Peter F

well his lawyers and the usgovt came to a deal if he pleads guilty to everything and gives up all rights to appeal then his maximum sentence would be 8 years of which 1 would be served in US custody. The rest will be served in Canadian custody if he requests it (which he has). The thing cannot be overturned because he gave up all rights of appeal. The trial judge also gave him tons and tons of opportunity to say he did not agree to plead guilty. He stood by the plea.

I shall take issue with the latter bit about killing a Army medic performing his duties at the time. He was indeed an army medic and was killed and may even have been performing his duties at the time. Unfortunately he was not wearing any of the required identifications of a medic (white circle with red cross on helmet, white arm band with red cross), he was also armed and conducting combat operations at the time he was killed. see transcript of Omar Khadr military commission where SgtMajor says so under cross examination by Khadrs lawyer MC record, Omar Khadr ( I would love to identify which specific page to look at but my computer here wont let me access adobe)

No they don't. What Army Guy is describing is 'combat immunity'. Killing others is murder. Even soldiers killing other soldiers is murder. However, when a soldier does his/her killing while serving the Armed forces of a state, they have combat immunity. That is they cannot be prosecuted for murder when they are killing with the sanction of the state in whose Armed forces they serve. Of course 'combat immunity' only applies in certain circumstances as Army Guy alluded to. Killing outside those conditions then the soldier is no longer immune to being charged with murder. There is a big fat grey area in regards to irregular forces. Can any armed mob (or for that matter, any armed individual) be considered to be part of a states Armed forces? or is that mob a bunch of thugs out for some loot? or that individual a nutbar out to kill somebody/anybody for their own purposes? This grey area is usually hurdled through the idea of identification. The Geneva conventions identify who is to be accorded P.O.W. status based on four things: 1. Openly bear arms 2. Be under the authority of a command heiarchy (sp?) 3. Wear a distinctive identifying mark/uniform visible from a distance 4. Operate within the Laws of War Of course those things are used for determining if a prisoner gets P.O.W. status under the geneva conventions. But they are also convenient to determine if a person has combat immunity. In wee Omars case he was operating with a group that openly bore arms, was under a command structure, did not wear distinctive identifying marks/uniform, and may or may not have been obeying the laws of war. Because of the identifying thing then he is not immune to murder charges if he kills someone. Thus the Murder charge laid against him by the USofA.

No charge of treason could possibly hold with wee Omar. He was captured by the Americans at the age of 15. Every possible act he could have committed to support a treason charge, had to have occurred before that time. And, needless to say, any such act would have been committed by a child - and most definately as a child-soldier to boot. There will be no charge of treason or any other charge for that reason alone.

Actually, he was shot on the battlefield - twice! Very lucky to be alive, thanks to the US medical personnel who worked very hard to save his life. Fact is to kill have killed him after the scrap was over would have been murder, bob. And actually, the judge doesn't get the choice. Sentence is determined by the commission jury. They gave him 40 years. So you see the judge had no say in what the sentence would be other than instructing the jury on what the minimum and maximum sentences are. He doesnt get to choose the sentence. So your claim that the judge placed no value on the dead is, as usual, BULLSHIT.

It is to laugh. The Israeli government released 1000 mass murderers in exchange for 1 soldat? And Israeli's value life more? You're not makin much sense there bob. Unless, maybe, the 1000 mass murderers arn't mass murderers at all. never mind: that doesn't work either...

Omar Khadr: the evilist man in the world. Stands up in court and admits to everything! The jury hearing the confession recommends a sentence of 40 years! Says-so-right-here Oh, but there was a pre-trial agreement, for no apparent reason given the rock-solid evidence against him. Sentenced to be a minimum of 1 further year in US prison. Not to held for more than 8 further years. Oh, and if he wants he can request transfer to Canada to serve out the rest of the sentence after the minimum 1 year in US prison. Oh, and if he does make such a request then it will be granted. Oh, and the further 8 years of the sentence is then subject to Canadian laws. Including paroles etc. says-so

Jeebus, what a lying piece of dung you are. You want everyone treated equally? My ass. You want each and every muslim shipped out of the country based on what? Oh yes, thier religious beliefs. And you're not an islamophobe? Your a fuckin joke.

Fundemental Point Pliny is turning a blind eye to: It happened, Pliny. It happened. Relative to the clock at rest the clock in motion had time pass slower. It is - absolutely - 59 nanoseconds younger. Yet you insist the younger clock must not be able to exist in the present when it obviously does. The two-clock experiment shows that the twin-paradox is a real physical phenomena. hyuk-hyuk.

Fundemental Point Pliny is turning a blind eye to: It happened, Pliny. It happened. Relative to the clock at rest the clock in motion had time pass slower. It is - absolutely - 59 nanoseconds younger. Yet you insist the younger clock must not be able to exist in the present when it obviously does. The two-clock experiment shows that the twin-paradox is a real physical phenomena. hyuk-hyuk.

...rat...vermin...filth...scum....subhuman. I think that describes Bob to a T.

...rat...vermin...filth...scum....subhuman. I think that describes Bob to a T.

I only consume oil that has tiny maple-leafs floating in it.

Sorry Bob, but people are allowed to be whatever religion they want. And if all the women of the world want to wear hijabs then they get to wear hijabs. You don't like it too effing bad.

My upper limit of toleration is a bit beyond 100%. After that I would not tolerate it anymore - I guess; depending upon whatever "not tolerating" means to you. I suspect that if you defined that then my toleration would reach 'limitless'. Whats your toleration level?

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to beg in the streets, steal bread, or sleep under a bridge." - Anatole France

Strong fences make for Good neighbours == Pierre Trudeau

Nice try but I havn't compared anyone to anyone cept'n Blachford to herself. Easy to do cause she has two faces.

Yeah, she should have written that on November 11th.

I agree with you the whole thing is an emotional issue not an economic one. Thats why it never goes away. But I was pointing out the two-faced silliness of the poster I was replying to. He was claiming that Canadians will have an emotional reaction to a seperate Quebec therefore Quebecers better not get emotional.

So Quebecers should not get emotional since the rest of the country will! Canadians can't help themselves. So Quebecers should pick up the slack. ... well, thats what should happen.

Army Guy: I remember that too. What kind of weirdo's are we that we enter war with an eagerness bordering on joy?

Oh i'm sure I can get one, you did!

Where do I get this certification? I want one.

ah yes. There are limitations. I cannot attempt to inspire hatred in others. What an effin shame.