is, he is NOT a ‘Child Soldier’! I know – the facts of the situation are unlikely to affect the direction of the public debate…. I have no illusions about it. People who point out the laws and the rules are nowhere near as interesting – and nowhere near listened to – as people who play on our emotions… But, we MUST TRY, mustn’t we?

if you think I'm the only one with a confirmation bias here, then I feel sorry for you. Now on to my real confirmation bias, focusing on the game tonight. Hopefully we can get off discussing terrorist scumbags being given giant gobs of taxpayer cash for a few hours and focus on football instead. Speaking of which, imagine what the CFL could do with $10.5 million of taxpayer cash? Wow. Other than just for infrastructure I mean (and I'm so happy to see the level of government support for the CFL in this area).

Explain how he was a child soldier. There we go. Back and forth we go. What a sweet boy.

anyone guess who this guy is? Taken a few days ago.

pot meet kettle. Seriously. Calling Khadr a "child soldier" isn't "facts", it's just people trying to justify a bad decision by a bad government. And that's why Trudeau will lose the next election. #PMScheerherewecome

amen

in this case, nope, I don't. This was a complete and utter joke.

Lol. This is the worst attempt at being the bigger person that I've ever seen.

LOL - that's not what I was doing. Anyway, as I said no one is budging on their views, and it seems that the only "facts" that people want to believe also correspond with their own personal political beliefs. I would encourage people to definitely open their minds, and that includes not just swallowing catch phrases like "child soldier" and "charter rights". This is a terrorist who was fighting against Canadian soldiers, not some guy who was a victim of accidental rendition.

yes this is rapidly falling apart. We have diametrically opposed views that aren't going to change, no matter what is stated or said. It's amazing to me that this discussion once again seems to be falling on political views, instead of on the actual situation. If you take a step back, it's obvious that this was a sickening outcome. A bad person was paid out secretly to deliberately screw over the widow. That to me is inexcusable. As there is no point continuing this discussion with those that seem committed to defending a murdering Taliban scumbag, I'm out.

What hasn't been proven? You are saying that Speer is still alive? Really?

How was Canada supposed to prevent the US from incarcerating a murderer found in Afghanistan? How were they to know he was even "Canadian"? As for the fighting this thing would have resulted in more money, I just will never agree that that is true, and in fact just justification for Trudeau fans to let Justin slide off the hook instead of holding him accountable for a really bad decision.

and sometimes governments should actually take terrorist scumbag murderers to court and let the courts decide what he should be paid for his "charter rights being violated". The Charter works when it is used to defend innocent people unjustly accused. To see it pulled out of people's rectums in this case to defend a murdering scumbag really just shows how laws have to evolve over time, as they may have unintended consequences.

was getting Khadr out of Gitmo asap really an option? He was a terrorist who killed an unarmed medic. Not sure how you just "get him out of Gitmo". He also was the lone survivor of a really bad bunch of Taliban scum. He had information. That information probably saved a lot of lives.

Once again we are in a pissing match, what a surprise. Look, I get it, if Khadr was American and had killed a Canadian, and Trump paid out the terrorist in a deliberate attempt to screw over the widow, we'd all be angry. And Americans should be angry by this. You can justify this anyway you want, and cry about "charters" and "child soldiers" (total BS) and about torture blah blah blah but this just stinks, and isn't just and isn't right.

No, you keep the snark to yourself, whatever the hell that means. This "child soldier" garbage is just BS to try and justify this disgusting payment to a disgusting person by a disgusting government. He wasn't a child soldier. I can buy that he was brain-washed by fundamentalist Islamic scumbags, as that seems to happen almost every day, including causing young men to self-detonate at Ariana Grande concerts, but this was not a child soldier, and this was not a "Canadian" - this was a kid who was born here to terrorist scum using Canada as a country of convenience to launch terror attacks who should never have been allowed into Canada in the first place. "Charter" and "Child Solider" are just affectations used by apologists who don't want to acknowledge reality.