Justice Served!

[PocketRocket]

Speaks volumes for not getting involved in the internal troubles of nations.

That's possibly the smartest thing that's been posted to this thread to date.

[Moonlight Graham]

Wave you guys seen the new pic of what Omar looks like now? He looks so much different, all grown up. Looks like a man. By the time this whole court thing is settled he'll be growing grey hairs!

[bush_cheney2004]

My purpose in mentioning the, "With us or agin' us" was not to do with Bush's statement to other nations, it was more in regards to the way many of his sycophants took up the same cry when dealing with anyone who disagreed with the war in Iraq. That war, as we are all now aware, was based on lies.

No, the invasion of Iraq was based on existing US policy, Public Law, violations of Gulf War surrender instruments, and a Congressional war resolution with yes and no votes....no "traitors" necessary.

I agree to some extent. Yes, we should all be pitching in to help eliminate, or at least reduce, terrorism.

But for Bush to say what he said, well, the man was a bloody lying hypocrite. If he was so intent on the "war on terror", why didn't he go after Bin-Laden and Afghanistan first???

He did....please check the calender for 2001 vs. 2003.

Why Iraq??? WMD's??? That's what Bush said, but that was a crock, as were so many of his follow-up stories about why the USA was there.

The only thing Bush really accomplished in Iraq, was to leave a power vacuum. Hussein HATED Bin-Laden and AlQaeda. By removing him, Bush effectively opened the door to Iraq to terrorists of all stripes.

Yes, Hussein was a murderous ass, but as long as he was in Iraq, AlQaeda treaded very carefully in that area as they knew that he'd put them to the knife with no provocation.

All these things considered, Bush's words ring hollow.

No, Saddam Hussein's regime is gone. In Iraq....Canada was irrelevant...so please relax.

Edited November 16, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

[PocketRocket]

Nonsense. The West didn't interfere enough. Islamic terrorism is the result of allowing them to operate naturally. The West never suppressed any democratic of freedom movements. The West simply engaged in trade with dictatorships that supplied an indispensable resource - oil.

Didn't interfere enough??? You're kidding, right???

Lets keep it to the 20th century.

1918 with Britain and France divide the Middle-East between them in the Sykes-Picot Agreement.

At the same time British promised the international Zionist movement support in creating a Jewish homeland in Palestine. This was the Balfour Declaration.

Around the same time, Arabs founded an independent state in Damascus.

But Britain and France put down this new state and divide the territory as they see fit.

I guess it didn't occur to either Britain or France that the people already living there might not agree with having their lands divided up this way, but hey, that's just the start. We haven't even reached 1920 yet. Onward....

1919, when Saad Zaghlul, later to become Prime Minister of Egypt, led mass demonstrations against the British colonial powers there. In repressing these demonstrations the Brits killed over 800 people.

Syria and Lebanon became French protectorates.

Britain took over in Iraq and Palestine.

Britain also supports Ibn Saud in taking over most of the Arabian Peninsula to found Saudi Arabia.

Enough meddling by the west for you yet??? No??? Okay, there's plenty more....

In 1920, Syrian and Iraq both revolted against their respective occupying nations, France and Britain. Both revolts were violently put down.

Independent Kingdom of Egypt was created in 1924. It was a neutral country, but that didn't stop the Brits from occupying it during WWII.

1941, Brits invade Iraq.....again. Syria and Lebanon are invaded by a combination of Allied forces.

No wonder we're all so popular over there.

So after WWII was done and dusted, several of these countries, tired of being tossed about by the western nations, were quite pleased to receive some support from Russia. Of course the USA could not stand by and watch the USSR developing friends in the M.E., and so started courting friends of her own. Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iran and the Persian Gulf emirates were among these new playmates. Of course the fact that their rulers were despots, murderers, liars etc etc etc, didn't matter then. It was quite alright to give money, weapons and ammunition to such countries so they could kill other Middle-Easterners who were getting THEIR arms and ammunition from the USSR.

In the 1970's the worm started to turn. America, who had become quite good bedfellows with Saudi Arabia, had been walking a tightrope because as well as wooing the Saudi's, the USA was also supporting Israel in her ongoing struggle in the M.E.

Tough job, playing both ends against the middle......

Anyway, the Palestine Liberation Organization arose, and started a violent campaign against Israel and her supporters in the west, including America. Iran, Iraq, Syria and Libya all provided varying degrees of support to the PLO.

Interesting in that this is the point where weapons provided by the USA are now beginning to be use AGAINST the USA and her M.E. interests.

This kind of sparring between USSR and USA continued on until the fall of the USSR. I'm sure we're all aware of the Iran-Contra scandal, the weapons provided to Saddam, and so many more little incidents of western nations trying to turn one dictator against another to further the interests of the western nations in this area.

Is it any wonder that many of the people in this Godforsaken part of the world have a serious hate-on for the west???

[PocketRocket]

My purpose in mentioning the, "With us or agin' us" was not to do with Bush's statement to other nations, it was more in regards to the way many of his sycophants took up the same cry when dealing with anyone who disagreed with the war in Iraq. That war, as we are all now aware, was based on lies.

No, the invasion of Iraq was based on existing US policy, Public Law, violations of Gulf War surrender instruments, and a Congressional war resolution with yes and no votes....no "traitors" necessary.

Actually, what I was referring to was the vilification by such media personalities as Anne Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and many others, along with many MANY people online who continued with the "You're a treasonous traitor" mantra to/about anyone who questioned Bush or his motives or plans for Iraq.

And sorry, my memory may not be all that great, but it ain't so bad that I do not recall

the battles in forums back at that time regarding Bush, Saddam, and the quest for WMD's. If you honestly believe Bush was on the up-and-up, feel free.

He did....please check the calender for 2001 vs. 2003.

You know what, I believe you're right. My mistake, probably due to not enough coffee . Thanks for the correction.

No, Saddam Hussein's regime is gone. In Iraq....Canada was irrelevant...so please relax.

Irrelevant only in that we refused to send troops there. Very relevant in that it continues a legacy of meddling in the internal affairs of other nations. It also has now provided a safe haven for Al Qaida and other terrorist groups where there was none before.

And yes, I am very relaxed, but I thank you for your concern

Good post, and thanks again for the correction.

[capricorn]

Omar Khadr supporters rallied across the country to press for his return to Canada.

Members of a group of girls and women, ranging in age from 11 to 23 years old -- none of whom wanted to be named -- said youth particularly are interested in this case because, given Khadr's age, they can relate.

"We all kind of relate to him," said one. "It doesn't matter your race or religion. He was Canadian first and there's still no justice for him."

Added an 11-year-old: "When Omar was getting tortured, we were all getting tortured."

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2009/11/16/11759791-sun.html

Sounds like the 11 year old is being groomed to head Amnesty International. Gotta shape them while they're young.

[noahbody]

Added an 11-year-old: "When Omar was getting tortured, we were all getting tortured."

Gee, i wonder if that line was fed to him. He probably asks to be sleep deprived every night.

[bush_cheney2004]

Actually, what I was referring to was the vilification by such media personalities as Anne Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and many others, along with many MANY people online who continued with the "You're a treasonous traitor" mantra to/about anyone who questioned Bush or his motives or plans for Iraq.

So what? It was their right to do so. The Dixie Chicks had a go at it as well, made their choices, and paid the price. It's a free country!

Irrelevant only in that we refused to send troops there. Very relevant in that it continues a legacy of meddling in the internal affairs of other nations. It also has now provided a safe haven for Al Qaida and other terrorist groups where there was none before.

No...much more irrelevant than that....Canada had nothing to give to the Iraq coalition, already being tapped out just to deploy under equipped forces to Afghanistan. PM Chretien enjoyed his perch on such a righteous fence.

[PocketRocket]

So what? It was their right to do so. The Dixie Chicks had a go at it as well, made their choices, and paid the price. It's a free country!

It is absolutely their right to do so, you are correct. But it does not make THEM right.

But you missed the point of my initial post. The reason I brought it up in the first place was because one member on this board stated, about another member, something to the effect of "Anyone who questions whether someone who is there is a terrorist, is actually a terrorist supporter himself and an enemy". That was what my initial comment was addressing.

Just because someone offers a dissenting opinion does NOT make them a traitor.

Simply questioning the guilt of a man who has not yet had his day in court does not constitute treason, and spouting such nonsense only further lowers the tone on this message board.

[bush_cheney2004]

It is absolutely their right to do so, you are correct. But it does not make THEM right.

They don't have to be "right" to participate in discourse and prevail over an opponent.

But you missed the point of my initial post. The reason I brought it up in the first place was because one member on this board stated, about another member, something to the effect of "Anyone who questions whether someone who is there is a terrorist, is actually a terrorist supporter himself and an enemy". That was what my initial comment was addressing.

Again, such an opinion would be subject to counter arguments, but would still stand.

Just because someone offers a dissenting opinion does NOT make them a traitor.

Traitors come in many flavors...fortunately, very few are ever convicted. Such political rhetoric and labels are part of the game.

Simply questioning the guilt of a man who has not yet had his day in court does not constitute treason, and spouting such nonsense only further lowers the tone on this message board.

Lighten up Francis....nobody here is going to replace William F. Buckley anytime soon.

[eyeball]

I'm sure you prefer Obama's initial reaction to the Fort Hood massacre when he said the American people should "not jump to conclusions". Yet, he fingered Hasan as the perp even before all the facts were known and a trial held.

I've pretty much learned not to attach much preference to anything Obama say's anymore. He said he would shut down Guantanamo within a year and appeared poised to reverse many of the worst policies his predecessor put in place.

Pffft.

Obama is so out of tune with Americans, he doesn't need an infected hanky to spread disillusionment.

No kidding.

[bush_cheney2004]

I've pretty much learned not to attach much preference to anything Obama say's anymore. He said he would shut down Guantanamo within a year and appeared poised to reverse many of the worst policies his predecessor put in place.

Why would you attach a preference either way....Obama is the president of a foreign nation.

[eyeball]

Why would you attach a preference either way....Obama is the president of a foreign nation.

Because the most powerful nation on Earth has an influence that is felt everywhere. What the US does in the world matters, a lot.

[bush_cheney2004]

Because the most powerful nation on Earth has an influence that is felt everywhere. What the US does in the world matters, a lot.

But by your own admission, such preferences are misplaced.

[wulf42]

Looks like despite the wrangling going on in Canada the U.S. military is going to

put him on trial anyway........good! Proscute him then hang him, the sooner the better! Obviously Harper is making the right choice and letting the Americans

deal with him and keep Canada out of it.......Omar lost any right's as a "Canadian"

went he joined the Taliban.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/khadr-to-stand-trial-at-military-tribunal/article1363459/

http://mcgilldaily.com/articles/22703

Edited November 17, 2009 by wulf42

[Gabriel]

Hey PocketRocket,

I really have no interest in scouring the CBC and other Canada websites for the evidence of this case. I must say, though, if you have reservations about this young terrorist's guilt then you've got problem. In my view, the case is closed by way of him simply living among the enemy and being born into a terrorist family. You're being dishonest (or wilfully ignorant, or ridiculously naive) in your attempts to look for possibilities that Omar might not be guilty of supporting our enemies in their murders and attacks of coalition soldiers. Again, in all seriousness, do you think this kid was in Afghanistan on some sort of nature retreat? What makes you think it was against his will - he's been a terrorist since he was conceived - look at his family!

lastly, with respect to your attempts to rewrite and misrepresent history, that is a subject I absolutely have no interest in engaging you with online. At least not at this time. To somehow suggest that the Middle East is a product of Western influence is absurd. It is as anti-Western as you can get. Western colonialism did very little (arguably nothing at all) to influence the current state of Middle Eastern culture (repressive, racism, hate-filled, backward, and barbaric). The Middle East would have been much better off today had there been a much stronger integration of Western modernity into the prevailing culture during the West's colonization of the area, i.e. like Algeria or India. What we're seeing today in the Middle East with respect to backwards culture (I'm not afraid to call it like it is!) is entirely a product of what's been there for a very long time. I can assure you that you've got a lot to learn about Middle Eastern history if you're one of those folks that somehow thinks the West is to blame for the ME's current state of affairs. Like I said, the West didn't engage the ME *nearly* enough.

[Gabriel]

Looks like despite the wrangling going on in Canada the U.S. military is going to

put him on trial anyway........good! Proscute him then hang him, the sooner the better! Obviously Harper is making the right choice and letting the Americans

deal with him and keep Canada out of it.......Omar lost any right's as a "Canadian"

went he joined the Taliban.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/khadr-to-stand-trial-at-military-tribunal/article1363459/

http://mcgilldaily.com/articles/22703

Thanks for the links, wulf42. Despite how sickeningly left-wing the two articles were written (both articles supporting the repatriation of this terrorist, and portraying him as a victim, and the second article lying about Omar being mistreated), the bottom line is good news - so far, this animal is one step closer to getting the justice he deserves.

[waldo]

Thanks for the links, wulf42. Despite how sickeningly left-wing the two articles were written (both articles supporting the repatriation of this terrorist, and portraying him as a victim, and the second article lying about Omar being mistreated), the bottom line is good news - so far, this animal is one step closer to getting the justice he deserves.

Selective reading consistency on display... nothing new here... recycled news per the original OP.

If Canada's high court rules against the Harper government, the Obama administration has hinted it might revisit the case.

"We'll look at the Khadr matter," (U.S. Attorney-General) Holder said, "and we will, as that case proceeds [in Canada], see how it should be ultimately treated."

But... at last... we have an insider with authoritative qualification to finally dispel all those suggestions of Khadr mistreatment... once and for all. Gabriel, can you expound further - ideally providing citations to counter what is clearly a gross misinformation campaign concerning detainees/Khadr, being put forward by such groups as Human Rights Watch and the Red Cross. Thanks in advance!

He was 15 years old at the time of arrest, making him a minor under Canadian and international law. Khadr has been subjected to crude interrogation methods: waterboarding, sleep deprivation, and sexual humiliation at Guantánamo.

[wulf42]

Thanks for the links, wulf42. Despite how sickeningly left-wing the two articles were written (both articles supporting the repatriation of this terrorist, and portraying him as a victim, and the second article lying about Omar being mistreated), the bottom line is good news - so far, this animal is one step closer to getting the justice he deserves.

Agreed! He will never see Canada again.......heard on the news even if the court orders repatriation it is very unlikely it would happen, this dirtbag is done like dinner.

Edited November 17, 2009 by wulf42

[eyeball]

But by your own admission, such preferences are misplaced.

So... I said I didn't attach much importance to my preference, because as you noted, it was misplaced.

[wulf42]

Selective reading consistency on display... nothing new here... recycled news per the original OP.

But... at last... we have an insider with authoritative qualification to finally dispel all those suggestions of Khadr mistreatment... once and for all. Gabriel, can you expound further - ideally providing citations to counter what is clearly a gross misinformation campaign concerning detainees/Khadr, being put forward by such groups as Human Rights Watch and the Red Cross. Thanks in advance!

Who cares if they did mistreat him? He is a friggin terrorist........the only people in the world that care what happens to this animals is the loonie lefties and other terrorist's...he should have been shot dead when they caught him.

Edited November 17, 2009 by wulf42

[eyeball]

In my view, the case is closed by way of him simply living among the enemy and being born into a terrorist family.

I have this image of some terrorist justifying their actions by saying much the same thing about their victims. Its their own fault for living amongst the enemy and being born into a meddlesome interfering nation etc.

Its easy to shrug off collateral damage. People do it all the time. Its not the fault of soldier who kills a kid, or a fighter pilot who bombs a village, or a government that props up a murdering dictator...its the victims fault.

This puts terrorism and counter-terrorism on the exact same footing.

[wulf42]

I have this image of some terrorist justifying their actions by saying much the same thing about their victims. Its their own fault for living amongst the enemy and being born into a meddlesome interfering nation etc.

Its easy to shrug off collateral damage. People do it all the time. Its not the fault of soldier who kills a kid, or a fighter pilot who bombs a village, or a government that props up a murdering dictator...its the victims fault.

This puts terrorism and counter-terrorism on the exact same footing.

I can t believe how you come up with excuses to defend these filthy animals...it is really disturbing to say the least, to say counter-terrorism is on the same footing as terrorism?? come man give your head a shake.

Edited November 18, 2009 by wulf42

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I can t believe how you come up with excuses to defend these filthy animals...it is really disturbing to say the least, to say counter-terrorism is on the same footing as terrorism?? come man give your head a shake.

FOOLS !

Can you not see that the intent of the vile acts were to change our way of life! Can you not see that THEY have been victorious in that effort and that with all the might of our society we have FAILED to prevent that change!

This person was never tried in a court of law. This person as a citizen of this nation has had that right since birth. This citizen is innocent until proven guilty.

I for one believe him to be guilty, but that has not been proven to me and until it has he is entitled to the protection of the law. If the law is not obeyed by the governments then there is no point in the law, the purpose of society is in question and the legitimacy of government becomes a moot point. We will have been DEFEATED by the original purpose and terrorism shall reign all of the world.

[wulf42]

This person was never tried in a court of law. This person as a citizen of this nation has had that right since birth. This citizen is innocent until proven guilty.

I for one believe him to be guilty, but that has not been proven to me and until it has he is entitled to the protection of the law.

Right....which is why he is going on trial in the U.S.! Why the heck would the U.S.A. hand him over to us when they know damn well Canada's ridiculous laws will let him walk away which will inspire the terrorist's even more ...they (terrorist's) already think Canada is a joke cause they know there is no real threat to them here. Omar was caught by American's troops, killed and American Medic of all things, caught fighting along side the hated enemy.He is not our problem, he left Canada to go fight a foreign country which is our Ally in Nato! He is completely an American problem, his right's as a Canadian no longer are valid when he left Canada to be a terrorist.

Canada owes this garbage nothing! he is no longer our concern, let the Americans put him on trial and if found guilty hang or shoot the filth...problem solved, cased closed...i don t see the problem. Here is a good article more or less describing how passive and naive Canadians are against terrorism.

http://www.nationalpost.com/related/links/story.html?id=2174994

Edited November 18, 2009 by wulf42