Jump to content

Omar Khdar


Topaz

Recommended Posts

What has these wars in the Middle-East really done? They have killed so many innocent people, especially children, they have made more enemies for the West and I fear the only way this war is going to stop is when the US decided or Israel, that its time for a nuke like in WW2 with Japan. Iraq is a mess, a lot of the country don't have hydro or water,and Afghanistan isn't much better. Where's the money going to come from to rebuild these countries when the other countries are having their own problems with their economy? As far as Omar and the other prisoners, can you blame them for seeking revenge, when most of them being held were innocent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 741
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I think the authors conclusion is completely wrong in this article: If child soldiers are immune from war crimes, it does not mean that the warlords can send them into the worst situations with impunity. What it means is that there is no one standing between the warlord and the deed to shoulder the blame for the crimes. That, I think, would be very poor strategic thinking on any warlords part.

Perhaps that would work if the punishment fit the crime, but it is not, very few of these War Lords see the court house, so for them to actually take that into consideration is questionable...

I do think that each child's case should be dealt individually, and not covered by a blanket policy, or law....as most of these crimes they have commited are very serious, from murder to rape, to recruiting other kids into the cycle....not all of them are as inocent as we would like them to be...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
What has these wars in the Middle-East really done? They have killed so many innocent people, especially children, they have made more enemies for the West and I fear the only way this war is going to stop is when the US decided or Israel, that its time for a nuke like in WW2 with Japan. Iraq is a mess, a lot of the country don't have hydro or water,and Afghanistan isn't much better. Where's the money going to come from to rebuild these countries when the other countries are having their own problems with their economy? As far as Omar and the other prisoners, can you blame them for seeking revenge, when most of them being held were innocent?

Let me see if I understand this correctly.

You see the US as responsible for killing innocent people because the US went to war out of revenge for the innocent lives that were lost here at the hands of terrorists, and that's bad; you 'blame' the US for that. But you 'don't blame' the suspected terrorists for seeking revenge and killing innocent people because they were held, but innocent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
"Apparently" I'm the only one who read the reports from court.

The links are there if you choose to read. Then you can know what I learned.

"Apparently" you don't read what other people say, because, once again, I have read the reports from the court. So I do know what you learned, and it's not conclusive. So I'll repeat again. The court records are incomplete until there's a trial and everyone has testified under oath. The picture is just what I said it is. It's not conclusive evidence of what you say it is by any means. Furthermore, if a picture taken at a crime scene were all that was needed to determine a verdict, there would be no need for investigations or forensics or any of the other of the tedious tasks that help determine guilt or innocence, much less a trial. There would be no need for an autopsy, either. The picture would "tell it all," as you claim.

And one more time. I see what you claim as truth. You claim to know what went on within the Khadr family, you claim to know whether Omar wanted to be there or not, you claim to know what he was thinking, you claim to know that his father would have forced him to become a suicide bomber if he didn't fight (seems to me you are admitting here that Omar was indeed fighting with the enemy)-- and your 'proof' of that is his brother's statement that his dad wanted him to become a suicide bomber, but he didn't. Apparently his father didn't "force" him to become one, so how you would "know" that he'd force Omar is a mystery to me. I have to say, though, I'd really like to know how one "forces" someone to become a suicide bomber. I can just see the struggle as his dad would be "forcefully" strapping explosives on Omar -- and then he would "force" Omar out among the innocent crowd. <_<

Your claims are ludicrous, and are based on nothing but your imagination.

Edited by American Woman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What has these wars in the Middle-East really done? They have killed so many innocent people, especially children, they have made more enemies for the West and I fear the only way this war is going to stop is when the US decided or Israel, that its time for a nuke like in WW2 with Japan. Iraq is a mess, a lot of the country don't have hydro or water,and Afghanistan isn't much better. Where's the money going to come from to rebuild these countries when the other countries are having their own problems with their economy? As far as Omar and the other prisoners, can you blame them for seeking revenge, when most of them being held were innocent?

Not having the edvidence for trial and being innocent are two very different things....72 out of the 500 already have re arrest warrents out for them, for being involved once again with terrorists or commiting terroist activities........

I can't speak for all prisoners, but the ones we handed over were normally taken off the battle field....where seconds ago they where trading shots and gun fire with us....Most NATO nations operated the same way we did....so lets drop the innocent crap....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've looked at the picture plus the many more that were taken by US forces, most as they were working on saving young mr Khadr, I've aslo seen first hand poeple shot dozens of times, so although i may not be a forensics expert but i have been trained to tell the difference on a exit and entrance wound.....So to answer your question no i'm not winging it....

Have you seen anyone shot by a 5.56 mm round, this is not the movies, if he was shot in the back he would have been thrown to the ground face first...lets not forget he was shot multiple times....the odds of him landing on his back as you suggest is very unlikely....So if he was covered in rubble as one statement suggests he would have been laying face down....and yet he was not...Thats a problem.....

Later you claim the wounds are covered in dust....well once again read your statements, tthe part about firing a few rounds down the lane way, the soldier sight is obscured by the amount of dust raised by firing his wpn...this dust affectionately known as Poo dust , is like talcum powdered, about 6 in thick in most places, just walking in the stuff can raise or reduce visability, and it gets on or coats everything it touches....moving Omar to a safe area to medically work on him would have been enough to coat the wounds....that and the fact that when performing first aid, one does have to check and treat both wounds exit and entrance which could involve rolling him over...into guess what the Poo dust.....

Just to make things clear making a false written statement carries the same punishment as making one under oath,sitting in front of the court....The picture explains nothing except clearly showing he was shot in the back....

Plus the fact that only one soldier out of the 4 that where there or seen the entire thing has changed thier statement....the other 3 have not....my question to you is why is this one statement true and the others false....what fact or piece of evidence changed your mind....

Thats exactly what is going to happen if he is brought to Canada and put on trial here. we all know that key evidence has been ruled out , as torture was involved ....he'll be found inocent and set free to roam your neiborhood....back with his family who loves thier new country, well everything except our way of life, did i mention us as well....I'm sure a young man with a bone to pick with not only the US but Canadians as well, will make an ideal next door neibor....

And if we are right, and he is set free to carry out his mytradom on some high value target.....i just hope it's not my neiborhood. And i will add this ....your Apology will mean squat to those lives omar takes ....

I guess we agree to disagree. I do believe a trial would have cleared the air, but it wasn't allowed to occur.

We'll probably never be allowed to know the truth, because it's too damaging to the US and Canada.

If Omar has a 'bone to pick' with the US and Canada, whose fault is that?

However, I've never heard reports of him saying anything suggesting he seeks revenge, martyrdom, or has any of the views you say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we agree to disagree. I do believe a trial would have cleared the air, but it wasn't allowed to occur.

We'll probably never be allowed to know the truth, because it's too damaging to the US and Canada.

If Omar has a 'bone to pick' with the US and Canada, whose fault is that?

However, I've never heard reports of him saying anything suggesting he seeks revenge, martyrdom, or has any of the views you say.

Having a bone to pick and killing people are two starkly different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess we agree to disagree. I do believe a trial would have cleared the air, but it wasn't allowed to occur.

We'll probably never be allowed to know the truth, because it's too damaging to the US and Canada.

If Omar has a 'bone to pick' with the US and Canada, whose fault is that?

However, I've never heard reports of him saying anything suggesting he seeks revenge, martyrdom, or has any of the views you say.

Oh, yeah...that's a good get out of jail strategy...say you plan to kill again ASAP.

:lol:

To ArmyGuy: I guess we agree to disagree. I do believe a trial would have cleared the air, but it wasn't allowed to occur.

Let's see...a Canadian soldier on the scene or a armchair mouthpiece sitting in Canada who thought Israelis still 'occupied' Gaza. Tough choice as to who one pays attention to...lol.

Edited by DogOnPorch
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Error casts doubt on Khadr case

Obama seeks Gitmo trial halt

U.S. President Barack Obama has instructed Pentagon prosecutors to seek the delay of the war crimes trial of Canadian Omar Khadr and 20 other pending cases here until May, to give his new administration "time to review" the process.

Jan 21, 2009 04:30 AM

Thomas Walkom

In the end, testimony at a Guantanamo Bay military hearing that attempted to link Ottawa engineer Maher Arar to an Afghan "safe house" doesn't tell us anything about either Arar or Afghan safe houses. It does, however, speak volumes about the manner in which the U.S. has conducted its so-called war on terror.

First, the allegation. Two days ago, FBI interrogator Robert Fuller testified that in October 2002, terror suspect Omar Khadr identified Arar as a visitor to a so-called Al Qaeda safe house in Afghanistan.

It was a sensational claim that made front-page headlines in Canada.

...

If Arar really had been bunking down at an Al Qaeda safe house in the fall of 2001, as Fuller said yesterday in a second day of testimony, both the royal commission finding and Ottawa's compensation decision would have faced serious questions.

And the U.S. decision to send him to Syria might have seemed more explicable.

...

In October 2001, when Omar Khadr was allegedly seeing him in South Asia, Arar was under RCMP surveillance in Ottawa.

That the FBI could be so spectacularly wrong on this important detail casts into doubt all the evidence gleaned from interrogating Khadr. In fact, it casts into doubt all the confessions obtained from terror suspects subjected to what Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff once approvingly called "coercive interrogations."

...

They used both sleep deprivation and classic Inquisition-style methods (now referred to by the anodyne phrase "stress positions"). She writes that Khadr, at the time badly wounded, was initially targeted for particular mistreatment.

...

A lot of Americans are implicated in Bush's patently unconstitutional projects. All may eventually be forced to justify their actions. The sound you hear from Gitmo is the pitter-patter of bureaucrats scurrying for cover.

http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/574363

Including Obama, imo.

http://www.thestar.com/Unassigned/article/574494

Navy Lt.-Cmdr. Bill Kuebler, Khadr's Pentagon-appointed lawyer, said yesterday outside court that Khadr would have "confessed to seeing the Pope," to make his interrogations stop.

Fuller's first interrogation of Khadr about Arar occurred on Oct. 7, a day before U.S. officials sent Arar to Syria, where he was held for more than 10 months on suspicion of terrorist activity, and tortured.

Fuller testified he did not know whether the information he gleaned from Khadr played any role Arar's deportation to Syria.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/01/20/khadr-hearing.html

So ... Omar says under interrogation that he saw Arar in Afghanistan. The next day Arar is sent to Syria for a year of torture. Now Arar has been cleared and paid a settlement ... something Harper certainly doe not want to go through again.

No wonder they're tripping all over themselves to deny Omar Khadr a fair trial. :angry:

Edited by tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So ... Omar says under interrogation that he saw Arar in Afghanistan. The next day Arar is sent to Syria for a year of torture. Now Arar has been cleared and paid a settlement ... something Harper certainly doe not want to go through again.

Arar was not tortured...but Canadian taxpayers were! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Arar was not tortured...but Canadian taxpayers were! :lol:

In October 2005, the inquiry released its fact-finder's report on Arar's treatment. Fact-finder Professor Stephen Toope said: "I conclude that Maher Arar was subjected to torture in Syria."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/arar_faq.html

Now why would you intentionally lie, b_c?

I guess your name speaks the truth about your motives, eh!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now why would you intentionally lie, b_c?

Because the inquiry called no primary witnesses nor did it invoke recognized "torture" criteria. Arar was returned to his nation of birth according to US law, and he was facing a rap for deserting mandatory military service. Nobody ever said that Syrian prisons were four star hotels.

I guess your name speaks the truth about your motives, eh!

So does yours! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
If Omar has a 'bone to pick' with the US and Canada, whose fault is that?

Let me guess. It's the US's fault. His being with enemy fighters has nothing to do with it. He's blameless. Al Qaeda is blameless. His family is blameless. I guess it's obvious that if "Omar had a 'bone to pick' with the US and Canada," it's all the US's and Canada's fault. Have I got that right? <_<

And now of course it's Obama's fault, too.

While you're doing all your "learning" about this issue, here's something you might want to remember:

Six days before he received the wounds that killed him, Chris [speer] walked into a minefield to rescue two wounded Afghan children. He applied a tourniquet to one child and bandaged the other. Then he stopped a passing military truck to take the wounded children to a U.S. Army field hospital saving their lives. link

That's who someone killed on the day in question. A man who would risk his life to save two Afghan children. The man you are defending, if not directly responsible, was there, according to you, fighting with the enemy.

Edited by American Woman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me guess. It's the US's fault. His being with enemy fighters has nothing to do with it. He's blameless. Al Qaeda is blameless. His family is blameless. I guess it's obvious that if "Omar had a 'bone to pick' with the US and Canada," it's all the US's and Canada's fault. Have I got that right? <_<

And now of course it's Obama's fault, too.

While you're doing all your "learning" about this issue, here's something you might want to remember:

Six days before he received the wounds that killed him, Chris [speer] walked into a minefield to rescue two wounded Afghan children. He applied a tourniquet to one child and bandaged the other. Then he stopped a passing military truck to take the wounded children to a U.S. Army field hospital saving their lives. link

That's who someone killed on the day in question. A man who would risk his life to save two Afghan children. The man you are defending, if not directly responsible, was there, according to you, fighting with the enemy.

The death of any soldier is a tragedy.

So is the imprisonment and torture of an innocent person for political purposes.

I never said the US is solely to blame. In fact, I consider Canada primarily to blame. The US would have sent Khadr home anytime Canada asked. ALL other westerners are gone home. ALL other children are gone. Harper is the problem.

I don't know why Obama denied Khadr his chance to clear his name. Just didn't want the bad publicity, I guess? Irrelevant to me: he would have sent him home if Harper asked, I think.

I see now why you've been so cranky with me. You thought I was blaming the US? No. This is purely a Canadian political issue, imo. Harper is playing with Omar's life to satisfy his nasty hardline core voters.

Perhaps you should keep in mind that this is a forum on Canadian federal politics.

Edited by tango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
I see now why you've been so cranky with me. You thought I was blaming the US? No. This is purely a Canadian political issue, imo. Harper is playing with Omar's life to satisfy his nasty hardline core voters.

My "crankiness" is in reality 'irritation.' Irritation for so many reasons which I won't repeat yet again since you evidently either don't get it, or refuse to get it, because no-- you don't "see" it at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let me see if I understand this correctly.

You see the US as responsible for killing innocent people because the US went to war out of revenge for the innocent lives that were lost here at the hands of terrorists, and that's bad; you 'blame' the US for that. But you 'don't blame' the suspected terrorists for seeking revenge and killing innocent people because they were held, but innocent.

I'm saying that the US government and the oil companies were in talks with the Taliban in the 2001 and when things didn't go the way that the VP and the oil companies wanted they seeked revenge on the Taliban. The Taliban also were told to turn over OBL or be attacked by the time the Taliban decided to do it, the first bomb was dropped. So now we are still in Afghanistan fighting for what? OBL was the purpose of going in and now what is the purpose? How many innocent people are being killed in Afghanistan looking for OBL when the US knows he not there! Oh yeah, the mission changed , the US doesn't care about OBL now! Drive out the Taliban and replace it with a US friendly leader.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest American Woman
I'm saying that the US government and the oil companies were in talks with the Taliban in the 2001 and when things didn't go the way that the VP and the oil companies wanted they seeked revenge on the Taliban. The Taliban also were told to turn over OBL or be attacked by the time the Taliban decided to do it, the first bomb was dropped. So now we are still in Afghanistan fighting for what? OBL was the purpose of going in and now what is the purpose? How many innocent people are being killed in Afghanistan looking for OBL when the US knows he not there! Oh yeah, the mission changed , the US doesn't care about OBL now! Drive out the Taliban and replace it with a US friendly leader.

So apparently you do blame the U.S. for "seeking revenge" for the deaths on 9-11, but you don't blame the suspected terrorists for "seeking revenge" for being held when they were innocent.

So you do blame one side for taking innocent lives, but you don't blame the other side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm saying that the US government and the oil companies were in talks with the Taliban in the 2001 and when things didn't go the way that the VP and the oil companies wanted they seeked revenge on the Taliban. The Taliban also were told to turn over OBL or be attacked by the time the Taliban decided to do it, the first bomb was dropped. So now we are still in Afghanistan fighting for what? OBL was the purpose of going in and now what is the purpose? How many innocent people are being killed in Afghanistan looking for OBL when the US knows he not there! Oh yeah, the mission changed , the US doesn't care about OBL now! Drive out the Taliban and replace it with a US friendly leader.

I find it hard to believe that both groups that are profit driven would spend hundreds of bils of dollars seeking revenge for a project that would not see that amount of profit.... does that make sense to "anyone" ....or do i need to adjust my tinfoil hat again....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The appeal to the supreme court of Canada is coming up-

SCC will hear appeal of Khadr return order

Canada's top court will hear the federal government's appeal of a court ruling that ordered it to seek the repatriation of Omar Khadr, a Canadian citizen who has been held at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for nearly seven years.

---

Seven years in a prison without a full trial? Now look, if he's guilty I'm all for pursuing the law, but to leave people languishing in jail for years without proving their guilt in a proper court, well that just shocks my conscience.

This government is obviously playing politics with the case, trying to delay the inevitable and hoping for another way out. If the case attracts a high level of public interest it will damage the CPC... especially if during an election. Well, that could be a form of justice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The appeal to the supreme court of Canada is coming up-

SCC will hear appeal of Khadr return order

Canada's top court will hear the federal government's appeal of a court ruling that ordered it to seek the repatriation of Omar Khadr, a Canadian citizen who has been held at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, for nearly seven years.

---

Seven years in a prison without a full trial? Now look, if he's guilty I'm all for pursuing the law, but to leave people languishing in jail for years without proving their guilt in a proper court, well that just shocks my conscience.

This government is obviously playing politics with the case, trying to delay the inevitable and hoping for another way out. If the case attracts a high level of public interest it will damage the CPC... especially if during an election. Well, that could be a form of justice.

What would you say if the Supreme Court rules in favour of the government? Would you still accuse them of playing politics.....or would you at least start to think that maybe they were right in making their case? Don't forget, the Federal Court's ruling was 2 to 1 with the dissenting judge offering a strong defence of the government's position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the case attracts a high level of public interest it will damage the CPC...

The comments section to your linked article doesn't support you assertion that the Khadr case will damage the Tories. In fact, the vast majority of those comments show it may be more damaging to the Liberals if they hammer the Conservatives on their handling of the file. The recent conviction of one of the group of 18 and the ongoing trials will keep terrorists and the threats of terrorism in the news, and throughout an election campaign. If I was Ignatieff, I would be very careful the way I approach this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would you say if the Supreme Court rules in favour of the government? Would you still accuse them of playing politics.....or would you at least start to think that maybe they were right in making their case? Don't forget, the Federal Court's ruling was 2 to 1 with the dissenting judge offering a strong defence of the government's position.

I would say, there is no justice in letting a person remain in jail for so long without a proper trial. The concept of justice is become a mockery.

Edited by Sir Bandelot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The comments section to your linked article doesn't support you assertion that the Khadr case will damage the Tories. In fact, the vast majority of those comments show it may be more damaging to the Liberals if they hammer the Conservatives on their handling of the file. The recent conviction of one of the group of 18 and the ongoing trials will keep terrorists and the threats of terrorism in the news, and throughout an election campaign. If I was Ignatieff, I would be very careful the way I approach this one.

I wouldn't say vast majority, but in any case it doesn't matter about the comments section. Most of the comments seem ill informed. Personally I don't think its important to bring him back to Canada, but that he face justice, somewhere, and bring this matter to a conclusion!

Since that hasn't happened in 7 years, it's reasonable to conclude that something is wrong: either there is no case or there is some other legal problem preventing it. My preference would be to have the trial in Guantanamo Bay. But doesn't look like that will happen.

Worst case scenario- that terrorists are returned to their country of origin, without charges being laid, to receive a heros welcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,712
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    nyralucas
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Jeary earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Venandi went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • Gaétan earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • Dictatords earned a badge
      First Post
    • babetteteets earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...