Who does Canada think it is?

execution is not murder ... that's the sort of confused and muddled thinking that permeates humanism and third and fourth rate nations

But it's so much of the rest of the world, a reality greatly exacerbated by the Bush administration, though I don't doubt that their motives have been good.
If not Canada, then who, phe? Who can be more plausibly proposed as your best international friends than the Canadians? The Brits? I don't think so, personally. And no one else comes to mind at all.

I've never heard anything so diplomatic, monsieur. It is well-known to almost all Americans that the Bush Administration's motives have not been good. they don't even pretend they have been good, why should anyone else? Bush's WMD jokes were proof positive he loved getting away with all those lies.

Execution is not murder. Hmmm.
Nick, I don't say you can't make this plausible ... but I do ask you to do so.

Unbelievable patience on display. Saying it in such a declamatory way would lead one to imagine it could be made plausible--but I'll pass, since the 3rd and 4th rate nations that never use it, viz., European, are nothing if not first-rate. At this point, I am fine with people thinking such things. It is no longer of any importance to me that people believe false things. I'm sure I believe some too--like the Importance of Dick.

But it's so much of the rest of the world, a reality greatly exacerbated by the Bush administration, though I don't doubt that their motives have been good.

You are incedibly wise. Of course their motives were well intended. The Bush adminisgtration did not seek out to gain a 51st state or oil. Gas today in my hometown is 4.45 per gallon. The role of the U.S. military in my life time has basically been humanitarian. U.S. and Canadian fought in flanders in WW1 and many came home vegtables, victims of nerve gas. The League of Nations vowed this would never be tolerated again. Iraq had a leader who used it on his own people and most in Canada, and other places critized my goverment for removing him.

If not Canada, then who, phe? Who can be more plausibly proposed as your best international friends than the Canadians? The Brits? I don't think so, personally. And no one else comes to mind at all.

I think the U.S. U.K relationship is much stronger than that of U.S. Canada. U.S. Aussie is stronger as well.
Many Canadians have a real opinion of Bush and what he has and has not done but your last P.M. really damaged our two nations long standing relations.

Well, Bush himself thinks he's doing God's will.

And the other biggies in the administration seem to think they are dealing harsh medicine to a world that needs it, whether it realizes it or not ... or, in the more obviously selfish cases, are simply doing as they believe duty commands, privileging American interests above everything else (and hence the abrogation of treaties, the scorning of mulitlateral fora, etc. etc.).

The problem is that the conception of 'American interests' has been far too narrow.

The U.S. needs friends, needs cooperation, needs the respect of the larger world.

(And personally, I think they can get a great deal of that back quickly. The world has always seen the U.S. on two separate tracks ... on one, a very self-willed nation, no more virtuous than any other great power, but more powerful than any of history and hence more dangerous ... and on another, an idealistic nation that often loses its way, but capable of periodic re-illumination and never fully releasing its will, not entirely self-deceptive, to be a light to the world.)

Execution is the result of an arduous process in pursuit of realizing what might be called the social contract, the agreements, the quid pro quo we live under

Murder, on the contrary, is the violation of those very same obligations and commitments we assume as citizens toward each other

The U.S.-U.K. relationship reached new heights because of cooperation on Iraq and in the larger war on terror. But that had a lot to do with the relationship between Bush and Blair. Whether anything similar will persist now that the personalities change, I don't know.
Something similar can be said about your relations with Australia.
But you know, I don't think the Aussies understand the States that well.
They love you in a way that a cross-country cousin can love you ... with the simplicity of one who only sees you every so often, when you take care to be on your best behavior, and never having to wake up beside you in bed, with your 5 a.m. shadow, your beastly snoring, your propensity towards nocturnal farting, and your morning breath.
(The same, of course, you might say of us ... though under-the-sheets twitchings of the elephant inconvenience the mouse more than the mouse will ever inconvenience Jumbo.)

Good points, definitely, but we'll see if the old magic is still there. The assessment referring to the past is superb, but I think I am less optimistic than you because of the damage that's been done--which is more than some people are admitting. The Iraq War itself as a response to 9/11 is perhaps stupider (even granting Bush's self-anointing by God, given all the oxymoronic entanglement that immediately implies) than anything I can think of in American history. And with the various investigations that ended up only with Scooter Libby getting out of jail mostly free, and refusals to honour subpoenas, plus Supreme Court appointments McCain will want to continue, it will be continued disaster if there is a Republican win (I may adore his wife's looks, but I am not voting for her husband, even if he is 9 inches uncut...)

I honestly don't see what the big deal is with the whole extradition thing.
So the Canadian government told the United States that it is against our laws to turn this person over to you if he is going to be executed. We will turn him over so long as this doesn't happen.
The United States government basically said then that we agree to this. Right? So why all of the fuss?
We abided by Canadian law in this matter as we should have. Are we not supposed to respect the laws of our friends/neighbors/allied countries?

The argument really isn't about if the death penalty is right or wrong. Or about National health care, or about any other differences between the USA and Canada that people keep bringing up.

There is really no issue at all, Nothing to argue about.

The correct action was taken. The laws and beliefs of one of our neighbors and allies were respected as they should have been.

I have been thinking frequently in my recent Sex Fevers about the choices of Mascots by the Two Parties: They have chosen Large Penis Support Group Animals. But the Elephant is even bigger, I saw two of them fucking on a George Page Nature PBS show, and even Page had to say 'The elephants are magnificent!'

But I don't know, I had some mice when there was construction for 4 years on my street, and they made becominghorse's life a thoroughgoing hell.

Well, those nations that do not execute people do still manage to realize their social contracts, in a manner that opponents of capital punishment might say is far more civilized.
Murder may indeed be the violation of the obligations we assume as citizens toward each other.
But if affirmation of life is one of our values, then we as citizens might wish in every way possible, as a social obligation, to avoid all taking of life ... avoiding that taken through a formal legal process with only slightly less zeal than that taken in the heat of emotion or of base and confused self-interest.

I suppose in the extreme case political asylum seekers who come to America and get safe asylum are similar to this criminal being harbored by Canada. Would America extradite political dissidents back to their homelands if they were sure to be executed?

I suppose it all boils down to what value you put on human life. In America the value of your life is conditional upon how much you contribute to society or rather how much take away from it. If you are innocent like a new born or fetus you are valued because you haven't done any bad in our life. But if you kill or rape someone then you deserve to die. The value of your life to society is conditional your life means nothing to others if you are a criminal. Three strikes...throw away the key and rot in hell.

In some counties the value of human life is unconditional and their justice system revolves around rehabilitation not vindictive punishment so they would naturally see killing as a means of punishment odd.

This whole thread has been very interesting and I've learnt a great deal. Thank you every one for your contributions.