quote:
Originally posted by jrootham:
[b]The problem with the absolutist position is that it is not working. Khadr is still in Gitmo.[/b]
By absolutist position, I assume you are referring to the principled position of calling for Khadr's unconditional release.
Not working, you say? Maybe that's because it hasn't been tried yet; Harper has not asked, and Bush has not refused.
The very least we owe Khadr before we start bargaining away his human rights is to demand his unconditional release. If that doesn't work, then maybe we can discuss other options.
quote:
[b]I am not demanding that he face trial, I am suggesting that facing trial in Canada would be better than being stuck in Gitmo. You disagree.[/b]
No I don't disagree. Where did I say I disagree with that statement?
I would also agree that sending him back to Canada and administering a public flogging and putting him in a Canadian prison for ten years would be better than spending the rest of his life in Guantanamo. But unlike you and Amnesty International and Michael Byers, I wouldn't dream of actually demanding that he face such treatment as a condition of his release from Guantanamo.
You say you are not demanding that Khadr face trial in Canada, but that's what Amnesty calls for, and you have no "huge problem" with such a position.
quote:
[b]The logical consequence of that disagreement is that you would leave him stuck in Gitmo if he was required to face trial in Canada.I really don't believe you mean that, but that is what you have argued in slandering me.[/b]
I have argued no such thing, and as I have stated above the "disagreement" of which you speak does not exist. The real diagreement is that I demand justice, while you are prepared to demand something far less than justice, all the while pretending to be concerned with Khadr's human rights.
As for your repeated allegations of slander, you cannot point to any evidence to support them. The only statements in this thread that are damaging to your reputation are the ones you have written yourself.
