NDP Convention

It also "theoretically" calls for a withdrawal from Afghanistan, not that you would know it based on the statements of its caucus. The NDP supports "negotiation" with the Taliban, ie, the Taliban surrender, followed by a withdrawal. Likewise there is very little that we can see of the NDP dealing with the issue of decriminalization, or the criminalization of the poor, and the shambles of the legal aid system in this country that allows crown attorneys to ride rough-shod over the poor, under the guise of being "tough on crime".

Sadly the NDP has no position at all on the issue of the dismantling of systems which seek to foment fair-play in the legal system, opting to stay silent on the return of Victorian era legal norms. Instead it is demanding minimum sentences on "gang related activities", and reinforcing the morally bankrupt principle of guilt by association.

Bullshit, its provincial. Federal transfer payments could be increased for the purposes supporting and expanding legal aid. I thought the NDP was some kind of "federalist party", and you were a federalist. What next? Make standards of practice and funding for health care a "provincial" responsibility? How charade you are.

As for making organizations illegal, we can already see the absurdness of this system in action with police forces engaging in dragnet operations picking up "known" associates who participated in high school soccer matches with members of "gangs" whose links are defined by the tatoos they wear. Under such legislation a whole swath of Muslim youths were packaged up in a federal RCMP probe, simply because they attended the same Mosque as some persons, or because they attended the same school.

The case against most of the Toronto 17, quickly evaporated, leaving a trail of innocent people who spent inordinate amounts of time in jail for nothing, waiting for charges to be dropped, while their reputations have been sullied for life.

The only purpose of making organizations illegal is to subvert the neccesity of the police having to get evidence to prosecute on a real criminal conspiracy involving an actual crime, and to allow them to "shake the tree" in the hope that some rotten apples will fall out.

It is called guilt by association and it is a crime which conforms to the principles of the Inquisition, not a modern "democratic" state.

These defendants all had access to virtually unlimited legal aid etc... if they were truly innocent and the case against them was so weak, they would have pleaded innocent and been acquitted. If they pleaded guilty - its because they are guilty. I assume these people are telling the truth. i don't know why you seem to think they are lying. Are you implying that because they're Muslims, they must be entering a false plea and committing perjury. That seems like a very racist assumption to make.

Again. 1 sentencing for time served. They did not have unending supply of legal aid. Their bills are paid by their community their friends and family. Legal aid is only so much. You are conflating the issues.

It is a very simple formula. The crown offered the guy time served for a plea. Get out of jail right now, and move on. It's a very tempting deal considering that he would have had to stay in prison for the duration of the trial, which are all still ongoing and he had no guarantee that there would be no conviction.

Threaten someone with 14 years and offer them a slap on the wrist "time served" deal is a very old formula for getting a conviction, which might be used to convict others in the so called conspiracy.

And in fact, the case is being appealed.

As for your appolgia on the position of the NDP on the issue of legal aid. It is quite simple, advocate for a decrease in costs prosecuting people on bullshit, save money on trials and for imprisonment, put in adminstrative controls that punish crown attorney from going on fishing expeditions based on spurious evidence such as the Hueza case, and funnel the money into legal aid. It has no impact on other programs that you say you cherrish.

Its called having a comprehensive "policy". It a little different than having a sound byte, like being "tough on gang related crime", whatever that is.

Ah just when I thought that maybe Cueball was trying to make some cogent points on a relevant issue I see he/she/it has strayed back to its usualy stance that everything bad is somehow the NDPs fault.  Disappointingly typical.

Long thread.