It seems Omar Khadr’s lawyers don’t want to talk to Sun Media’s parliamentary bureau boss David Akin:
Khadr’s two Canadian lawyers are Nate Whitling and Dennis Edney, both of Edmonton. Whitling, reached Monday night via e-mail, refused to speak to QMI Agency and Edney could not be reached.
Which caused a clearly perturbed Akin to turn to Twitter:
Sorry David, but we can’t help but reply boo-hoo. And la-dee-dah.
I can’t imagine why Khadr’s lawyers might not be inclined to talk to a Sun Media reporter, take them seriously as a news organization, or think what they have to say might be treated fairly.
Oh, no, yes I can imagine why. It’s probably because they read the ridiculous editorial that ran across the Sun/QMI chain a few weeks ago that made clear the chain’s feelings on the Khadr case. Some excerpts:
Khadr was 15 when he ended up in the American prison camp at Cuba’s Guantanamo Bay, and he is now almost 24.
Boo-hoo. And la-dee-dah.
Unfortunately, Omar Khadr is in the news again, having just fired his U.S. lawyers.
Too bad more ink must be spilled.
…
As for Omar himself, why bring him back to Canada? Simply because he was born here?
Screw him.
…
He’s a waste of our breath.
So, let’s see. The Sun believes the un-convicted Khadr has terrorism bred in his bones, and is a waste of breath and ink that should get screwed. But how dare his lawyers not talk to our fine news organization!
Akin has a solid journalistic pedigree and he’s no dummy, so he has to have seen this coming. You can argue about the wall between editorial and news until you’re blue in the face (and the low height of that wall at QMI is another issue we’ll keep exploring). But public perception is another thing, and when you run ridiculous editorials like that the walls are seen to crumble, whether you want to believe it or not.
Put another way, keep sleeping with dogs, David, and you’re going to get fleas. And sources won’t return your e-mails.


That’s why I like the French editorial tradition so much more: the person writing it signs it, there’s no pretension that it’s the view of “The Newspaper and all it’s staff™”.