Army Guy Posted January 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 maple_leafs182 Are you sure it's worth it, who are you really fighting for, Canadians or the Canadian government? Every been to Afghanistan ? ever meet anyone from Afghanistan ? Have you read anything about Afghanistan in relation to thier history, culture, people....YA i think it's worth it... Who are we really fighting for, Both...But what your really trying to say is i can't be fighting for Canadians because a large majority do not believe in the mission , would that be correct.... And yet lets go back in time to the start of the mission, the majority of Canadians did support the mission, in fact thousands where at the airport to wave good bye to our combat troops, the same troops that had very specific orders from our government "we where to close with and destroy the enemy", I'll translate that for you, Canada was sending combat troops to go over to Afghanistan and send those little heathen bastards to thier heathen gods, via the use of superior firepower, and Canadian fighting sprite...And the PPCLI did just that, infact they did so well the US government recogized there efforts by awarding medals and citations....And the majority of Canadians cheered....clapped...and pionted those men are our troops, thier Canadians.... From that day forward we've been in combat, we've been doing what we where told to do, what the majority of Canadians wanted us to do.... Fast track to today...The majority of Canadians no longer support the mission, they want our troops home, but thats where it all stops just words in some poll, or some media article or some forum...and while you are entilted to your opinion, you've got a lot of balls to ask me who i'am fighting for... I'm fighting for Canadians, the same Canadians that set up this mission, who agreed that it was an honourable one, worth our time, and effort. And that will continue until the Majority of Canadian get off thier asses and exericise some of their democratic rights and do something about it. which i pretty sure they won't...so they have to suck up what our government dishes out...with our military stuck in the middle... We have to look at what motivates a terrorist to be a terrorist. Why do they want to hurt Americans or Canadians or whoever.We should be listening to what the terrorist are saying, they usually say its because of our foreign policy, we are over their bombing and starting wars. Do we not expect retaliation? Because they want the right to impose thier ways and rule on others freely...without outside interference...They are extremists...willing to bring on more harm to thier own people than ours...The Taliban have killed more of thier own citizens than they have NATO troops...In fact most of thier targets are thier own people.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 My posts are being heavily edited by a third party to switch words around and insert typos. Not to derail this conversation but.... what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 Another update to the Toronto 18, this man recieved a 7 1/2 year sentence and will be free to walk the very streets and cities he threaten to blow up this THURSDAY...He also recieved the very generous two for one deal. But hey if it's worth anything he says he's sorry, and would like to become an engineer.. My linknews.globaltv.com/world Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 Here is another story of a known terrorist here in Canada. seems he's been refused the right to become a lawyer, inspired by the lawyers that represented him during his bout with the law... This guy has balls made of iron, he has entered Canada under a false name, has been ordered to be deported, and still has time to ask the courts of this country if he can be a lawyer...Thats our justice system at work... mean while thousands of EX Canadian soldiers have to take to our justice system to fight for meager pensions awarded to them because they have been disabled in the service of this country....sounds alittle ironic does it not.... My linkwww.theglobeandmail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 (edited) I'll admit, i think he's guilty, but that was not intent of this post. Rather than piont out that this trail has set a precedence for sentencing, If he is found guilty, then there is a good chance he will be released a free man, for time already served... As for the evidence i've said this a thousand times, it is almost impossable to have the same standards of evidence on the battlefield , as we have here in Canada, where crime scenes are cordoned off, specialist brought in to collect and process evidence....on the battlefield your lucky to get a few pictures, gathering up evidence, is not a priority. Security, and living to fight another day is...Failing to take into account these will be a mistake for our justice system here.... well we are lucky enough in this case to have a few of photos of the crime scene...hereis picture of Khadr wounded he was found accidently when one of the americans realized he was standing on him, testimony says his heart was visibly beating you have battlefield experience would you say these wounds are severe? how far could think you go with this type of injury... here is are two more photos of where Khadr was found buried face down under the debris of a house....beside him is the body of an adult Taliban or AQ... now with your experience tell me if the pictures jive with the accusations?...it is claimed he threw a grenade and was then shot...tell me if honestly believe that a fifteen yr old kid has the strength with the severity of wounds he has to bury himself under the debris of the while face down???...anyone being able to move after those injuries is difficult enough to imagine, that he could bury himself while face down is impossible...if anyone threw a grenade the obvious suspect is the man laying next to him... Edited January 21, 2010 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 The fact no terrorist act occured is one of them, well if I planned to murder an innocent person does this make me liable to prison. If you planned a murder on an innocent, that is premeditated and well, go directly to jail and stay there. It wasn't terrorism, no terrorist act occured! You might want to understand the definition of terrorism. Terrorism is not the act itself, but stating that you will commit the act. It is the threat of the attack that is terrorism. To Army Guy - Loading your comrades onto the plane and draping the flag over the coffin, to me that would be one of the hardest things to go through and to understand. No matter the reason for the war, you have my condolences. Make it back in one piece. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 21, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 well we are lucky enough in this case to have a few of photos of the crime scene...hereis picture of Khadr wounded he was found accidently when one of the americans realized he was standing on him, testimony says his heart was visibly beating you have battlefield experience would you say these wounds are severe? how far could think you go with this type of injury...here is are two more photos of where Khadr was found buried face down under the debris of a house....beside him is the body of an adult Taliban or AQ... now with your experience tell me if the pictures jive with the accusations?...it is claimed he threw a grenade and was then shot...tell me if honestly believe that a fifteen yr old kid has the strength with the severity of wounds he has to bury himself under the debris of the while face down???...anyone being able to move after those injuries is difficult enough to imagine, that he could bury himself while face down is impossible...if anyone threw a grenade the obvious suspect is the man laying next to him... I'll answer your questions honestly, the wounds are severe life threatening and if not treated deadly. Could he have moved, I'd say yes depending on the indiv, enough to buring himself i could not know 100%. remember the young MCPL medic, how has lost both his legs in that IED incident that claimed the the diplomat, not only did he trat himself, but he manged to crawl and treat serveral of his buddies as well, all this with missing a leg and the other hanging but some tissue...so it is possiable , but i can not say 100% about Khadr condition or abilities... now with your experience tell me if the pictures jive with the accusations?...it is claimed he threw a grenade and was then shot...tell me if honestly believe that a fifteen yr old kid has the strength with the severity of wounds he has to bury himself under the debris of the while face down???...anyone being able to move after those injuries is difficult enough to imagine, that he could bury himself while face down is impossible...if anyone threw a grenade the obvious suspect is the man laying next to him... All the statements run about the same,accounting approx the same thing...They assumed Khadr threw the grenade , because nobody else was alive...so there is doubt there, but what is very clear, is Khadr was involved in the fight, wpns where found near both bodies, and then there is the vid found in the rubble, showing him tooling around with mines, and then out one night planting them, bragging how he is going to collect the bounty for dead americans. And those two facts make him atleast a terrorist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 The fact no terrorist act occured is one of them, well if I planned to murder an innocent person does this make me liable to prison. Then you won't mind me making a VX nerve gas bomb in your neighborhood. It's just a hobby of mine. I don't plan on using it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VX_(nerve_agent) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironstone Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 To suggest that what these cowards did does not merit tougher sentences than what has been handed out so far is ridiculous.Supposing they were not caught until it was too late?Storming Parliament,bombing the TSE,planning decapitations.And people like William Ashley think that the people that planned to carry this out not only do not merit serious jail time,but that they HAVE ALREADY SPENT TOO MUCH TIME IN JAIL AWAITING TRIAL!William is upset because he believes the Toronto 18's rights have been violated. William Ashley,thank you for this demonstration of how the politically correct mind thinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 (edited) Of course planning to kill people is an offense Where is that in the criminal code? just like inciting a riot is an offense Inciting a riot is nothing like planning to kill someone, although inciting a riot can involve killing people, a riot need not be planned, nor is planning a riot an offence, unless you actually intend on inciting people to rioting. You are tainted with looks like duck mindset. It isn't even quacking. Are you seriously saying the only point at which someone should be punished is after the murder or attempted murder? I don't beleive in punishment, I support inquisitional justice that tries to correct errors, not punish them. Negative reinforcement only damages society and lowers the moral standard to which society exists. The point I do support is that murder is a crime, attempting to murder someone is a crime, however creating a plan to murder someone is not. Although if someone were to follow your plan and you informed them of it, or communicated it to them, then it could be considered accessory to the act, making you liable to trial. Planning a murder in itself is not a crime. How about hiring a hitman? That is accessory. Are you seriously advocating that no one be charged until the hitman actually tries to commit the act? In this case it is a little different, as soon as you hire them and they agree it is conspiracy.. "conspiracy to commit murder" which is a crime, but it isn't murder itself. As soon as the hit man sets out to murder( on their agreement the intent would be established if they didn't have some sort of defence - it would be attempted murder as their acceptance merits a murder charge. Where do guys like you come from? Clearly not your mamma. I mean, what planet do you live on where it's a civil liberty to plot murders of others, whether in small or large numbers. earth. It certainly has never ever ever ever been a right in our system, or in any other system that I'm aware of. You couldn't see a straight line if you drew it. In most legal systems based off the English Common and Criminal Law there is the notion of an ichoate offense, that is planning to commit an offense. I think you are confusing mens rhea with planning. Planning does not always consitute intent. If you plan to commit a crime This is your confusion, planning a crime does not constitute intent to commit it outright. whatever that crime is, you have commited an inchoate offense. I think you are smearing the actual event and are incorrect. Thoughts arn't offense unless you act on them, or intend to act on them. You are not permitted to plan or plot an illegal activity. I think you are wrong. There is nothing illegal about thinking about a crime or how it could be committed, unless you actually intend to commit it or act as an accessory to commit it. And it's a good thing, because I'd rather bust the guy carrying the dynamite in his vest before he lights the fuse, because it's pretty pointless busting him after the fact. There is a difference between coordinating a crime and plotting one. You clearly don't have the intelligence to see the difference. Just to clarify incohate is ""Conduct deemed criminal without actual harm being done, provided that the harm that would have occurred is one the law tries to prevent." Planning something with no intent to carry it out or having someone else carry it out is not a crime, that is if nothing would have occured i.e. There was no intent to carry it out. You are simply wrong and couldn't see a barn if you had cows. "Absent a specific law, an inchoate offense requires that the defendant have the specific intent to commit the underlying crime." You need some matter in there, stop scrubbing. BTW this isn't legal advice, that would be a crime. Planning serves a greater role than in commiting an act, it helps prevent them. Edited January 21, 2010 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 Unless these guys are isolated from the rest of the prisoners, do you really think they are coming out alive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 (edited) Any Canadian who plans to fight for the enemy of our country and military should be tried for treason and if found guilty should be incarcerated for the remainder of their lives. If making war, they should be treated as a POW. Although treason usually does imply life in prison, as long as it is tried within 3 years of the act (don't ask me why, treason is one of them weird criminal acts) For some reason it has a statute of limitations set to 3 years from the commital- makes no sense. Edited January 21, 2010 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 (edited) I'll admit, i think he's guilty, but that was not intent of this post. Rather than piont out that this trail has set a precedence for sentencing, If he is found guilty, then there is a good chance he will be released a free man, for time already served... http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/us-military-death-penalty 118 - Murder (punishable by death) Edited January 21, 2010 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted January 21, 2010 Report Share Posted January 21, 2010 (edited) Then you won't mind me making a VX nerve gas bomb in your neighborhood. It's just a hobby of mine. I don't plan on using it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VX_(nerve_agent) Is it a prohibited or restricted substance? http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/C-27.6/index.html Do you have a certificate? Chemical weapons 6. No person shall (a) develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile or retain a chemical weapon, or transfer, directly or indirectly, a chemical weapon to anyone; ( use a chemical weapon; © engage in any military preparations to use a chemical weapon; or (d) assist, encourage or induce, in any way, anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a State Party under the Convention. 20. Every person who contravenes any provision of this Act is guilty of an offence and liable (a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding $5,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding eighteen months, or to both; or ( on conviction on indictment, to a fine not exceeding $500,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, or to both. Criminal Code provisions apply 21. For greater certainty, the provisions of the Criminal Code apply for the purposes of enforcing this Act. Offence outside Canada 22. Every individual who commits, outside Canada, an act or omission that would, if committed in Canada, be an offence under this Act, shall, if the individual is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, be deemed to have committed that act or omission in Canada. 1995, c. 25, s. 22; 2001, c. 27, s. 227. Forfeiture 23. (1) Where a person has been convicted of an offence under this Act, any thing seized by means of which or in respect of which the offence was committed is forfeited to Her Majesty in right of Canada and shall be disposed of as the Minister directs. Forfeiture with consent (2) Where any thing has been seized by means of which or in respect of which an offence has been committed under this Act and the owner of the thing, or the person in whose possession the thing was at the time of seizure, consents in writing to its forfeiture, the thing is forfeited to Her Majesty in right of Canada and shall be disposed of as the Minister directs. Limitation period for summary conviction offences 24. Proceedings by way of summary conviction may be instituted at any time within, but not later than, two years after the day on which the subject-matter of the proceedings arose. Continuing offence 25. Where an offence under this Act is committed or continued on more than one day, the person who committed the offence is liable to be convicted for a separate offence for each day on which the offence is committed or continued. Venue 26. A complaint or an information in respect of an offence under this Act may be dealt with by any competent court of criminal jurisdiction if the accused is resident or carrying on business within the territorial jurisdiction of that court, even though the subject-matter of the complaint or information did not arise in that territorial jurisdiction. As you can see unless you have a certificate that says you can make it, you can get up to 5 years in jail or a half a million dollars fine You'd have to use it that day or you could be liable for up to 10 years in jail and a 1 million dollar fine, with 10 more years and 1 million more dollars every two days. Could be an expensive hobby. I could care less personally though. Socially it wouldn't be koshure but personally I would care less. I would dislike a person with herpes using my tub more than vx. Edited January 22, 2010 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DogOnPorch Posted January 22, 2010 Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 Poor choice. However, if I was found with photos and diagrams with circles and arrows with descriptions on the back re: plans to attack the local shopping mall, what would you have the RCMP do? Ignore me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 22, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2010 http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/us-military-death-penalty 118 - Murder (punishable by death) Nobody mention the death penalty, On top of that your aware that our government has ensured that if charged under US law no death penalty would be sought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted January 23, 2010 Report Share Posted January 23, 2010 I'll answer your questions honestly, the wounds are severe life threatening and if not treated deadly. Could he have moved, I'd say yes depending on the indiv, enough to buring himself i could not know 100%. remember the young MCPL medic, how has lost both his legs in that IED incident that claimed the the diplomat, not only did he trat himself, but he manged to crawl and treat serveral of his buddies as well, all this with missing a leg and the other hanging but some tissue...so it is possiable , but i can not say 100% about Khadr condition or abilities... then he can't be convicted...you have to really stretch the credibility of the accusations to accept he could cover himself with the amount of debris shown in the photo while face down, that is one amazing feat...All the statements run about the same,accounting approx the same thing...They assumed Khadr threw the grenade , because nobody else was alive...so there is doubt there, he was accused of throwing a grenade, not shooting some one, if someone is to be tried for a crime you can't make assumptions and change the accusations to suit the prosecution in order to get a conviction, there was a dead fighter next to him who is to say he did not throw the grenade, why does someone have to be alive to be guilty unless it's for politcal purposes of a show trial...but what is very clear, is Khadr was involved in the fight, wpns where found near both bodies, and then there is the vid found in the rubble, showing him tooling around with mines, and then out one night planting them, bragging how he is going to collect the bounty for dead americans. And those two facts make him atleast a terrorist. now we get into a different argument, what or who is a terrorist...the occupied Europeans of WW2 we call resistance, the Germans called terrorists...being classified as a terrorist or freedom fighter is a political issue not a criminal one...he isn't the first Canadian to take up a foreign cause and they weren't labeled as terrorists... and then we haven't got to the issue of being a child soldier, if he had been convicted of murder in Canada he'd would be free by now, children according to my Neurologist friend cannot be held responsible for crime as an adult because they are not mentally competent to make responsible decisions/choices...he says you need to control violent young offenders to protect the public but their potential to reform is excellent as long as there are not underlying conditions such as FAS... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted January 23, 2010 Report Share Posted January 23, 2010 Nobody mention the death penalty, On top of that your aware that our government has ensured that if charged under US law no death penalty would be sought. What does Canada's government have to do with the trial or sentencing in a US court system, you think they care what Canada thinks? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted January 23, 2010 Report Share Posted January 23, 2010 (edited) but they could have just as well been fellow Canadians. Canadian ground forces wern't deployed in the preliminary stages of the Afghan Conflict. - They killed his family and quite easily could of killed him also. His father was a humanitarian, that didn't stop US forces from killing his father. Edited January 23, 2010 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted January 23, 2010 Report Share Posted January 23, 2010 (edited) Poor choice. However, if I was found with photos and diagrams with circles and arrows with descriptions on the back re: plans to attack the local shopping mall, what would you have the RCMP do? Ignore me? I use to Role Play (see role playing game) this type of thing was common place, where planning of things which might be construed illegal in real life, but wern't intended for real life. Security Personnel commonly are suppose to plan for potential attacks, this includes actually planning attacks then developing methods to prevent those attacks. There are also novelists and people just currious. Detectives and investigators have to do this sort of thing also. Personally unless the RCMP has reasons to suspect you plan an attack (such as buying materials needed for the attack, etc..) it shoulnd't matter. While scrutiny or clarification by means of asking questions might be plausable, an arrest would not solely for having a plan drawn up on paper, a plan is not sufficient alone to establish mens rhea. If other elements of a crime existed however, those plans could be a form of evidence- or if a crime occured which mirrored the plans but not other evidence existed it would be leading evidence. But plans alone outright are not sufficient to establish the means of a guilty verdict without a crime occuring, or the intent by other elements such as actus reus. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actus_reus Edited January 23, 2010 by William Ashley Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 The mastermind got a life-sentence but is eligible for parole in 6 years? Let his ass rot in jail forever, no parole. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueblood Posted January 24, 2010 Report Share Posted January 24, 2010 The mastermind got a life-sentence but is eligible for parole in 6 years? Let his ass rot in jail forever, no parole. But you guys on the left think that these types of people can be rehabilitated. Seems like a double standard... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 then he can't be convicted...you have to really stretch the credibility of the accusations to accept he could cover himself with the amount of debris shown in the photo while face down, that is one amazing feat... IS it, so was the Mcpl's feat treating serveral of his comrads with his legs blown off, and bleeding out. so there is a possiablity it could have happen, perhaps Mr Khadr did not have to bury himself, perhaps the debris fell on top of him, I think this is a more likly explantion, remember the entire site was attacked by aircraft, so the building structures would have been serverally comprimised... he was accused of throwing a grenade, not shooting some one, if someone is to be tried for a crime you can't make assumptions and change the accusations to suit the prosecution in order to get a conviction, there was a dead fighter next to him who is to say he did not throw the grenade, why does someone have to be alive to be guilty unless it's for politcal purposes of a show trial... He was accused of serveral things, throwing the grenade that killed a US medic is one of them, and i'm not changing anything, the US is. As for the other fighter found, if the statements are true he was killed earlir in the firefight, so that rules him out, nobody else was found alive at the scene, hence why it is assumed that the only one that could have thrown the grenade is Khadr....And i've already agreed with you their is doubt there....But what about the other facts, he was there to start off with, remember it was the Taliban that started this dance with the killing of serveral aghanis soldiers who knocked on the door....the second fact is a recently fired wpn was found next to him, and then there is the tape. which shows him playing around with mines used to make IED's then planting them at night with his buddies....all of the above clearly show serveral chargable offensives... now we get into a different argument, what or who is a terrorist...the occupied Europeans of WW2 we call resistance, the Germans called terrorists...being classified as a terrorist or freedom fighter is a political issue not a criminal one...he isn't the first Canadian to take up a foreign cause and they weren't labeled as terrorists... Come on Wyly your a smart guy, are we calling Al Quaida freedom fighters now...Inter national community will disagree even the UN has slotted them in the terrorist catagory. I think your grasping at straws here...I've seen the Al Quaida's work up close and personally, a man stripped of all his skin left to die or should i say cook in the morning sun...ya nice guys... and then we haven't got to the issue of being a child soldier, if he had been convicted of murder in Canada he'd would be free by now, That says nothing of his innocence but rather his guilt , and speaks of our weak justice system....not Mr Khadr....He has been classified a terrorist, and thier are NO child soldier in this classification. check under the Genva convention, or even our Canadian laws...sorry..i don't make the rules... children according to my Neurologist friend cannot be held responsible for crime as an adult because they are not mentally competent to make responsible decisions/choices...he says you need to control violent young offenders to protect the public but their potential to reform is excellent as long as there are not underlying conditions such as FAS... Look our justice system has charged youths or minors with adult crimes, and have sentenced them, those are a matter of record. At age 15 he is mentally competent, enough so that he knows right from wrong, he knows planting mines will kill NATO soldiers, he knows firing a wpn will kill...He's been trained to kill, and knows the consquences....He knows the difference between life and death....remember his mother wanted him to be a suicide bomber, he refused ,he chose life, because he wanted to live...so he knows the difference.... Red necks don't join the KKK because they are not racist, they do so because they are and want to be a part of that club, or culture....Khadr is a terrorist, he wanted to follow his father footsteps...now that he is caught he must also atone for his actions... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 25, 2010 Author Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 What does Canada's government have to do with the trial or sentencing in a US court system, you think they care what Canada thinks? You are aware that our current government has talked to the US government and both agreed that the death penalty would not on the table...Thats what our government has to do with it, and the US government does care what we think or they would have said piss off.... Do you really know anything about this case or are you talking out your ass. my guess is the latter... Canadian ground forces wern't deployed in the preliminary stages of the Afghan Conflict. - They killed his family and quite easily could of killed him also. And when do you think they became involved William. How many families this guy got, maybe you should rephrase that.... His father was a humanitarian, that didn't stop US forces from killing his father. US forces had nothing to do with the killing of Khadrs father and brother, try checking that out once again....they where killed in a fire fight with Pakistani forces...not a US soldier among'st them... As for the humanitarian your joking right. how many humanitarians armed with Ak 47's you know get killed in a shoot out with military forces, ...your facts suck william....i think you need to adjust that Facts from your ass machine, make it atleast some what crediable.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted January 25, 2010 Report Share Posted January 25, 2010 This could haunt the Conservatives nicely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
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.