Sum them up!

[Enzo]

The "light" issue is a non-issue and is in no way whatsoever defined by torture. The light is left on for the reasons Fiddle stated. The wee little baby in his cell has to endure the neverending buzz of the light itself and some sleep deprivation if he can't manage to get something over his eyes, etc. So what, that is SOP in any cell in the country where the concerns are as stated above.

It sucks, deal with it.

PBI +1.

Finally, shrilling, proselytising, media-whore lawyer has high profile case. Gosh, it's a shame that we average citizens are gullible when it comes to believing his soundbites, without any factual information to back his position of course.

Riiight... Bleat on buddy (he getting paid by the hour?)

 

[TMM]

I don't have much faith in the system, but I'm still trying to understand how no lights is torture???? So what is to much light?

I'll leave it to the medics to eleborate but humans sleep and rest better without light.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

..and the lights we are talking about here are what we call "nightlights".....about what you would have in your kids room so you could see that he/she were safe but not have to turn on the "room" lights to do it.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

The "light" issue is a non-issue and is in no way whatsoever defined by torture. The light is left on for the reasons Fiddle stated. The wee little baby in his cell has to endure the neverending buzz of the light itself and some sleep deprivation if he can't manage to get something over his eyes, etc. So what, that is SOP in any cell in the country where the concerns are as stated above.

It sucks, deal with it.

Anyone living in the far north has to sleep in daylight at certain times of the year; I nap in the afternoon on some weekends and get better rest than I do at night. Much ado about nothing - and the lawyer should be ashamed of using words like "torture". I understand he is aggressively representing his client, but the reputation of the entire nation will be judged by this case and how "we" handle it.

 

[TMM]

..and the lights we are talking about here are what we call "nightlights".....

Ahhh, thanks. I had images of interrogation lights in my head.

Nightlights? Heck I sleep with a brighter light than that.

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

Yup, probably a lot darker for sleeping then the night shift CO's will be having the next day.....

 

[George Wallace]

Light! ?  What's the problem?

Now how many of you are in the military?  How many of you have not been put on "Forced Rest" on a bright sunny summer afternoon? 

I am sure they can do like the rest of us: 1.  put an arm over their eyes; 2. put a hat, shirt, blanket or pillow over their eyes;  3. turn and face away from the light;  4.  stay awake and when finally exhausted go to sleep.  Not that serious a problem.  Sleep will come.

That ambulance chaser ought to be drummed out of the Bar Association.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

That ambulance chaser ought to be drummed out of the Bar Association.

Its not a reflection of his abilities as a lawyer that are in question; more like his responsibilities as a citizen. Accusing the government of torture and racism during a war seems scandalous. That some lawyer would push the envelope to aggressively defend his client is not.

 

[Enzo]

When such statements are made on television, I am left numb. There is little relevance, for the individual is clearly using words of such magnitude to bolster his clients defense. As with the boy who cried wolf; a defense lawyer on display, sanctimoniously denouncing the authorities for their use of "torture", etc. holds empty. I almost expect no less since it seems to be the current standard for public declarations.

I consider myself to be a fair person, free thinking and moral. I have issues with the government over different subjects at the best of times, but I truly doubt that there is sanctioned torture by the professionals in the law enforcement community. I suspect that a strong majority of Canadians share this view. Reality television has left me stupified many times over in recent years and I have to take responsibility for allowing it to do so; entertainment notwithstanding, but I find it interesting that I do not even consider such remarks to have a moments validity. Its the white noise I have come to expect from a defence lawyer and I tune it out.

I am left with a sense of despair, for my cynicism swells with the boy who seems to be howling something about a wolf.

 

[Aislinn]

I'm not at all suprised. Claiming torture seems to be the catchphase of the day. The "in" thing, if you will. If there weren't so many other countries watching this, I'd laugh at how preposterous it all is.
Interesting information about the lights, though, thanks. I have a sidewalk light right outside my window that lights up my bedroom almost as well as my bedside lamp does, and while it's annoying, I have adjusted quite well to it.

Cheers.

 

[Sapper Bloggins]

In reply to the original poster, who I tend to agree with.

Hmm. Is this saying that the official security forces of a society are unable to defend the people & therefore, the people must assist in this defence themselves.
This is also acknowledging that terrorism, and in this case, Islamfascism, doesn't operate by and against a military ( as did European fascism) but by and against civilians.

I think this will eventually bring back the DUTY of citizens to be armed and to come to the defence of the polity. This is an ancient tradition of ours from " hue & cry", to a duty to have serviceable arms and armour, Anglo society has long relied on the populace for defence.

As to making civilians "legitimate targets": moot point. The terrorists couldn't give a red rat's ass; this is merely semantics that make leftists, nihilist law profs feel better. Since they already support terrorists anyways, arming the populace will have no effect but to make them more secure and make life harder. BooHoo.

Cheers