Omar Khdar

DogOnPorch · September 20, 2009

How many "Canadian" MS-13 members will you take into your home? Can the "Canadian" Khadr babysit your kids?

The "Rule of Law" has some catching-up to do.

wulf42 · September 20, 2009

you truly are a simpleton... a paranoid simpleton. A literal translation of your fear-mongering "terrorists dancing in the streets" reference... the question asked of you was to name which groups you would see "dancing in the streets"... which you didn't answer.
how do you sleep with all those terrorists under your bed... in your closets?

And there we have it............Left winger insults after they have been proven wrong time after time

with actual proof with Links....although Waldo has yet to back up ANY of his Lefty ramblings....sorry

but your Liberal ranting's are really getting old.....hey if you want to support an Al Qaeda operative

and his Al Qaeda Loving family thats your business however i have given you factual proof of terror

groups in Canada (that you requested)....and you still deny it......lol!!!

Don t you just hate being proven wrong??

Edited September 20, 2009 by wulf42

wulf42 · September 20, 2009

and since the Canadian Charter of Rights is founded upon the Rule of Law... you then consider both to be "politically correct bull shit". Regardless - in spite of your disrespect for both... you, as a Canadian, as are all Canadians, can expect the Charters rights and the embodiment of those rights into the Rule of Law... to also apply to you. A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian!

Doesn t apply to traitors and AL Qaeda terrorist's..................why can t you get it??

Half of Canada doesn t want this terrorist allowed back into the country!!! He should face

justice in the good ole USA!! not our problem!!

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/689740

Edited September 20, 2009 by wulf42

wulf42 · September 20, 2009

Why thank-you, I will.
(who made this dude king? )

Hey DogOnPorch.......I wonder how much he will support Omar

after he gets recycled back into AL Qaeda and kills again..talk about hard headed........ :lol:

wulf42 · September 20, 2009

you appear to be following in the fine traditions of wulf42... apparently, you (also) can't seem to grasp that lobbying for Khadr's rights to due process does not equate to, as you say, "wanting a known terrorist let loose on our streets in the name of fair play". Wait... do you equate fair play with due process? Well... there you have it then! We are making progress, after all.
as an aside, what relevance does your naming a South American gang, the Mara, have to anything just being discussed... to a possible release of Khadr?

And you can t grasp that fair play and human rights do not apply

to the AL Qaeda enemy that our brave soldiers are fighting everyday

you would put this country and thousands of Canadians in mortal danger

so a known terrorist who killed one of our Allies has rights???

give your head a shake!

waldo · September 21, 2009

and since the Canadian Charter of Rights is founded upon the Rule of Law... you then consider both to be "politically correct bull shit". Regardless - in spite of your disrespect for both... you, as a Canadian, as are all Canadians, can expect the Charters rights and the embodiment of those rights into the Rule of Law... to also apply to you. A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian!

Doesn t apply to traitors and AL Qaeda terrorist's..................why can t you get it??

Half of Canada doesn t want this terrorist allowed back into the country!!! He should face

justice in the good ole USA!! not our problem!!

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/689740

no - you are incorrect - both the Canadian Charter and the Rule of Law apply to all Canadians... evidence rulings favouring Khadr from the Supreme Court, the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeals. Obviously, it is you that doesn't get it.

thanks for the link... stating that more Canadians favour the repatriation of Khadr to Canada to 'face due process' versus those that favour Khadr remaining in the U.S. to face military commission trial. Apparently, you're in the minority position.

waldo · September 21, 2009

you truly are a simpleton... a paranoid simpleton. A literal translation of your fear-mongering "terrorists dancing in the streets" reference... the question asked of you was to name which groups you would see "dancing in the streets"... which you didn't answer.
how do you sleep with all those terrorists under your bed... in your closets?

And there we have it............Left winger insults after they have been proven wrong time after time
with actual proof with Links....although Waldo has yet to back up ANY of his Lefty ramblings....sorry but your Liberal ranting's are really getting old.....hey if you want to support an Al Qaeda operative and his Al Qaeda Loving family thats your business however i have given you factual proof of terror groups in Canada (that you requested)....and you still deny it......lol!!! Don t you just hate being proven wrong??

excellent - more left-wing labeling from the brazenly obtuse. You still haven't answered the request that followed your claim that there would be "groups dancing in the streets" - should due process result in the release of Khadr. At least the PorchDog attempted an answer with his lame suggestions toward Sri Lanka related protestors, supporters of the Israel-Hezzbola prisoner exchange and Mara gang members :lol:

the paramount insults originate from yourself, ad nauseam. A constant prattle throwing accusations of "supporting terrorists/terrorism"... as with this, your latest reply. It's most unfortunate you have no respect for the principles/foundations of Canada - one would think otherwise coming from a "Warrior for Truth", like yourself.

speaking of your proof links (other than your "Warrior for Truth" or other "jihad watch" type links), have you anything else to substantiate your Geneva Convention related claims?

wulf42 · September 21, 2009

excellent - more left-wing labeling from the brazenly obtuse. You still haven't answered the request that followed your claim that there would be "groups dancing in the streets" - should due process result in the release of Khadr. At least the PorchDog attempted an answer with his lame suggestions toward Sri Lanka related protestors, supporters of the Israel-Hezzbola prisoner exchange and Mara gang members
the paramount insults originate from yourself, ad nauseam. A constant prattle throwing accusations of "supporting terrorists/terrorism"... as with this, your latest reply. It's most unfortunate you have no respect for the principles/foundations of Canada - one would think otherwise coming from a "Warrior for Truth", like yourself.

speaking of your proof links (other than your "Warrior for Truth" or other "jihad watch" type links), have you anything else to substantiate your Geneva Convention related claims?

Your question was answered with proof..........if you bothered to read the

information you would have seen many of the groups listed were Islamic

those obviously would be the smiling cheering scumbags to greet the other

smiling scumbag at the airport!! and Jihad Watch....???..lol, i have nevered posted

anything from there!! you have tons of info on active Terrorists groups in Canada

from the CSIS site..but you simply ignored that now didn t you????

See Waldo the problem with your line of thinking is you think a known terrorist

should be brought back just to be set free on the streets until he kills again and gets

recycled back into the AL Qaeda killing machine and then thats when you think we

should react after the fact!..our Government's line of thinking

is to keep a known terrorist from entering Canada at all so that they

can t kill us in the first place and that is why most Canadians support that!

btw - it is my respect for the principles/foundations of Canada that i believe this

piece of Garbage the terrorist should be kept out since he and others like him set

out to destroy the very principles/foundations you say you respect!

Edited September 21, 2009 by wulf42

wyly · September 21, 2009

it is my respect for the principles/foundations of Canada that i believe this
piece of Garbage the terrorist should be kept out since he and others like him set

out to destroy the very principles/foundations you say you respect!

you've demonstrated by your posts that you have no principles and no respect for our laws...you've called for the execution/murder and torture of anyone suspected of wrongdoing without trial claiming it's allowed by the Geneva Convention which it is not...

that you claim to have served in the armed forces must be an embarassment to everyone who has ever served in the armed forces...this should be of concern to the forces that their screening process of recruits is flawed...

wulf42 · September 21, 2009

you've demonstrated by your posts that you have no principles and no respect for our laws...you've called for the execution/murder and torture of anyone suspected of wrongdoing without trial claiming it's allowed by the Geneva Convention which it is not...
that you claim to have served in the armed forces must be an embarassment to everyone who has ever served in the armed forces...this should be of concern to the forces that their screening process of recruits is flawed...

BooHoo............at least i don t want to endanger this country by allowing

killers to be set free and terrorize again!! people like you have

have turned this country into a haven for terrorist and Canada into a Laughing stock!

You support rights for a terrorist group that plots against us and our Allies...as far

as the armed forces goes don t waste my time or anyone else pretending you speak

for soldiers because i assure you do not! Army guy feels the same that this filth

should not be brought back to Canada...and i won t repeat on here what most soldiers

i have talked to think about Omar! you are the embarassment you

would put the good of one over the good of thousands just to protect an Al Qaeda member's

rights!!!.........revolting to say the least! I could careless what they do to those creatures

in Gitmo......Al Qaeda as far as i am concerned are not even human being's! you want him to

have a trial fine let the Americans do it with a military tribunal!

Edited September 21, 2009 by wulf42

wulf42 · September 21, 2009

no - you are incorrect - both the Canadian Charter and the Rule of Law apply to all Canadians... evidence rulings favouring Khadr from the Supreme Court, the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeals. Obviously, it is you that doesn't get it.
thanks for the link... stating that more Canadians favour the repatriation of Khadr to Canada to 'face due process' versus those that favour Khadr remaining in the U.S. to face military commission trial. Apparently, you're in the minority position.

according to the article it split right down the middle but twist it

as you see fit...........you will anyway!

waldo · September 21, 2009

btw - it is my respect for the principles/foundations of Canada that i believe this piece of Garbage the terrorist should be kept out since he and others like him set out to destroy the very principles/foundations you say you respect!
you've demonstrated by your posts that you have no principles and no respect for our laws...you've called for the execution/murder and torture of anyone suspected of wrongdoing without trial claiming it's allowed by the Geneva Convention which it is not...
that you claim to have served in the armed forces must be an embarrassment to everyone who has ever served in the armed forces...this should be of concern to the forces that their screening process of recruits is flawed...

OohhhhRahhhhhh!!!

waldo · September 21, 2009

no - you are incorrect - both the Canadian Charter and the Rule of Law apply to all Canadians... evidence rulings favouring Khadr from the Supreme Court, the Federal Court and the Federal Court of Appeals. Obviously, it is you that doesn't get it.
thanks for the link... stating that more Canadians favour the repatriation of Khadr to Canada to 'face due process' versus those that favour Khadr remaining in the U.S. to face military commission trial. Apparently, you're in the minority position.

according to the article it split right down the middle but twist it as you see fit...........you will anyway!

the only twisting is you... in the wind! From your linked article:

Conducted by Angus Reid Strategies for the Toronto Star, the survey shows 42 per cent of Canadians believe Khadr should be brought back to face "due process under Canadian law." That's up from 37 per cent of Canadians more than a year ago.
Almost an equal amount, 40 per cent, think Khadr should be left to face trial by military commission at Guantanamo Bay.

oh my! ... up 5% from a year ago - you "Warriors For Truth" might need a new battle plan :lol:

wulf42 · September 21, 2009

the only twisting is you... in the wind! From your linked article:
oh my! ... up 5% from a year ago - you "Warriors For Truth" might need a new battle plan

Grasping at straws now aren t we??.....lol

a whole 5 % funny though if i show you a poll that say

Conservatives are out in front (which they are)...then all of a sudden it's

" polls don t mean a thing" again twist it any ole way you

want to fit your argument! Omar isn t coming back here

anytime soon even if his case was heard he'll sit in Gitmo

or another U.S. prison for years before anything happens

by then another U.S. president will take over and Omar

still won t be going anywhere!...Face it he's done like dinner

and good riddance!

waldo · September 21, 2009

Grasping at straws now aren t we??.....lol
a whole 5 % funny though if i show you a poll that say

Conservatives are out in front (which they are)...then all of a sudden it's

" polls don t mean a thing" again twist it any ole way you

want to fit your argument! Omar isn t coming back here

anytime soon even if his case was heard he'll sit in Gitmo

or another U.S. prison for years before anything happens

by then another U.S. president will take over and Omar

still won t be going anywhere!...Face it he's done like dinner

and good riddance!

hey buddy - if you don't like the particulars stated within the link you put up, perhaps you should either read the actual article you're providing a link to... or quit your twisting (whining)!

wulf42 · September 21, 2009

hey buddy - if you don't like the particulars stated within the link you put up, perhaps you should either read the actual article you're providing a link to... or quit your twisting (whining)!

Yeah whatever!...lets just agree to disagree and see what happens

in the courts with little ole Omar.

waldo · September 21, 2009

Yeah whatever!...lets just agree to disagree and see what happens
in the courts with little ole Omar.

I accept your capitulation :lol:

wulf42 · September 21, 2009

I accept your capitulation

:lol: ...well we could dragged this out for weeks but i doubt either one of us

will budge on our views!

waldo · September 21, 2009

...well we could dragged this out for weeks but i doubt either one of us
will budge on our views!

clearly, your resolve was softening... you were tiring... and we hadn't even moved into Defcon3. I'm also a might ticked you wouldn't bite over that Geneva Convention nonsense... oh wait, we're winding down, right (for now... at least until, oh... tomorrow, perhaps)

wulf42 · September 21, 2009

clearly, your resolve was softening... you were tiring... and we hadn't even moved into Defcon3. I'm also a might ticked you wouldn't bite over that Geneva Convention nonsense... oh wait, we're winding down, right (for now... at least until, oh... tomorrow, perhaps)

I respect your views and of course you are entitled to them.......maybe its the wine

tonight not sure.. :rolleyes: but i just think Omar is a risk! if i thought he would really face

justice here i would be all for it...but given our justice system track record i fear

we would only embolden the terror networks more...but as i say we will see what happens.

Edited September 21, 2009 by wulf42

DogOnPorch · September 22, 2009

I respect your views and of course you are entitled to them.......maybe its the wine
tonight not sure.. but i just think Omar is a risk! if i thought he would really face

justice here i would be all for it...but given our justice system track record i fear

we would only embolden the terror networks more...but as i say we will see what happens.

What Omar can expect if tried in Canada...a slap on the wrist.

'Toronto 18' member pleads guilty:
...Khalid is among 17 who were charged with several offences. The charges were later stayed or dropped against some of the accused.

Nishanthan Yogakrishnan, a minor at the time of his arrest, was tried under youth justice laws and convicted in September 2008 of conspiring to bomb several targets. He was the first person convicted under Canada's terrorism laws.

The presiding judge found he had continued his activity with the group past his 18th birthday, so he was sentenced as an adult in May 2009, getting a 2½ year prison term. The judge then freed him, granting him credit for time already spent in custody.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/200...ty-plea235.html

Two and a half years for plotting to kill Canadians...freed due to time served.

Goat Boy© · September 22, 2009

This thread has been some journey, admittedly I've only gotten to page 24. Still, I'd like to offer a few comments:

This is something of an absolute un-winnable situation I believe;

-OK cannot win because his life will never, ever, be normal again.

-Those seeking justice cannot win because it has already failed, and based on the circumstantial evidence, I don't believe it can ever be unequivocally proven that OK is guilty or innocent.

I believe that Canada has zero moral or ethical obligation to defend this man. He is not a part of Canada beyond formal paperwork. That being said, I think that Canada has a legal obligation to do so. An interesting point raised earlier about how the SC should not be able to dictate foreign policy to the elected government.

After some thought, I would offer; in a constitutional government, the elected government is answerable to the constitution, and it is the SCC's role to interpret said constitution. The PM may be the PM, but he is still a Canadian and as answerable to constitution as the rest of us. I am not happy with the way the constitution was patriated, but it is what it is, and it is there for a reason.

Many of those who advocate for the death penalty and other such draconian punishment for OK, are also advocating for the equal treatment of all people regardless of nationality, skin color, religion, tax bracket etc. I personally see the political right as more tolerant domestically, with the left being more divisive in terms of special interest group, minority, etc. If you feel that a pedophile should be fed through a meat grinder after being convicted, does OK not deserve the same right to a trial as any other Canadian? We may not be happy with what the law says, but it is the law, and the onus is on us to manage and change it to suit our wishes.

We as Canadians carry a burden of responsibility, to ensure that our government & laws are arranged in a responsible and acceptable manner. If our laws or constitution fail to account for all possible circumstances, then the onus is on us as citizens to correct it. Something I personally think Canadian's fail miserably at, but that is another thread altogether. The important thing is, the law stands above any elected government. This is why we deal with minimalist government corruption everywhere, but not rampant runaway government corruption.

Should OK be released and go on to commit a terrorist act, I believe the responsibility is with us as Canadians to amend the law in such a fashion to prevent it from happening again in the future. Such action is what keeps Canada a successful state, and in failure to do so, I see little difference between that and NATO presence in Afghanistan, dropping bombs, as a result of their own inability to control their own citizens.

What spawned modern terrorism was not relgion - what spawned it was one set of prosperous and spoiled people - starving the hell out of another group. Suddenly the hungry man stands up and demands food - suddenly he is a terrorist. This all started because of American foreign policy - a brutal policy that has been in place for 75 years - one of usery - cruelty - elitism - greed - dominance and spiritual blindness - when Madame Albright commented on the effects of sanctions against Iraq in the early days - when it was reported that about 30 thousand Iraq children died because of the blockade of drugs needed to sustain good health....and she said this ---"it was worth it" - no wonder they seek to kill this type of freak and all they represent. Khdar - is not a terrorist - The f***ing bank that sends off credit cards to our youth...and enslaving them in debt for a life time - that's terrible - that is terrorism..how come no one is pissed off at these slave masters?

This post deserves a thread of it's own. I absolutely agree, 100%.

Modern terrorism is a result of socio-economical disparity.

Certainly, their may well be fundamental extremist religious zealots, every religion has them. However, the troops do not fit in this category. These people come from a result of a failed existence, indoctrinated into nonsense without ever having had a chance to see an alternative. Were Afghanistan to be a successful nation like Canada, and these people had the opportunity to attend school, and not have to grow drugs to feed their families, do we really think they will turn to fundamental Islam?

Even if the above is not true, basic needs being addressed, common sense and education beat out religion every time. One of the reasons for the gradual religious downfall in the west. You can remove Islam from the equation, but you're still going to see angry people who have to choose between heating their house or eating. People who cannot even have basic needs of survival, so called 'guaranteed rights' in Canada met, so that we in the west can continue to waste our entire disposable incomes, and then proceed into credit on things like HD televisions, Iphone's & a new car every two years.

You can protest and try and correct the problems attached to Islam, you can protest and try to end war, but all it is, is trying to correct the result of the problem, not the problem itself.

If you take every single resource on the block, and force your neighbors to work for you, in exchange for an almost but not quite human existence, one should not be surprised if a revolution shows up.

Lengthy and rantish, but my $.02

*************

Army Guy: Respect.

Several friends and family in the various services in both North American countries. Some didn't get to come home. Hope you fare well.

Regardless of what you are doing out their, why, or who sent you, the fact that you sir, are willing to lay your life on the line for a cause beyond yourself, regardless of what end it may be. That puts you a cut above the rest of us in my books.

It pains me to see some of the comments from our more radical activists about the doings of our armed forces.

Army Guy · September 22, 2009

jusitice ruled as it should and I applaud that and take pride in that, no one should be above the law... disbanding the regiment may seem harsh to you and I can understand that but it sends a message, the rule of law is supreme and loyalty to that is more important than anything...

Justice had nothing to do with the disbandment of the CAR, justice was served when those soldiers where charged in a court of law, where found guilty and sentenced, including those found guilty of not doing anything ....that was justice...the decision to disband the Regt was made to score political pionts, nothing more...

I'm curious to know what message was sent....or what message did you recieve....As for the loyality to the rule of law, a soldier is responasable to 2 layers of law, civil law, military law, and to top all of that off the code of conduct within the Dept of National Defense. So i'm sure every soldier is well aware of where the rule of law stands in the grand sceme of things.

I'm just not sure how collective punishment fits into this so called rule of law, because it's not in any Canadian law, or inter national law, or for that matter the Genva convention...in fact all of the above laws strictly state that collective punsihment is indeed unlawful....so much for that rule of law being supreme, but i guess that only go's when it seems polictically acceptable to do so....so one would have to ask are you really for the rule of law or are you for whats political acceptable ?

Keepitsimple · September 22, 2009

Justice had nothing to do with the disbandment of the CAR, justice was served when those soldiers where charged in a court of law, where found guilty and sentenced, including those found guilty of not doing anything ....that was justice...the decision to disband the Regt was made to score political pionts, nothing more...
I'm curious to know what message was sent....or what message did you recieve....As for the loyality to the rule of law, a soldier is responasable to 2 layers of law, civil law, military law, and to top all of that off the code of conduct within the Dept of National Defense. So i'm sure every soldier is well aware of where the rule of law stands in the grand sceme of things.

I'm just not sure how collective punishment fits into this so called rule of law, because it's not in any Canadian law, or inter national law, or for that matter the Genva convention...in fact all of the above laws strictly state that collective punsihment is indeed unlawful....so much for that rule of law being supreme, but i guess that only go's when it seems polictically acceptable to do so....so one would have to ask are you really for the rule of law or are you for whats political acceptable ?

Well said. Thank you.