Khadr Wins Transfer

[On Guard for Thee]

Really? A "rock star" in Gitmo with the other extremists makes him a "model prisoner"? You know, because if he opposed violent jihad, that would go against the grain. Hardly model at all.

Well the experts who are tasked with making those determinations, and who actually get to spend time with, and evaluating, him, have reached their conclusion and it is in fact, model prisoner. Not sure what qualifications you have to determine them wrong.

[Topaz]

First of all, Americans are not terrorists , only some who run the government, like CIA and others. The people of a country can't be responsible for what its government does, especially if they don't know what the government is up to, and that goes for Canada too. Who knows what has happened in the past and what is happening now under Harper, who seems to like to send off our military to any conflict that makes him feel good. Lately Harper talking about sending the military to the Philippines, to "train" their military, training under Harper means going to war.

[drummindiver]

Folks,

If you have a problem with a fellow member's posts or if you believe a fellow member is violating the forum rules, you are expected to report it, to ignore it and to refrain from responding in kind.

If you can not handle those simple freedoms, then you are expected to go find some place else on the internet to pass your time.

Edited May 10, 2015 by drummindiver

[Army Guy]

First of all we dont all agree, he may have, but there is on site testimony from other US personnel which sheds doubt on what he actually did. And what would you consider yourself in relation to an invading force coming into your housing compound and starting a firefight if not an enemy. And once again, if hes a soldier then he was only doing his job. Soldiers kill each other in case you havent somehow heard of it.

Wow, was,nt it you that was calling out everyone for not reading the transcript of Omars press conference, it seems your just as guilty of misinterputating the facts.

Yes it is true not all the US ground forces had the same statements, and some did shed some doubt on what happened, as with any crime scene and multi witnesses, it is common that they all don't line up, as not everyone see's what happened from a certain perspective nor do they translate what they seen the same way.

You call them an invading force, and the incident in hand happened on July 27 th 2002.....the Taliban regime had stopped being the legal government well before that infact the UN had set up the Afghan interim government on Dec 22, 2001. In which Hamid Karzai was appointed as it' s new leader....it was him that had asked coalition forces plus UN forces to act as tHe countries security forces....which does not make them an invading force, but rather the legal right to maintain security at that time....

My next piont is .....was Omar not a Canadian citizen at the time, visiting the country of Afghanistan during the time of the conflict, perhaps you can show me in any law were he would have any legal rights to defend anything in Afghanistan....or did he just get caught up in he moment.....next piont it was not Us forces that approached the compound that Omar and his terrorist buddies were, it was afghan forces, they had knocked on the door and asked if they and US forces could search the house, the answer they received was gun fire, killing 2 members of the afghan forces, US forces then surrounded the coound and waited for more forces to arrive.....does not sound like they started anything, it sounds like they did not want the compound searched as it was a bomb factory. They had something to hide....

But he was not a soldier was he, in fact he was a Canadian citizen, he did not wear an Afghanistan uniform, nor did he bear arms openly,

He was however trained by Al Queda, in the presence of other Al Queda members, that built IED' s for the purpose of killing US forces in the area.....the same US forces that had taken charge of Afghanistan security.....all of that makes him a terrorist, under inter national law, UN charters of rules of war, Canadian law, and let's not forget Afghanistan laws.....

[The_Squid]

was Omar not a Canadian citizen at the time, visiting the country of Afghanistan during the time of the conflict

So you think Omar bought a plane ticket and travelled there of his own volition? How many international trips did you do by yourself when you were 15 years old or less? That's sheer stupidity to think that he made his own way there!

[Army Guy]

http://m.thestar.com/#/article/news/canada/2015/05/07/omar-khadr-speaks-freedom-is-way-better-than-i-thought.html

Q: Omar, what do you want Canadians to know about you? Whats most important?

A: Just to give me a chance, who I am as a person, not as a name. They can make their own judgement after that.

Q: Who are you as a person?

A: Im still learning about myself, Im still growing. I believe in learning, I didnt have a lot of experience in life, and Im excited to start my life.

...

Q: Omar, what do you want the American people to know about you?

A: I can say that Im sorry for the pain I might have caused the families of the victims, and theres nothing I can do about the past but I hope that, the future can I can do something about the future.

...

Q: Can you categorically say that you denounce violence [indistinguishable] Omar?

A: Yes, yes I can.

Q: Not one thing?

A: Its not something I believe in right now. I want to start, fresh start. Theres too many good things in life that I want to experience.

Q: Do you have any career aspirations? Looking down the road, is there anything that you really?

A: Something in the healthcare. I believe that you have to be able to empathize with people in pain and I know how that Ive experienced pain so I think I can empathize with people who are going through that. And I think I hope I can do something in the healthcare.

Q: Omar, so many Canadians know about your father. What do you think about your father now after what happened to you?

A: Theres a lot of questions that Id like to ask my father. I cant change the past, all I can do is just work on the present and future.

Q: What do you want to ask him? What would you ask him?

A: Uh, everything? A lot of decisions that he made, reason he took us back there, just a whole bunch of questions about his reasoning behind and his life decisions.

Q: And these are not life decisions you want to make going forward?

A: No.

Q: What would you say to someone who is contemplating extremism and looking to you as a young person?

A: What I would tell everybody is to educate yourself. Dont let emotions control you. Education is very important, Ive noticed that a lot of people are manipulated by not being educated, so education is very important.

Edited to add:

This is interesting too:omar_khadr_innocent_in_death_of_us_soldier

My sense is that Omar Khadr doesn't remember throwing a grenade, doesn't know himself whether he killed anybody.

And a US soldier reported that he stood on top of the pile of rubble before the grenade was thrown, and they later found Khadr under the rubble.

.

Thank you , I guess I should have done some research first, sorry.

My question I do have if Omar could not have thrown the grenade because he was under some brush, how or when did he receive the the gunshot wounds to his back, did they uncover him then shoot him, was it moments before getting buried in the brush....either way it opens up other questions as well.

[Army Guy]

So you think Omar bought a plane ticket and travelled there of his own volition? How many international trips did you do by yourself when you were 15 years old or less? That's sheer stupidity to think that he made his own way there!

I don't recall ever saying he traveled by himself, regardless of how he traveled or with whom. He traveled with how does that change the fact he was a Canadian visitor in afghanistan , what right did he have for using force again'st afghan authorities....what set of laws would allow him to defend anything in Afghanistan......stop jumping to conclusions.

[The_Squid]

I don't recall ever saying he traveled by himself, regardless of how he traveled or with whom. He traveled with how does that change the fact he was a Canadian visitor in afghanistan , what right did he have for using force again'st afghan authorities....what set of laws would allow him to defend anything in Afghanistan......stop jumping to conclusions.

I didn't say by himself.... I said his ow volition.

As if he decided to take a vacation and throw some grenades!

Do you think he travelled there of his own volition?

[Rue]

Kadr has never denied he killed a US soldier and has never denounced his act of war. When he stated he was sorry for the harm he had done it was not directed at the Afghani people, Canada, the family of the dead US soldier-this was a sorry I got caught to his parents comment.

He was given many opportunities to in fact denounce what he did and refused stating what he did was an act of war not an act of terror. Unlike some I have actually read all his interviews and he refused to work with Musim Mullahs who offered him guidance in turning down violence as a legitimate method of political expression-he sent them on their way.

His entire argument is not that he did what he did but he wants it excluded as being forced out of him. Why? If he was tortured as he says, and what he said is not true, then why admit hat he did?

He's a terrorist caught in the act of murder who does not deny he is a murderer-but tries to throw out the evidence on a technicality. Why/if he was genuinely remorseful why bother-just admit you are a terrorist and want to change.He's not doing that. His defence is he was just a soldier acting as a soldier when caught and then was coerced into calling himself a terrorist. He was not in uniform. He was fighting in civilian clothes not as a member of a state army but a terror cell. He was at all material times a child terrorist. He was never a child soldier.

Some believe if they sanitize what he did by presenting him as a soldier he sounds more cuddly. Get over it. Your spin does not change what he was and remains. This is not someone who believes what he did was wrong. He has stated what he did was not wrong and he would do it again.

Some of you need to go read his interviews which were not coerced.

You want to pretend he's not a terrorist because he says he is sorry for the problems he has caused? That's it/Oh well then off you go that settles that.Off to Tim Horton's and settle in the suburbs an marry and become a model citizen.

You Kadr apologists haven't a clue what turns one into a terrorist and how it does not magically poof go away because you pretend he is not what he is. Go on keep hugging your cute little wolf puppy and pretend he will grow into a lap dog.

Edited May 10, 2015 by Rue

[Army Guy]

I didn't say by himself.... I said his ow volition.

As if he decided to take a vacation and throw some grenades!

Do you think he travelled there of his own volition?

Squid take a moment here and think about what your saying, would it matter if he was drug over there kicking and screaming, if he was kidnaped, would it change the fact that he was a Canadian citizen......would it change the fact that he was not afghanis, would it change the fact that according to afghan officials he was not an afghanis citizen but just a vistor.....

My question still stands what set of laws covers him "meaning allows him" or gives him the right to take up arms in Afghanistan.

[The_Squid]

No one is an appologist for anything he may or may not have done. Most Canadians (yourself excepted) want any Canadian who is accused of this sort of thing to get a fair trial, and for the gov't to live by their obligations.

For instance, he should not have been sent to Gitmo and tortured; or been tried by the kangaroo court where he was "convicted".

Also, Canada should be living up to its child soldier treaties, which it clearly did not.

Both of these things lead people to think that there has been an injustice, and every court case Khadr has had in Canada has confirmed this.

[The_Squid]

Squid take a moment here and think about what your saying, would it matter if he was drug over there kicking and screaming, if he was kidnaped, would it change the fact that he was a Canadian citizen......would it change the fact that he was not afghanis, would it change the fact that according to afghan officials he was not an afghanis citizen but just a vistor.....

My question still stands what set of laws covers him "meaning allows him" or gives him the right to take up arms in Afghanistan.

Of course if someone is forced to do something as a child that, as a fully developed adult they probably wouldn't do, is a totally different situation. It's called indoctrination and is why we have signed a treaty to treat these kids differently than we would the adults in the same situation.

So you think this teenager voluntarily went over there and threw grenades of his own volition?

[On Guard for Thee]

Wow, was,nt it you that was calling out everyone for not reading the transcript of Omars press conference, it seems your just as guilty of misinterputating the facts.

Yes it is true not all the US ground forces had the same statements, and some did shed some doubt on what happened, as with any crime scene and multi witnesses, it is common that they all don't line up, as not everyone see's what happened from a certain perspective nor do they translate what they seen the same way.

You call them an invading force, and the incident in hand happened on July 27 th 2002.....the Taliban regime had stopped being the legal government well before that infact the UN had set up the Afghan interim government on Dec 22, 2001. In which Hamid Karzai was appointed as it' s new leader....it was him that had asked coalition forces plus UN forces to act as tHe countries security forces....which does not make them an invading force, but rather the legal right to maintain security at that time....

My next piont is .....was Omar not a Canadian citizen at the time, visiting the country of Afghanistan during the time of the conflict, perhaps you can show me in any law were he would have any legal rights to defend anything in Afghanistan....or did he just get caught up in he moment.....next piont it was not Us forces that approached the compound that Omar and his terrorist buddies were, it was afghan forces, they had knocked on the door and asked if they and US forces could search the house, the answer they received was gun fire, killing 2 members of the afghan forces, US forces then surrounded the coound and waited for more forces to arrive.....does not sound like they started anything, it sounds like they did not want the compound searched as it was a bomb factory. They had something to hide....

But he was not a soldier was he, in fact he was a Canadian citizen, he did not wear an Afghanistan uniform, nor did he bear arms openly,

He was however trained by Al Queda, in the presence of other Al Queda members, that built IED' s for the purpose of killing US forces in the area.....the same US forces that had taken charge of Afghanistan security.....all of that makes him a terrorist, under inter national law, UN charters of rules of war, Canadian law, and let's not forget Afghanistan laws.....

Better check your facts with regard to the laws you are referencing. The CMA is dubious at best, and international law forbids charging someone retroactively with a newly created law. Also under international law, Khadr was a child at the time of the incident.

[Keepitsimple]

Of course if someone is forced to do something as a child that, as a fully developed adult they probably wouldn't do, is a totally different situation. It's called indoctrination and is why we have signed a treaty to treat these kids differently than we would the adults in the same situation.

So you think this teenager voluntarily went over there and threw grenades of his own volition?

Who's to say any different? With his entire family steeped in terrorism, chances are he would have remained over there to do his father's bidding as he turned 16, 17 and 18. The only thing that stopped him was a bullet. Her listen - if he can turn his life around - great - and good on him.

[cybercoma]

It sounds like your leaning towards Khadr simply being a victim and responding in self defence.

Khadr is more a victim of radical terrorists than you or I will ever be. Edited May 10, 2015 by cybercoma

[cybercoma]

Kadr has never denied he killed a US soldier

Just out of curiosity, have you ever denied killing US soldiers?

[cybercoma]

Better check your facts with regard to the laws you are referencing. The CMA is dubious at best, and international law forbids charging someone retroactively with a newly created law. Also under international law, Khadr was a child at the time of the incident.

Legal experts claim that Khadr has an excellent chance of winning his appeal since the military conviction had "no credible legal foundation."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/omar-khadr-s-odds-of-winning-u-s-appeal-look-good-legal-expert-says-1.3065931

snippets

[snip]

Glazier, a leading expert on military commissions, teaches courses on the law of war and international law at Loyola School of Law in Los Angeles.

Before that, Glazier served 21 years in the U.S. navy, including as commander of the frigate USS George Philip.

[snip]

The key merit of Khadr's appeal, Glazier says, "is that he's being tried in a military court system which, as a matter of law, should only have jurisdiction over actual war crimes' allegations, and none of the charges that have been levied against him constitute war crimes, as recognized by international law."

[snip]

"you can't plead guilty to something that a court can't try you for." Glazier says that Khadr's guilty plea shouldn't have any legal effect.

[snip]

"none of Khadr's five charges described actual war crimes, even assuming the underlying factual predicates are true." That means the military commission didn't have jurisdiction.

[Army Guy]

Better check your facts with regard to the laws you are referencing. The CMA is dubious at best, and international law forbids charging someone retroactively with a newly created law. Also under international law, Khadr was a child at the time of the incident.

Perhaps you can explain where you think my facts are incorrect.

Was it the fact that Omar was a Canadian citizen, and had no rights other than those implied to any vistor of a foreign country?

Was it the fact that Omar was a member of a terrorist organization.

Correct me if I!m wrong but inter national law in regards to terrorism have been in place for a long time.

Inter national laws in regarding child soldiers, does not state that children can not be charged with war crimes, it does say they should be given special consideration , but there is no get out of jail free card. Just as Canadian civil law youths can be chaged as an adult if the crime is serious, murder is a serious crime.

[Army Guy]

Yes we have signed the treaty, but show where in that treaty it states that children can NOT be held accountable for their actions. Taking into account he was a member of a terrorist group, has been charged with murder in a war zone, on top of being a bomb maker. Which would put him on top of the target list for NATO forces.

Yes I do, he wanted to be with his family, did he have a choice no he did not, that being said do you think he did not know right from wrong, do you think he knew that his country of citizenship was at war with the group he was supporting. At almost 16 years of age do you think he was not capable of his own chioces, such as surrendering himself to NATO troops, or leaving the war zone, and going home to his mother in Pakistan,

And yet in his video tapes he proclaims he wanted to claim the bounty for killing American soldiers, I think he bought into the life style hook line and sinker, and thought his dream would never come to an end. I'm sure if he had not been captured he would still be involved with the terrorist or dead.

[cybercoma]

Omar Khadr wasn't charged with war crimes. That's the whole problem. And have you no conscience for a child who was brought by his father to a foreign country and forced to be involved in those things? Why does no one criticize his father nearly as much as they criticize Omar?

[On Guard for Thee]

Perhaps you can explain where you think my facts are incorrect.

Was it the fact that Omar was a Canadian citizen, and had no rights other than those implied to any vistor of a foreign country?

Was it the fact that Omar was a member of a terrorist organization.

Correct me if I!m wrong but inter national law in regards to terrorism have been in place for a long time.

Inter national laws in regarding child soldiers, does not state that children can not be charged with war crimes, it does say they should be given special consideration , but there is no get out of jail free card. Just as Canadian civil law youths can be chaged as an adult if the crime is serious, murder is a serious crime.

For one thing, and as I for one have already stated, the MCA was brought into power long after Khadr was imprisoned in a illegal prison, under illegal law, and he was then retroactively charged under that law. That is illegal under international law.

[Army Guy]

Omar Khadr wasn't charged with war crimes. That's the whole problem. And have you no conscience for a child who was brought by his father to a foreign country and forced to be involved in those things? Why does no one criticize his father nearly as much as they criticize Omar?

Actually last time I checked murder is a war crime, he killed a U.S. Soldier while he was an illegal combatant.....that part of the convention is designed to protect innocent civilians, but it works both ways.

None, please explain what makes Omar any different than the other terrorists, because he was Under 16 years of age.....because there is a lot of terrorist under 16....what makes him any different than the other Canadian minors that were charged and tried in adult court because of the seriousness of their crimes.

Start a topic i' m sure lots of people will have something to say.

[Army Guy]

CMA, now MCA I'm getting confused could you spell it out for me which one did you mean and what does it mean.

[On Guard for Thee]

CMA, now MCA I'm getting confused could you spell it out for me which one did you mean and what does it mean.

Oops, did I make a typo. OK, MCA, it refers to Military Commissions Act. A little somethin the US cooked up 4 years or so after they were already waterboarding Omar at Gitmo.

[The_Squid]

Actually last time I checked murder is a war crime, he killed a U.S. Soldier while he was an illegal combatant.....that part of the convention is designed to protect innocent civilians, but it works both ways.

None, please explain what makes Omar any different than the other terrorists, because he was Under 16 years of age.....because there is a lot of terrorist under 16....what makes him any different than the other Canadian minors that were charged and tried in adult court because of the seriousness of their crimes.

Start a topic i' m sure lots of people will have something to say.

Again, do you really think a teenage Kahdr went to fight of his own volition, or was he indoctrinated?

Edited May 11, 2015 by The_Squid