Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
Not really, no. In the latter case, the "moral standpoint" is that Khadr deserves no compensation at all. And most of the people who fit this mindset would be just as outraged at the courts if they awarded Khadr that money instead.
This isn't about due process. This is about the narrative being written that a terrorist was paid off rather than a victim of torture being compensated.
|
Of course they would've preferred no compensation, but that's not a realistic outcome. Assuming the government lawyers have done their job competently, there were only two outcomes:
a) Settle for $10.5M
b) Continuing defending the litigation and lose for unspecified damages and additional legal expenses
The narrative you describe is certainly the one playing out in the public arena, but most people can't be bothered to understand the intricacies of the case. The Tories are trying to score populist points here, but what else would one expect from an opposition government?