Facts all that should matter
The Editor, While I am not interested in engaging in a feud with Robin Poston, I find myself as confused by his stand as he seems to be regarding justice and/or that which is legal.
In her Sept. 6 letter ((Khadr: Justice must prevail), he admits to not being interested in the facts. He goes on to say that the Op/Ed page in which his letter appeared, and to which I responded, was not a court of law.
He is right but opinions based solely on feelings or prejudices without facts have no place in serious discourse, nor should the Op/Ed page be a platform for armchair lynch mob justice. In law and justice, as in almost everything by which we guide our lives, facts are all that should matter, not Poston's truth nor mine. For Poston, it appears “facts” are of less concern than the truthiness of his gut feelings.
He seeks justice, but only as he defines it. He raises examples of court cases thrown out because judges have deemed the rights of the accused to a speedy trial to have been violated. He says that was “all perfectly legal but certainly not just.”
He does have a point. Such outcomes offer no justice for the accused or the public suggesting a system in dire need of mending. Yet, regarding Khadr, he ignores the issue of justice as when he writes, “I am positive his (Khadr’s) handling by US authorities was all perfectly legal.”
The evidence doesn’t bear that out. As a teenage prisoner Khadr was subjected to human rights abuses by US authorities knowingly breaking the law. No matter. Poston’s concerns have less to do with either facts or justice than with punishment. He even turns to the absurd, stating, “Omar Khadr was a terrorist, you could even argue it was in his DNA.” Well, evidently Poston can. Yet he doesn’t do so, however. Saying something is so doesn’t make it so; that’s the magical thinking of immaturity.
Frank Pelaschuk, Alexandria