Omar Khadr Suing And Being Sued

[Argus]

The Harper government is onside with keeping it going because it's their ideology to punish him because he's a Muslim.

Is it your ambition to post ALL the dumbest statements in the history of this web site?

[Wilber]

Victims suffered the damage.

THey should not get the reward? Oh boy.

Without punitive measures , companies will roll on without safety concerns, to others and to their own bottom line

When it comes to punitive damages I agree with Tim. By definition, punitive damages are to punish, not reward.

[Rue]

How can an American living in the US sue a Canadian?

Jurisdiction is determined by either the accident site or where defendant lives so that is one way. So I think that is what you are getting at.

US tort laws can allow an American attacked by a terrorist anywhere in the world can sue that person not just in the jurisdiction of the site of attack or where that citizen lives, but also the US.

Since this person some of you make out as a victim was a child terrorist at the time of his actions and not a conventional soldier he is not entitled to the protection under the Geneva convention for prisoners of war. That protection only applies to soldiers in a sovereign nation's army engaging in war as per the Geneva convention's stipulations.

He was in fact a minor sent by his father to engage in terror and crime including terrorizing innocent civilians and murdering civilians. In fact he was part of an organizationt that states it does not follow any laws.

This sob is now in Canada and totally unrepentant stating he is glad what he did and believes in terrorism and violence and everything he did and he states Canada is an infidel nation whose laws he does not obey. His sob mother is on welfare as are the rest of his family and they hold the same views. They openly state Canada is an infidel nation and they do not follow its laws but in the same breath demand welfare and all the state offers.

Good. Sue the sob. He plans to sue Canada, sue him.

Why shouldn't he be sued. He engaged in an act of wrongful death and battery. Those are tort offences.

As far as I am considered the estate of the father and mother should be sued as well as the sob since he was a minor at the time of the actions. I think they should seize their house as pay back since they won't collect any other money from these sob's.

I also think the whole bloody lot of them should have been deported back to Afghanistan the country whose laws they broke or Egypt their country of origin. Theyd don't like Canadian laws then get the hell out.

Some of you want to molly coddle and turn this scum into a hero and a child victim. He is neither.

Edited May 23, 2014 by Rue

[jacee]

Omar Khadr is going to keep lawyers busy. In 2013 his lawyers asked a judge to approve yet another round of amendments to a lawsuit thats been inching its way through the system for almost as long as hes been locked away. Originally filed in 2004 as a mere $100,000 claim (and later bumped up to $10 million), Khadrs latest submission says he now deserves $60 million from the Canadian government: $20 million for breaching his Charter rights, $20 million in punitive damages, and $20 million for failing to treat him like the 15-year-old child soldier he was.

Yesterday it was announced that the widow of a U.S. special forces soldier killed in Afghanistan and an American soldier blinded by a grenade are now suing Canada's Omar for close to $50 million. The lawsuit alleges that Khadr, then 15, was responsible for the death of one American soldier and blinding of another in July 2002. The basis for the suit is that Khadr pleaded guilty to five war crimes before a U.S. military commission in Guantanamo Bay in October 2010 that saw him sentenced to a further eight years in prison.

That plea deal stipulated that Khadr, now 27, admitted to murder and attempted murder in violation of the rule of war, and three other war crimes. The Khadr lawyers responded that Omar only pleaded guilty to those charges to get out of the USA and into a Canadian prison.

Should anyone have the right to sue anybody else because of the result of war.

Should a terrorist have the right to sue a government because he feels he was mistreated?

Do you know who is going to pay for all these lawyers?

Is this soap opera ever going to end?

Some coverage at;

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/omar-khadr-faces-50m-suit-by-blinded-u-s-soldier-widow-1.2651290

and

http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/omar-khadr-sues-government-for-60-million/

Can a 15 yeat old be sued?

Will his mother have to pay?

[Rue]

The Harper government is onside with keeping it going because it's their ideology to punish him because he's a Muslim. But there's also the blackmail threat from the US that's not being ignored as it should be.

Here's a test of the riculous level on which this needs to be placed. Just imagine how US military murderers are treated who are actually caught on camera slaughtering injured and dying Muslims. They walk and they've been walking ever since Calley walked for his crimes against humanity.

The Harper government wants to punish him because he's a Muslim? Say you sound familiar. We just had someone else write a post saying he was being discriminated against from entering Canada because he's a Muslim by Harper with zero proof of that allegation as well.

So where do you get off making such a b.s. allegation?

This man engaged in terrorism and murder and you say he is being held liable for that because he's a Muslim? Oh I get it. If I engage in terror and murder and call it Islamic religious belief I am allowed to do it? That is your reasoning?

This sob can act like a victim of religious persecution because he chose to engage in violence and terror?

I have news for you. Whether he claims to be a Muslim, Christian, Jew, Bahaii, Sayanist, Wiccan, atheist, agnostic, Buddist, Taoist, Scientologist, whatever, if he engages in terror and violence in the name of his alleged religion, he's a terrorist and he should be treated as such. End of story.

Pull that Muslim card with someone else. Oh wait and you will be the first to complain if someone says all Muslims are terrorists but you now claim a terrorist if he claims to be Muslim should be protected for his terrorist beliefs. Right got it.

Edited May 24, 2014 by Rue

[Rue]

Can a 15 yeat old be sued?

Will his mother have to pay?

No you would sue his father's estate and mother and they could seize his mother's house in Canada.

Clearly someone got fed up seeing his family live in a house on welfare claiming Canada is an infidel state while in the next breath collecting welfare.

[monty16]

The Harper government wants to punish him because he's a Muslim? Say you sound familiar. We just had someone else write a post saying he was being discriminated against from entering Canada because he's a Muslim by Harper with zero proof of that allegation as well.

So where do you get off making such a b.s. allegation?

This man engaged in terrorism and murder and you say he is being held liable for that because he's a Muslim? Oh I get it. If I engage in terror and murder and call it Islamic religious belief I am allowed to do it? That is your reasoning?

This sob can act like a victim of religious persecution because he chose to engage in violence and terror?

I have news for you. Whether he claims to be a Muslim, Christian, Jew, Bahaii, Sayanist, Wiccan, atheist, agnostic, Buddist, Taoist, Scientologist, whatever, if he engages in terror and violence in the name of his alleged religion, he's a terrorist and he should be treated as such. End of story.

Pull that Muslim card with someone else. Oh wait and you will be the first to complain if someone says all Muslims are terrorists but you now claim a terrorist if he claims to be Muslim should be protected for his terrorist beliefs. Right got it.

The US slaughters hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians and calls it the war on terror. In retrospect we now know it was nothing of the sort. We also know that if there was justice in the world, Bush and his neocons would be strung up by their heels from lampposts in the Hague and have their throats cut in public.

Then we could put the 15 year old kid before the ICC and see if they are going to be so tough to sentence him to probation for 6 months with time off for time already served. And a few million dollars for the balance.

Don't you think we need to get our priorities in order?

[Wilber]

The US slaughters hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians and calls it the war on terror. In retrospect we now know it was nothing of the sort. We also know that if there was justice in the world, Bush and his neocons would be strung up by their heels from lampposts in the Hague and have their throats cut in public.

Then we could put the 15 year old kid before the ICC and see if they are going to be so tough to sentence him to probation for 6 months with time off for time already served. And a few million dollars for the balance.

Don't you think we need to get our priorities in order?

Khadr isn't suing Bush, he is suing you. Time to get your priorities in order.

[Moonlight Graham]

Jurisdiction is determined by either the accident site or where defendant lives so that is one way. So I think that is what you are getting at.

US tort laws can allow an American attacked by a terrorist anywhere in the world can sue that person not just in the jurisdiction of the site of attack or where that citizen lives, but also the US.

US laws don't apply to Canadians and their assets in Canada. If they sue, it will apply only to what the US government has access to in gov or US bank funds etc. Khadr was already sued by the family of victims while he was at Gitmo, from wikipedia:

Sgt. Layne Morris and Sgt. Speer's widow Tabitha, both represented by Donald Winder,^[179] filed a civil suit against the estate of Ahmed Khadr – claiming that the father's failure to control his son resulted in the loss of Speers' life and Morris' right eye. Since United States law does not allow civil lawsuits against "acts of war", Speer and Morris relied on the argument that throwing the grenade was an act of terrorism, rather than war. In February 2006, Utah District Court Judge Paul Cassell awarded the plaintiffs $102.6 million in damages, approximately $94 million to Speer and $8 million to Morris.^[180] He said it likely marks the first time terrorist acts have resulted in civil liabilities.^[181] It has been suggested that the plaintiffs might collect funds via the U.S. Terrorism Risk Insurance Act,^[182] but since the Federal government is not bound by civil rulings, it has refused to release Khadr's frozen assets.

"Speer and Morris relied on the argument that throwing the grenade was an act of terrorism, rather than war." What a joke. Throwing a grenade at an active soldier in a war zone can in no way be described as an act of terrorism by the very definition of the word. Btw I'm not defending the scumbag Khadr so much as I'm defending his right as a Canadian citizen against these Americans, as I would any Canadian. The US and Canadian governments have treated him very unjustly in this whole matter. Regardless of his actions, & I don't care if he raped 1000 babies, he has still is and should be guaranteed certain legal rights.

[WWWTT]

You , of course , have a link that backs this up ....right?

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

This man engaged in terrorism and murder and you say he is being held liable for that because he's a Muslim?

LOL!

Do you see the contradiction?

Name me a terrorist that isn't a Muslim.

Oh and by the way what is terrorism?

WWWTT

[On Guard for Thee]

The Harper government wants to punish him because he's a Muslim? Say you sound familiar. We just had someone else write a post saying he was being discriminated against from entering Canada because he's a Muslim by Harper with zero proof of that allegation as well.

So where do you get off making such a b.s. allegation?

This man engaged in terrorism and murder and you say he is being held liable for that because he's a Muslim? Oh I get it. If I engage in terror and murder and call it Islamic religious belief I am allowed to do it? That is your reasoning?

This sob can act like a victim of religious persecution because he chose to engage in violence and terror?

I have news for you. Whether he claims to be a Muslim, Christian, Jew, Bahaii, Sayanist, Wiccan, atheist, agnostic, Buddist, Taoist, Scientologist, whatever, if he engages in terror and violence in the name of his alleged religion, he's a terrorist and he should be treated as such. End of story.

Pull that Muslim card with someone else. Oh wait and you will be the first to complain if someone says all Muslims are terrorists but you now claim a terrorist if he claims to be Muslim should be protected for his terrorist beliefs. Right got it.

And what did the US engage in?

[monty16]

Khadr isn't suing Bush, he is suing you. Time to get your priorities in order.

Is that as good as your rebuttals ever get? Absolutely nothing to do with anything I said. Talk about getting priorities straight!

[monty16]

LOL!

Do you see the contradiction?

Name me a terrorist that isn't a Muslim.

Oh and by the way what is terrorism?

WWWTT

Great question. Terrorists and freedom fighters are the same thing, only looked at from a different perspective. Anyone who condemns that approach to the issue needs to think about it for a while before making a fool of themselves.

So with that in mind it's easy to name a terrorist who isn't a Muslim.

[Argus]

The US slaughters hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians

In point of fact, most of them were 'slaughtered' by Iraqis.

[Shady]

In point of fact, most of them were 'slaughtered' by Iraqis.

Exactly. The surge in '06 was to help stop the intensity of the violence.

[On Guard for Thee]

Exactly. The surge in '06 was to help stop the intensity of the violence.

And was that what the invasion of '03 was supposed to do as well?

[Shady]

And was that what the invasion of '03 was supposed to do as well?

No. It was to remove Saddam Hussein from power.

[On Guard for Thee]

No. It was to remove Saddam Hussein from power.

The US claimed it was to get those nasty weapons of mass destruction. Probably one of the truest statement ever uttered about that war was from a retired CIA guy who said "we know he HAD those types of weapons, we have the receipts" They certainly didn't have them when they invaded.

[Shady]

The US claimed it was to get those nasty weapons of mass destruction. Probably one of the truest statement ever uttered about that war was from a retired CIA guy who said "we know he HAD those types of weapons, we have the receipts" They certainly didn't have them when they invaded.

I guess Saddam should've have refused inspections for four years then. Violating UN resolutions can have deadly consequences. Especially when there's actually people around that want to enforce them.

[On Guard for Thee]

I guess Saddam should've have refused inspections for four years then. Violating UN resolutions can have deadly consequences. Especially when there's actually people around that want to enforce them.

Except they never found any violations.

[monty16]

Americans not admitting their guilt for that illegal phony war is simply profane. Saddam Hussein's biggest mistake was not working harder to obtain the nuclear deterrent to US aggression. It will be a lesson for any other country that trusts the US's intentions are honourable.

Edited May 25, 2014 by monty16

[WWWTT]

Great question. Terrorists and freedom fighters are the same thing, only looked at from a different perspective. Anyone who condemns that approach to the issue needs to think about it for a while before making a fool of themselves.

So with that in mind it's easy to name a terrorist who isn't a Muslim.

Exactly!

Barack Obama is probably the biggest terrorist right now with his drone strikes!

It's very easy for you and I to find a whole slew of terrorists who aren't Islamic. But not so easy for someone with stereotype cast vision. That's who my question was directed for

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

Khadr isn't suing Bush, he is suing you. Time to get your priorities in order.

LOL!

We are not the Canadian government!

Nor are we in any way responsible for the actions of the conservative government!

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

I would suggest the lawsuit is based on his lawsuit, and the belief he will be coming into a lot of money. No one wants to see the punk who murdered their loved ones become a multi-millionaire because of it.

Welcome to US post WW2 politics!

See US invasion of Iraq and the list of US contractors making billions there.

But somehow you want to hold this guy to a higher moral standard than you hold western (especially US) governments!

WWWTT