The whole thing is ridiculous anyway. How many people here have said that they would be quite happy to shoot anyone invading their homes. Well, soldiers invaded his home. He threw a grenade, and now they're charging him with murder. It's not as if he came to the U.S. and threw a grenade, for Pete's sake. The U.S. is pretty much saying that if U.S. soldiers invade someone's country, the citizens can be charged with murder for defending themselves.

Now, don't get me wrong, while I disagreed with the invasion of Iraq, I was solidly behind the invasion of Afghanistan. But to charge those who are being invaded with murder for fighting back is really stretching it.

>OK, since you like to play with words and have the empathy of a lobster, I will stop loosing my time with you.
>
>>I wonder if any criminal experiences this kind of 'torture' at the point of arresting. For example, handcuffing could qualify in both 'physical' and 'mental' categories. Also, it seems that any 'punishment' is a 'torture'. Advocating for centencing by Canadian court to incarceration in Canadian jail could mean supporting another kind of the torture. The only way, you and your ilk would be happy is an unconditional freedom for any terrosist suspect.