The Unknown Poster

Im not saying I'd be concerned with hurting his rep. This is acting. He can do whatever he wants. My point is that its tougher to buy into when everyone knows his real life. The argument to my point is that they do the same thing in Hollywood all the time. But in wrestling, you play yourself playing a character. I just dont think WWE will do it. A former WWE writer has posted that its an awful storyline.

Yes, and I edited my post. Pay attention next time. Those are two separate legal proceedings.

I was hoping to calm you down a bit as you're coming across very emotional and angry. You're saying there was no point for the government to defend itself in court because a separate ruling didnt go their way. Not every ruling wa unanimous by the way (a lower court was split on one of them). The point many are making, which you are ignoring, is the principal behind seeing a legal outcome to its conclusion because you feel it's wrong to pay a convicted murder compensation. KBF posted a video where the Cons leader explains this perspective. Its worth a watch.

When did I label you a SJW the first time? You're missing a lot here. You're connecting a separate ruling with the payout. There was no ruling on the issue pertaining to the payout because the government settled. EDIT: I erroneously thought your reply was to me. i see its to KBF. My apologies.

What are this week's lottery numbers?

I agree other than about treating him like a refugee. He was a Canadian citizen. Should have been brought back, tried and, if convicted, sent to prison.

Another great point that hasnt been talked about. He finished his sentence in Canada but were there no charges he could have been subject to here? If I join ISIS and then come back, do I get a welcome home party or criminal charges? There should be consequences. Khadr did the crime, did the time. He won his case when he was brought back to Canada and worked his way through the corrections system (going fro Maximum to medium security and eventually released). The government chose to pay him and apologize (like above all, what the heck was up with the apology?)

I dont feel like that is a compliment ;-) EDIT: But he's not wrong. He sums up how many Canadians feel. The Supreme Court ruled and the previous government accepted that ruling.

What if the government had won? Or the court lowered the amount? You're basing your position of an outcome that cannot be known. We can say "likely" all we want. But the government chose to give up. That might have been the advice they were given legally. But they still didn't need to do it. And they certainly didnt need to keep it hush hush if it was such a right thing to do.

I believe that specific ruling was appealed and the Liberals withdrew it. Chances are, the government would have lost, but again, the government chose not to fight it, or more accurately the Liberal government chose not to whereas the previous government did.

The disagreement is that many feel Canada's obligation was to repatriate him, not make him a millionaire. If you feel it was in the nation's interest to pay him, secretly and quickly, that's your opinion. Others disagree. Im not sure we'll come to an agreement on that. He is a convicted murderer. I'd applaud the government if they had fought til the end, lost and begrudgingly paid whatever the court said they owed. Are we going to argue over a few million? It wouldnt make a lick of difference to taxpayers' bottom line in the big picture. Plus, if they had fought and the widow was able to enforce her lawful judgement and seize the money, wouldn't that have been a win-win? (or a lose-win in the case of Canada losing a judgement).

Nah, Ill make comments I feel are appropriate, thank you. Where do you get the impression I have a government source? Is my opinion or speculation less relevant than yours (or do you think its more relevant?)

I agree. Its too out of their wheel house. If they wanted to do a gay angle, Kurt is the wrong guy to do it with since he's a celebrity outside of wrestling. Unless he was insisting (because as an Olympic medal winner he could have a positive influence on people) it makes more sense to do it with a newer worker. And if you're going to do it, why not do it with a gay wrestler? As an aside, the original plan for Brock Lesnar was that he was going to be gay.

Also, Im not sure if the Court would have (or could have) weighed the actions of the criminal. But they had already decided it was none of their business how Canada ran its foreign policy and had no opinion on whether Khadr should be repatriated. Its possible they'd have found in favour of Khadr and awarded him nothing.

I believe the incurred costs thus far were relatively minimal. It doesnt change the secretive nature or the decision by this government that this was the right thing to do. We shouldnt make excuses here. The Liberal government wanted this outcome. Its not like they were dragged kicking and screaming.

A civil case between two individuals or an individual and a corporation is very different. This involves the taxpayers. One could argue the government had the duty to minimize the damages by settling. But one could also argue they had a duty to see it through and fight for a victory. And of course, they could have stalled in an attempt to let the widow try to have her US judgement certified in Canada so she's get the money. The government made the decision to MAKE SURE a convicted terrorist got paid and they made sure a widow of a murder victim had no chance at the money. What's next, will they hide some of OJ's assets too?

Thats another major theory but I dont see it. if hey did a gay angle the story wouldnt be that it would ruin his life and career. Plus, Kurt Angle is a pretty big deal so having him play a gay character would be tough to accept, although it would be interesting. Seems a lot of people think Bayley will be his love child. Which is weird.

I tried to end it numerous times actually. I agree with you. It is silly and shameful that it kept going. oh well!

I really really cannot see WWE thinking Dixie is important enough to use in that angle. And since she screwed them on the TNA sale, what motive would they have to bring her in? She wasnt a good performer like Bisch.

Good thing I dont care whatsoever what you think! But the fact you think its silly does offer insight into your bias. I stumbled across the quote as I was reading multiple articles on this issue. I strongly suspect you would never read an article that wasnt supporting your person view. But since I did, I was surprised Nutt would take that position which I thought added a lot of credibility to her and spoke to her character. And as I explained 4 times, the relevancy of my post was clear.

I wasnt confused at all. I never once discussed the position of the organization or the larger opinion of the head of that position. You're trying to create facts that werent there and then argue them. You're effectively arguing with yourself. Im the one that introduced the organization and head of it to the discussion. I generalized what the organization is. Because Im far less entrenched in the political aspect of this discussion than you seem to be. Is Omar Khadr your nephew or something? And for the 4th time, the reason I did so was to quell the mistaken believe that Khadr actually didnt do anything. Do you agree with Nutt that Khadr did it? Do you condemn those actions? Why do you not want to answer? Why do you continue to take part in this one shallow aspect of the thread without being willing to stand behind your position? What's the point?

You're arguing semantics which I have addressed. You're calling me a liar now (again). Shameful. You were rude then. You're even more rude now. And this is the type of immature behavior that derails quality discussions. Unless your intent is to get the thread locked (and if so, I hope the mods eliminate the problem and not the thread).

This was your response. No where does it mention the word "guilty". And in fact, yes, it doesnt take long to see Nutt's opinion (which I posted) that she felt there was no doubt Khadr did it. I posted that she believed he did it. You said it took 3 seconds to find her opinion...which is that he did it. Were you actually agreeing with me?

No, you implied I was lying. And further hedged by suggesting if I could find an article where she admitted he did it, that it was either a fake news story and/or I was stupid for believing it. Ill keep going round and round all day with you. But Im sure everyone else is tired of it. You were rude and you were wrong. If you choose not to admit it, so be it. Im not remotely emotional about it. But if we're going to have a reasonable discussion posts where someone does an insulting and smug drive by should either not be allowed or that person should be happy to acknowledge their error. It would be a positive thing, Fraser, if you simply apologized and admitted you were wrong and that Nutt did, in fact admit there was no doubt Khadr did what he was accused of. Do you agree that Khadr did it and if so, do you condemn his actions?