Bob Macadoo Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 (edited) Omar Khadr To Be Transferred To Medium-Security Federal Prison: Lawyerhttp://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/17/omar-khadr-medium-security-prison_n_4619401.html Last October an Alberta judge turned down his request to be moved to a lower security provincial jail where he would be eligible for rehabilitation programs.At the time Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney welcomed the court ruling, saying the government of Canada would continue to vigorously defend against any attempt to lessen his punishment. Almost like the Harper Gov't doesn't think they have angered their base. I wonder how the opposition can use this? j/k. Someone should find Toews for a quote......"Either you're for maximum security or you're with the blood thirsty terrorists." Edited February 12, 2014 by Charles Anthony changed title; old title: "Someone at Corrections Canada is Going Under the Bus" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 Omar Khadr To Be Transferred To Medium-Security Federal Prison: Lawyer http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/17/omar-khadr-medium-security-prison_n_4619401.html Almost like the Harper Gov't doesn't think they have angered their base. I wonder how the opposition can use this? j/k. Someone should find Toews for a quote......"Either you're for maximum security or you're with the blood thirsty terrorists." Punishment vs rehabilitation models of incarceration ... we know where Harper Conservatives stand! They're all for creating more hardened criminals by refusing access to rehab programs. ... the government of Canada would continue to vigorously defend against any attempt to lessen his punishment. ... A government website says Bowden Institution encourages inmates to become law-abiding citizens by offering education, employment, and rehabilitation programs. Rehab programs offers better opportunities to evaluate readiness for successful reintegration into society, identify problem areas for supervision, etc. Harper Conservatives seem to prefer punishing lawbreaking as harshly as possible for as long as possible ... and then setting angry ticking time bombs loose on society. How stupid is that! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 The primary role of incarceration is neither punishment or rehabilitation. It is, or should be, protection of the public. That is how Khadr should be assessed in terms of what prison he is locked up in, and how much of his sentence( a sentence he agreed to on advice of counsel) should be served. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 Punishment vs rehabilitation models of incarceration ... we know where Harper Conservatives stand! They're all for creating more hardened criminals by refusing access to rehab programs. ... the government of Canada would continue to vigorously defend against any attempt to lessen his punishment. ... A government website says Bowden Institution encourages inmates to become law-abiding citizens by offering education, employment, and rehabilitation programs. Rehab programs offers better opportunities to evaluate readiness for successful reintegration into society, identify problem areas for supervision, etc. Harper Conservatives seem to prefer punishing lawbreaking as harshly as possible for as long as possible ... and then setting angry ticking time bombs loose on society. How stupid is that! I agree it's moronic. Crimes need punishment, such as forced manual labour to repay society, but also a strong rehab component to turn criminals into less of a risk for recommitting when they leave than when they entered prison. You also don't want criminals being released, continuing to be law-breakers, then having children and teaching their kids to be idiots too & perpetuating the cycle. The Harper gov's tough-guy BS is just that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 The primary role of incarceration is neither punishment or rehabilitation. It is, or should be, protection of the public. That is how Khadr should be assessed in terms of what prison he is locked up in, and how much of his sentence( a sentence he agreed to on advice of counsel) should be served. No, i think punishment, rehab, and public protection should about equal priorities. Rehab is also part of public protection because it may prevent future crimes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthere Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 As you wish. But.... I also think that the primary, #1 duty of government is to ensure the safety and security of its citizens. Rule of law enables.... everything we like about our lives in Canada. Rule of law is also probably the most important reason that people want to move here. It is relatively safe. A big reason it is relatively safe is that we are protected from the most dangerous people. Behind bars. No doubt they might get rehabbed, they might get punished. But above all, they are kept away from you and I. That is why protecting the public against those who would harm us is primary. Rehab is a fix that can be done from inside or outside a jail, but protection cannot really be managed outisde the walls. I think several hundred years of jurisprudence agree with me. Both our law and our practices give the longest sentences in the tightest prisons to those that are most deemed dangerous: killers, rapists, the chronically violent amongst us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted January 18, 2014 Report Share Posted January 18, 2014 The primary role of incarceration is neither punishment or rehabilitation. It is, or should be, protection of the public. That is how Khadr should be assessed in terms of what prison he is locked up in, and how much of his sentence( a sentence he agreed to on advice of counsel) should be served. Protection of the public while they're inside ... AND after they get out.That requires a rehabilitation component. Public Safety Canada: The Social Reintegration of Offenders and Crime Prevention Comprehensive crime prevention programs must include effective measures to prevent recidivism and to stop the cycle of failed adaptation by repeat offenders. Offenders released from confinement face a variety of challenges that may hinder their ability to become law-abiding citizens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted January 19, 2014 Report Share Posted January 19, 2014 Protection of the public while they're inside ... AND after they get out. That requires a rehabilitation component. Public Safety Canada: The Social Reintegration of Offenders and Crime Prevention Comprehensive crime prevention programs must include effective measures to prevent recidivism and to stop the cycle of failed adaptation by repeat offenders. Offenders released from confinement face a variety of challenges that may hinder their ability to become law-abiding citizens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted January 19, 2014 Report Share Posted January 19, 2014 (edited) Protection of the public while they're inside ... AND after they get out. That requires a rehabilitation component. Public Safety Canada: The Social Reintegration of Offenders and Crime Prevention Comprehensive crime prevention programs must include effective measures to prevent recidivism and to stop the cycle of failed adaptation by repeat offenders. Offenders released from confinement face a variety of challenges that may hinder their ability to become law-abiding citizens. What are you trying to say. You seem to think that it's all about punishment and there's no rehab. Are you saying that The Federal and Provincial governments have NO rehab programs? I think you'd be sadly mistaken on that. Don't forget that our justice system is very lenient for non-violent crime. Criminals get plenty of chances from judges before they even get to prison - and most crime ends up being two years less a day so it can be served locally or in a provincial prison. Fact is, 99% of the population go through life without committing crimes but there is the very small segment of repeat offenders that flout rehab programs - they consider their repeat offenses to be the cost of living their "don't give a crap" lives. As for violent offenders - especially the repeat ones - good luck with rehab. Oh - and how about the mentally ill who should be in institutions but the Charter of Rights means they can refuse help. There was a big fuss a while back about a rehab program being cut - one crummy program - some work, some don't - they should always be re-evaluated for effectiveness. You don't hear too much about any new rehab initiatives though. Wonder why. Edited January 19, 2014 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted January 19, 2014 Report Share Posted January 19, 2014 Harper is taking Canada backwards with his so called "tough on crime" bills. The crime rate has been dropping here for over 4 decades and the violent crime rate for over two. Of course he does this, like everything else he does, to try and grab a vote or two. The worst and most damaging part are his minimum mandatort sentences. This will serve to create more criminals. Spend a few bucks up front on prevention rather than a whole bunch of bucks after the fact and we will all reap rewards. Of all sources even the state of Texas attempted to point that out to Harper with actual facts and figures but he decided to ignore it. Get out your wallets everybody. We have to pay for a lot of new jail cells. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted January 19, 2014 Report Share Posted January 19, 2014 The primary role of incarceration is neither punishment or rehabilitation. It is, or should be, protection of the public. That is how Khadr should be assessed in terms of what prison he is locked up in, and how much of his sentence( a sentence he agreed to on advice of counsel) should be served. "Council"? are you refering to the kangaroo lawyers in a kangaroo court on a base where the young feller Bush took a pen and proclaimed that Habeus Corpus no longer exists. Khadr was 15 years old. If he had done the same thig in New York City he would have been out some time ago. But he didn't do it in NYC. He did it in Afghanistan where his country had been declared war on and invaded. I guess the US can call him a criminal because he fought back. Wars do generate revenue, but sometimes they're not fun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 You can call it what ever you like, however it is still a court of law and has served the world for decades, nobody seemed to mind when we hung the NAZI chain of command after they were found guilty....Young Mr Khadar, was fighting in a war which he had no bussiness, he was not a citizen of Afghan but rather a Canadian. That fact is against the genva convention, inter national law, along with Canadian law. To top it all off he had aligned himself with a terrorist group, in which he was active in many things that were war crimes...it is not just the US that is calling him a terrorist, but most the free world as well, including Canada. Some say he was a child soldier, and should be treated as one, the whole child soldier thing came about in africa where armies kidnaped children to fight their wars,and has been twisted to suit this case here, however that was not the intention of the UN agreement. Young mr Khadar was not kidnaped, but took part in this war on his own free will. The terrorist clause is a new onwe and still has not been clarified, or atleast a clear defination come out of the UN. that been said Canada's defination is clear, and so is the law, the genva convention and inter national law...he is guilty and now he has to do the time for his crimes. He is and will always be just a terrorist. the same group of terrorist that have taken over 160 Canadian lives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 28, 2014 Report Share Posted January 28, 2014 No, i think punishment, rehab, and public protection should about equal priorities. Rehab is also part of public protection because it may prevent future crimes. I agree, But i don't think that is what the numbers are showing.....so what are the numbers showing us, how many repeat offenses are commited, does our rehab system work. The reason i ask is, the last time i checked repeat offenses out numbered every thing.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I really do not know what was in this 15 year olds mind when he tossed and then was tossed a grenade in Afghanistan. For the last 12 years he has been living a bizarre existence that has probably resulted in a damaged individual. I do not know what kind of "rehabilitation" he is receiving but I doubt that he currently has a marketable skill that would allow him to start a productive path in our society. His notoriety may bring him some income (book?) and/or he may eventually receive compensation for being used a political football by both the USA and the Harper government. How stable is he psychologically? At what level of education is he operating? This person has cost the Canadian taxpayer $millions and every day adds to the total. He is going to have a difficult time in becoming a productive member of our society so the sooner he is set free then the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 He is going to have a difficult time in becoming a productive member of our society so the sooner he is set free then the better. Not sure what logic you use to get from the first part of this sentence to the second. How about: He is going to have a difficult time in becoming a productive member of our society so the longer he is kept locked up the better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hudson Jones Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I really do not know what was in this 15 year olds mind when he tossed and then was tossed a grenade in Afghanistan. For the last 12 years he has been living a bizarre existence that has probably resulted in a damaged individual. I hope he writes a book about his experiences, including about his relationship with his father and his years in Guantanamo, where he transitioned from a boy to an adult. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 (edited) You can call it what ever you like, however it is still a court of law and has served the world for decades, nobody seemed to mind when we hung the NAZI chain of command after they were found guilty....Young Mr Khadar, was fighting in a war which he had no bussiness, he was not a citizen of Afghan but rather a Canadian. That fact is against the genva convention, inter national law, along with Canadian law. To top it all off he had aligned himself with a terrorist group, in which he was active in many things that were war crimes...it is not just the US that is calling him a terrorist, but most the free world as well, including Canada. Some say he was a child soldier, and should be treated as one, the whole child soldier thing came about in africa where armies kidnaped children to fight their wars,and has been twisted to suit this case here, however that was not the intention of the UN agreement. Young mr Khadar was not kidnaped, but took part in this war on his own free will. The terrorist clause is a new onwe and still has not been clarified, or atleast a clear defination come out of the UN. that been said Canada's defination is clear, and so is the law, the genva convention and inter national law...he is guilty and now he has to do the time for his crimes. He is and will always be just a terrorist. the same group of terrorist that have taken over 160 Canadian lives. Army Guy I've asked you this before and you didn't answer: At what age does a person have "free will", independent of parents ... 10 years old as Khadr was when his father put him into AlQuaeda training camp? 15 years old as he was when put into the care of his father's Al Quaeda friend that he was with when the firefight occurred? Edited January 29, 2014 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I really do not know what was in this 15 year olds mind when he tossed and then was tossed a grenade in Afghanistan. For the last 12 years he has been living a bizarre existence that has probably resulted in a damaged individual. I do not know what kind of "rehabilitation" he is receiving but I doubt that he currently has a marketable skill that would allow him to start a productive path in our society. His notoriety may bring him some income (book?) and/or he may eventually receive compensation for being used a political football by both the USA and the Harper government. How stable is he psychologically? At what level of education is he operating? This person has cost the Canadian taxpayer $millions and every day adds to the total. He is going to have a difficult time in becoming a productive member of our society so the sooner he is set free then the better. This is what we are concerned with, that he has lived a bizare existence, and your wondering if he is going to be a productive member of society....He is a harden terrorist, what is it that you think he is going to do when he gets out...And what of the US Army Medic he has killed, what of his family, or the other Coalition forces that he may have killed with IED's or mines, what of them...instead you worried about the terrorist. I hope he remains in jail for a long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 You can call it what ever you like, however it is still a court of law and has served the world for decades, nobody seemed to mind when we hung the NAZI chain of command after they were found guilty....Young Mr Khadar, was fighting in a war which he had no bussiness, he was not a citizen of Afghan but rather a Canadian. That fact is against the genva convention, inter national law, along with Canadian law. To top it all off he had aligned himself with a terrorist group, in which he was active in many things that were war crimes...it is not just the US that is calling him a terrorist, but most the free world as well, including Canada. Some say he was a child soldier, and should be treated as one, the whole child soldier thing came about in africa where armies kidnaped children to fight their wars,and has been twisted to suit this case here, however that was not the intention of the UN agreement. Young mr Khadar was not kidnaped, but took part in this war on his own free will. The terrorist clause is a new onwe and still has not been clarified, or atleast a clear defination come out of the UN. that been said Canada's defination is clear, and so is the law, the genva convention and inter national law...he is guilty and now he has to do the time for his crimes. He is and will always be just a terrorist. the same group of terrorist that have taken over 160 Canadian lives. Army Guy I've asked you this before and you didn't answer: At what age does a person have "free will", independent of parents ... 10 years old as Khadr was when his father put him into AlQuaeda training camp? 15 years old as he was when put into the care of his father's Al Quaeda friend that he was with when the firefight occurred? Alot of people have a hard time understanding the culture he was submeged in at 10 years of age he is considered an adult, a man, hence why he is sent to a training camp, to learn his craft as a terrorist....I get it he is a canadian citizen, and we don't consider anyone to be an adult until 16 years of age, but that was not the culture he was brought up in.... Omar had free will at age 10, according to his culture, at the age of 15 he was on his own, making his own way in life , yes he had someone looking after his interests, life in AL Quaeda is alot tougher than most know, makes the hells angles look like boy scouts...but he was his own man making life decisions for a long time. regardless of his age... Did he know right form wrong sure he did, did he know he was a canadian citizen sure he did, did he know that Canada was part of the coalition forces sure he did, he made a choice to take up arms and fight for a terrorist group, that he knew exactly what they did and their exploits and he did it freely... He had plenty of chances to just up and leave on his own, to atleast get out of the fighting , and away from his gang of merry men...instead he makes vidio's bragging how many Americans he is going to kill and how much money he'll get doing it... I'm sorry for not having any compasion for him, but i spent 3 tours over there , most of that time i spent wondering when i was going to get blown up, seen to many comrads die the same way...Here in Canada we have sentenced minors adult sentences for serious crimes, and no one has picked up their banner to have them released.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 (edited) Alot of people have a hard time understanding the culture he was submeged in at 10 years of age he is considered an adult, a man, hence why he is sent to a training camp, to learn his craft as a terrorist....I get it he is a canadian citizen, and we don't consider anyone to be an adult until 16 years of age, but that was not the culture he was brought up in...Keyword "sent". Not his choice, because he's a child under parental control. If he refused he'd be forced to be a suicide bomber. That's what his father tried to do to his brother.Some choice!!! What does international law say about the age when a person can freely choose to become a soldier? Omar had free will at age 10, according to his culture, at the age of 15 he was on his own, making his own way in life , yes he had someone looking after his interests, life in AL Quaeda is alot tougher than most know, makes the hells angles look like boy scouts...but he was his own man making life decisions for a long time. regardless of his age... Did he know right form wrong sure he did, did he know he was a canadian citizen sure he did, did he know that Canada was part of the coalition forces sure he did, he made a choice to take up arms and fight for a terrorist group, that he knew exactly what they did and their exploits and he did it freely... BS He had plenty of chances to just up and leave on his own, to atleast get out of the fighting , and away from his gang of merry men...instead he makes vidio's bragging how many Americans he is going to kill and how much money he'll get doing it... See "suicide bomber" above. I'm sorry for not having any compasion for him, but i spent 3 tours over there , most of that time i spent wondering when i was going to get blown up, seen to many comrads die the same way...You had plenty of chances to just up and leave, to at least get out of the fighting. You weren't 10 11 12 13 14 or 15 years old and under threat of being forced to be a suicide bomber. Here in Canada we have sentenced minors adult sentences for serious crimes, and no one has picked up their banner to have them released....Irrelevant. Edited January 29, 2014 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 I'd be more worried about the other people that were let go from Gitmo. Some of them are back in Gitmo. At least Omar is behind bars at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Keyword "sent". Not his choice, because he's a child under parental control. If he refused he'd be forced to be a suicide bomber. That's what his father tried to do to his brother. Some choice!!! What does international law say about the age when a person can freely choose to become a soldier? BS See "suicide bomber" above. You had plenty of chances to just up and leave, to at least get out of the fighting. You weren't 10 11 12 13 14 or 15 years old and under threat of being forced to be a suicide bomber. Irrelevant. If you had read any of the Omar transcripts it was his mother that asked him to become a sucide bomber, to increase the value of the families name, instead both boys turned down the offer to become bombers, and elected to instead take the training. Lets not forget his father was killed in a raid when he was 12, leaving his mother as the head of the family, not sure your familar with the culture but females control nothing, even when they are the sole surviving parent, that would have fallen to the eldest son... Yes lets throw around a bit of inter national law....inter national law states the youngest any military can recruit is 17 years of age with consent of parents, and the Age for Combat is 18 years old....That fact has been dismissed, no one in the Taliban organization has been charged with recruiting child soldiers, Omars mother has not been charged with anything....That being said Omar was captured as a terrorists which are not protected under the genva convention, or inter national law...he was charged with the murder of a US soldier, no other war crimes were filed....such as being a terrorist, etc etc etc.... You calling it bullshit, does not change the facts. again Omar states in his transcripts he was left alone dozens, without supervision....he was a trusted terrorist....by his own choice... No i was not, i was asked to go by our nation to do a job , that was to kill taliban and terrorists that were surpressing the people of Afghan , funney here is a canadian in a foreign land surpressing an entirely different culture and you want compasion....there are thousands like him over there waiting to control the people of Afghan, not even afghanis and we are weeping over a boy who's luck run out....actually he is lucky to be alive...as the desert is full of guys like Omar buried in shallow graves in a foreign land....ya i cry every nightfor those poor bastards....not really...i do live with my share of ghosts, but i do not regret any of my actions in Afghan. No i volunteered to go over, once there i was there for the duration, unless wounded or killed.... You'll have to make up your mind which laws do you want to apply, how about all of them, he is Canadian, so lets start there, it is again'st the law to fight in another nations war, as a merc or free lance soldier, or a terrorist....and yet he was not charged by Canada....He was charged for the murder of a serving US soldier, asked there by the country of Afghanistan.....and yet here we are still weeping ovr a boy we say has suffered enough....once a week i vist a widow of a comrad killed in an IED blast planted by one of Omars merry men....i take his son out biking, or camping telling him stories of his father exploits....once a month i drive down to ontario to vist a buddy who lost both legs in the same blast.....Those are the guys i show compasion to, not the enemy...never will i change my mind on this topic. to me when i see Omar at 15 i see a combatant , nothing more.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 You'll have to make up your mind which laws do you want to apply, how about all of them, he is Canadian, so lets start there, it is again'st the law to fight in another nations war, as a merc or free lance soldier, or a terrorist....and yet he was not charged by Canada....Since when? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 Since when? Terrorist laws are atleast 10 years old, fight as a merc is as far as i can remember 30 40 years, fighting as a canadian citzen , in another foreign nations war as a non combantant has always been illigal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted January 29, 2014 Report Share Posted January 29, 2014 http://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2010/01/19/life_term_for_terror_ringleader.html Toronto 18 man charged with .......he pleaded guilty to participating in the activity of a terrorist group and intending to cause an explosion that was likely to cause serious harm or death. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/8-things-to-know-about-the-new-anti-terrorism-bill-1.1413346 http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/12/14/supreme-court-anti-terror-law_n_2298474.html#slide=more238496 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.