GostHacked Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 Pretty much every modern society has different "ages" when certain rights and obligations are granted... under (I think) 8 and you can't be charged with a crime at all. Over 18 you can be charged as an adult. Legal drinking age is 18 or 19 (depending on province). Age of consent is 16. There is no magic age after which an individual suddenly becomes "responsible" in all things, whereas one day earlier they were considered "not responsible". I'll add this here. Those age limits are also different from each other in many provinces and states. Of course he did. He fought with Al-Quida. Geneva Convention CLEARLY specify who is a legal combatant. All other "fighters" can be shot on the spot, no legal requiremenht to hold them as P.O.W. What Afghan law did he break? Remember that during this time it was a transitional government and the laws were being written. So what law did he break? The Child soldier argument is a myth in Omars case....if it had any truth to it Omar would have used it as part of his defense... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39945319/ns/us_news-security/ Khadr was prohibited under the deal from calling witnesses at his sentencing hearing who would support defense claims that he was a "child soldier," forced into fighting the U.S. by a radical father who was an associate of Osama bin Laden.Legal principles 'long since abandoned' "The fact that the trial of a child soldier, Omar Khadr, has ended with a guilty plea in exchange for his eventual release to Canada does not change the fact that fundamental principles of law and due process were long since abandoned in Omar's case," Edney said. Quote
M.Dancer Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 Geneva Convention CLEARLY specify who is a legal combatant. All other "fighters" can be shot on the spot, no legal requiremenht to hold them as P.O.W. You need to read more before posting. Not since prior to the Hague convention. You need to read more... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
wyly Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 That is what will soon change. We don't need bunch of foreigners with citizenship and alegiance to other countries who only call themself "canadians" to use our pssports. hmmm like the 800,000+ Canadians living in the USA?You'll get it soon as the difference between law and justice get clearer to many younger generation Canadians.younger generations thinking like you? I can't see that day coming anytime soon... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
wyly Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 Apparently,being Canadian these days means not even having to reside in Canada at all,which is truly moronic.It seems that there are a lot of people who are Canadians of convenience,like Omar Khadr or the one's that live most of the time in Lebanon for example.They don't pay taxes here and contribute virtually nothing to this country,but when the sh*t hit the fan in Lebanon a few years ago,they suddenly became Canadians in need. What is it about this country that we feel that our citizens can do whatever they bloody well like in other countries and only be subject our very lenient justice system after all is said and done? an estimated 2.8 million Canadians live abroad do you have issues with only those that choose Lebanon? what about the UK, Aus, USA, Mexico, Costa Rica?...when the shit hits the fan in any country how do you propose to differentiate between who should be helped and who should be ignored?...because you have a second residence/job in another country do you suggest Canada should not help you? Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
wyly Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 It's moronic? That's the way it's always been, and the way that it is in most countries. there are even countries that refuse to acknowledge Canadian citizenship of those who emigrated to Canada... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
wyly Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 (edited) My point was that you're picking and choosing. How long someone or their ancestry has resided in a given geographic area is a different thing from their citizenship. You can have a historic tie to a place that has no connection to the citizenship of a specific officially incorporated country. Khadr is either a citizen of Canada (in which case, he's should be tried for treason upon his return), or he's not and we have to reason to repatriate him. do you want to explain how he can be charged with treason? here's the Criminal code for treason-"Every one commits treason who, in Canada, A- uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province; B- without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada" did he commit either offense? nope... Edited November 1, 2010 by wyly Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Saipan Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 do you want to explain how he can be charged with treason? Yes. he fought against Canada and Allies. Worse offence than desertion. Quote
Saipan Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 an estimated 2.8 million Canadians live abroad do you have issues with only those that choose Lebanon? 1) Live there because of work contract, being Canadinas only? 2) Are they former foreigners whom came to Canada just to get SECOND citizenshinp and passport? 3) Are the Mohammed Atta type of "citizen"? what about the UK, Aus, USA, Mexico, Costa Rica?.. What about them? Quote
Sir Bandelot Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 younger generations thinking like you? I can't see that day coming anytime soon... no, but once they grow up Quote
wyly Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 (edited) Yes. he fought against Canada and Allies. Worse offence than desertion. reading comprehension issues?once again just for you here is the criminal code for treason Every one commits treason who, in Canada, a- uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province; B- without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada" Edited November 1, 2010 by wyly Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
guyser Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 Khadr will never be tried for treason because his family is close friends with bin Laden and there would most definitely be retaliation. Tin foil....get some This is why, I assume anyway, his mother has never been tried when she clearly committed treason. You assume wrong. Quote
wyly Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 no, but once they grow up with that logic we would still be putting gay people in prison, burning witches, denying women the vote, practicing slavery... every generation is more socially liberal and enlightened than the one that came before... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Sir Bandelot Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada" [/b] What about, doing so for safety or defence FROM Canada? Since the apparent offences occured in another country. --> "without lawful authority..." Whose authority was he working for? It also excludes the word "willingly..." Quote
Sir Bandelot Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 every generation is more socially liberal and enlightened than the one that came before... Socially liberal, yes... Quote
wyly Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 Socially liberal, yes... and ethically, criminally, economically, politically, everything evolves...we are not the same people/country we were 30 years ago...and Canada in 30 years from now will be a very different place again today's liberals will be tomorrows conservatives but not because they are more conservative but because today's conservatives will be extinct... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
wyly Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 What about, doing so for safety or defence FROM Canada? Since the apparent offences occured in another country. --> "without lawful authority..." Whose authority was he working for? It also excludes the word "willingly..." are you deliberately ignoring the rest of the wording? "communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada"-when has he done any of those? Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
eyeball Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 Just look at the differences between the sentencing of Khadr and US Johnny Walker who was a US citizen and twenty years old. The most obvious one is that John Walker went to Afghanistan on his own as an adult, whereas Khadr was pressed involuntarily into Al Qaeda when he was eleven years old. The other glaring difference is that Walker was charged, tried and convicted in a real court of law and justice instead of a kangeroo court in a gulag. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 The most obvious one is that John Walker went to Afghanistan on his own as an adult, whereas Khadr was pressed involuntarily into Al Qaeda when he was eleven years old. The other glaring difference is that Walker was charged, tried and convicted in a real court of law and justice instead of a kangeroo court in a gulag. BS...he was following and emulating his father. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 BS...he was following and emulating his father. Children are encouraged by society and commanded by God to obey their parents. I think we might want to add a caveat or two to that. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 Children are encouraged by society and commanded by God to obey their parents. I think we might want to add a caveat or two to that. Is that what society thought when yer daddy took you fishing? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
GostHacked Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 The most obvious one is that John Walker went to Afghanistan on his own as an adult, whereas Khadr was pressed involuntarily into Al Qaeda when he was eleven years old. The other glaring difference is that Walker was charged, tried and convicted in a real court of law and justice instead of a kangeroo court in a gulag. Does raise some questions don't it. I hear ya. Quote
bud Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 1) Live there because of work contract, being Canadinas only? 2) Are they former foreigners whom came to Canada just to get SECOND citizenshinp and passport? 3) Are the Mohammed Atta type of "citizen"? What about them? There are approximately 20,000 Canadian citizens living in Israel Link Quote http://whoprofits.org/
noahbody Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 Tin foil....get some You assume wrong. Tinfoil for what? Are you not aware that the Khadrs and bin Laden were close? They were invited to his daughter's wedding. I base my assumption on Ahmed Said Khadr warned the government of retaliation if they got involved. What do you base your assumption that I'm wrong on? Let me guess... nothing. Quote
wyly Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 Does raise some questions don't it. I hear ya. torturing a 15 yr old and holding him for 8 yrs without trial would never have happened in the US Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
GostHacked Posted November 1, 2010 Report Posted November 1, 2010 torturing a 15 yr old and holding him for 8 yrs without trial would never have happened in the US I hope that is sarcasm wyly. However we have witnessed just that very thing. Gitmo is sovereign US land. Quote
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.