Widow suing Khadr

[eyeball]

Who forced us to follow the American's interpretation again? And so long as you're avoiding the topic, were you conscripted at gun point or something? I hear they do that child soldiers sometimes too.

Edited January 26, 2020 by eyeball

[Moonlight Graham]

On 1/24/2020 at 7:28 PM, eyeball said:

Not 15 year old's who've been indoctrinated from the age of 8.

Parents instill their values in their children.  His parents were terrorists, Omar was a terrorist and went to war against NATO and Canada.

Omar shouldn't have been treated inhumanely and left in gitmo.  He also isn't a completely innocent doe-eyed victim, though he was a child soldier and shouldn't be treated as harshly as an adult.  He still should have been imprisoned and as a trained terrorist raised in such a belief system should always be watched very closely.

Yes Omar was wronged, but I've never seen you make anything but excuses and apologies for the guy.  Take your eye off your enemy and he'll slit your throat in the night.

Edited January 27, 2020 by Moonlight Graham

[eyeball]

28 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Yes Omar was wronged, but I've never seen you make anything but excuses and apologies for the guy. 

Thats probably because I think the way his case and especially the fictions spun about his classification symbolize the deeper contradictions of this war such as the basis for it who started it and why - I recall there was a time when you didn't make excuses and apologies for the other protagonists but apparently someone/thing got  to you.

Quote

Take your eye off your enemy and he'll slit your throat in the night.

Yes and the Islamofascist's carrier strike groups and invasion forces will be arriving on our coasts any day now too.

In the meantime closing our eyes to our allies behaviour and focusing instead on following their fear has cost us billions of dollars and gallons of blood. It's also shaken our unity as a nation by causing Canadians to doubt the morality and values of their fellow citizens and wonder what it is we have or ever had in common.

Edited January 27, 2020 by eyeball

[Moonlight Graham]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

 I recall there was a time when you didn't make excuses and apologies for the other protagonists but apparently someone/thing got  to you.

Who am I making excuses for?  US wrongly tortured prisoners, the Canadian gov is also complicit in wrongly keeping Omar in gitmo.  Omar and his family are also pieces of crap.

You feel sorry for the guy and think he's a victim, others think he's just a POS.  I think he's both.

Most anyone who ever murdered anyone has some kind of sob story, whether from their upbringing or whatever.  Aboriginals in jail, poor black Americans, Charles Manson, whomever.  It's fine and even good to have some empathy for them but at the end of the day people are still responsible for their own actions despite their sob stories and should be held accountable.

At the root of most politics is victim/oppressor narratives and who you feel sorry for vs not.

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Yes and the Islamofascist's carrier strike groups and invasion forces will be arriving on our coasts any day now too.

Terrorists don't use uniformed armies they use asymmetrical warfare, and they're already here.  They attacked our politicians inside Parliament Hill, have attacked military soldiers and locations within Canada numerous times, have gone off to fight for ISIS and returned etc.  Everyone has blood on their hands, so choose your loyalty and choose wisely.

 

[Army Guy]

On 1/26/2020 at 7:08 PM, eyeball said:

What it says is that he was a kid. Full stop.

Whatever else you think the GC says about child soldiers is and was moot without that singularly important first initial acknowledgement.

You still don't get it, He was charged under a US military tribunal, that was using US laws...had nothing to do with the conventions...nothing...Omar was a Canadian citizen who was Captured by US forces , and charged with the murder of a US Soldier.. and would be tried in a US court of law....

Omar's pay out was due to CSIS passing on info they had collected during their interviews with Omar...disregarding some of his Canadian rights... which we as a nation became so focused on, that we completely forgot to press any other charges such as treason, or being an terrorist, or at very minimum an illegal combatant, I know that means nothing to you....or to the other Canadians that think like you....

We as a nation thought what ever sentence the US handed down would suffice, 9 years was what he was sentenced ...for murder... Yes he was subjected to torture, loud music and the light were left on during the night....WOW mean while the Taliban was cutting the heads off US army personal that they had captured, and put his killing on the inter net....along with dozens of other killings....and still Canadians find time to weep for a terrorist, no tears for the people of Afghanistan, though …. who had to survive their reign of terror, and what Omar contributed to their pain, he did after all plant mines that killed the first person that drove over them...in most cases this was Afghanis civilians , I know your Canadian passport means fuc* them Afghanis,guys he is one of ours a Canadian who is above the law, and yet here in Canada under aged minors are still subjected to being tried as adults for adult crimes, like ya you guessed it murder....Canada took the easy way out because to many Canadian liberals were crying about his age, and how a Canadian boy got caught up in it all...It would have been difficult to try him for treason, because the law is to old, and still today it has not been updated so it can be used...because putting a teenager on the stand for murder means lost votes...  

[Army Guy]

On 1/26/2020 at 7:13 PM, eyeball said:

Who forced us to follow the American's interpretation again? And so long as you're avoiding the topic, were you conscripted at gun point or something? I hear they do that child soldiers sometimes too.

Nobody is forcing anything on Canadians, he was captured by US forces, after he was charged with murdering a US service member, who do you think was going charge him , and see him through a military tribunal....the UN, the Hague, no the capturing nation is reasonable for determining his status and proceeding with charges, thats how all of this works, you are not asked to understand it, but that is the law, inter-national, US and Canadian.

I did have a chioce, one I could have been released as a CO, and turned my backs on my brothers and sisters to leave them to their own devices in this conflict, and lived with that fact that if anything bad had happened to them while I was at home enjoying myself.....something I may have prevented by my presence, .that would haunt me ...for the rest of my life. again that may be one of your character traits, but it is not one of mine....I did not pick this conflict, OUR country decided that for all of us, for me, and you....the difference between us is you chose to sit at home and whine about it, me and thousands of other Canadians decided to support that decision right or wrong...and do something about it... 

[Abies]

On 1/25/2020 at 9:05 AM, Army Guy said:

The plea was used in the US justice system, where he pleaded guilty to his crimes , in exchange for being returned to Canada .and then he still remained in Canadian prison until he had served his time....So if he wants to redress those sentences he would have to do that through the US system, and they are not going to pay him anything.. …..But also the widow has already filed claims against his new found wealth.....once on American soil do you think they are not going forward with the widows claims...If Justin had any back bone, he would have made sure that 10.5 mil was re directed to the widow...instead he made sure that it was untouchable... giving the terrorist a gift for which he did not deserve.

Canada owes him nothing, he made a chioce one that he reveled in being able to kill American soldiers, who were Canadian allies, fighting in the same theater... In Afghanistan he was considered an adult, in Canada he would have been an adult in a few months, he knew what he was doing , but many here consider he was brain washed....HE was a terrorist period , one that planted mines that claimed not only soldiers lives but unarmed innocent civilians.....he also spied on American and NATO troop movements and reported that info to a known terrorist Groups…so direct action groups could take their life's … all these things he freely admitted to on his tapes, made by himself, and while in terrorist hands...all of those actions are treason...Something that he did not stand trail for....Something all of his groupies forget.. something our government forgot ,  He is a terrorist nothing more, he'll always be a terrorist, something I hope All Canadians will remember when he is asking for a job....or buying a home your sub division.

I spent 3 combat tours in Afghanistan and I'm very familiar with how these terrorist work , how they treated the people of Afghanistan like dirt, pieces of shit to be kicked around on their leisure, forcing children to become suicide bombers, forcing adults do become bombers so the Taliban would not harm their families, your problem here is you have never been terrorized , or lived in a war zone... or had your life dictated to you by some ruthless thugs who would gladly kill you over a glance in there direction.... He has never faced his crimes he committed in Afghanistan, nor the ones in Canada...How anyone here in this nation could even look at him let alone take up his case,   and not loath him is beyond my comprehension...he has made you his bitch and now he is taken you for a ride..

By now you can tell I'm not a fan of Omar and his band of little scumbags,  I don't care how old he was , I don't care he was Canadian, just like most that defend him don't care he killed American service members, be it from IED's or the gun battle.  they don't care what he did to the Afghanis people, they don't care he was in a group that claimed 159 plus Canadian service members through IEDS, or direct action, they don't care how many Canadian families are now without a father or mother, because people like Omar wanted the right  to enslave millions of people through terror, torture, force them into there dream world , where the only way out was death. Yes none of that shit matters as long as we did not infringe on any of his rights...

 

 

 

He is already appealing in the US. If the widow wants to collect she will have to file in Canada and get a Canadian judge to say that judgement has to be upheld. 

Choices he made as a kid after being brainwashed by his family. In Canada 18 is an adult not 16 or 15 for that matter. Also there isn't any evidence he threw the grenade and the bar for charging someone for treason is extremely high and unlikely. He was a child soldier full stop. 

Also nobody made me their 'bitch'. I simply have a brain and I have used it. It is something I encourage you to do. Ironically soldiers are seen as protectors of our freedom but after my exchange with you it turns out it is just a lie. You don't care about the charter or rights at all. 

 

[Abies]

50 minutes ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Who am I making excuses for?  US wrongly tortured prisoners, the Canadian gov is also complicit in wrongly keeping Omar in gitmo.  Omar and his family are also pieces of crap.

You feel sorry for the guy and think he's a victim, others think he's just a POS.  I think he's both.

Most anyone who ever murdered anyone has some kind of sob story, whether from their upbringing or whatever.  Aboriginals in jail, poor black Americans, Charles Manson, whomever.  It's fine and even good to have some empathy for them but at the end of the day people are still responsible for their own actions despite their sob stories and should be held accountable.

At the root of most politics is victim/oppressor narratives and who you feel sorry for vs not.

Terrorists don't use uniformed armies they use asymmetrical warfare, and they're already here.  They attacked our politicians inside Parliament Hill, have attacked military soldiers and locations within Canada numerous times, have gone off to fight for ISIS and returned etc.  Everyone has blood on their hands, so choose your loyalty and choose wisely.

 

The problem is that there hasn't been any evidence that he threw the grenade. The evidence has never been tried in the court of law. 

[Army Guy]

1 hour ago, Abies said:

He is already appealing in the US. If the widow wants to collect she will have to file in Canada and get a Canadian judge to say that judgement has to be upheld. 

Choices he made as a kid after being brainwashed by his family. In Canada 18 is an adult not 16 or 15 for that matter. Also there isn't any evidence he threw the grenade and the bar for charging someone for treason is extremely high and unlikely. He was a child soldier full stop. 

Also nobody made me their 'bitch'. I simply have a brain and I have used it. It is something I encourage you to do. Ironically soldiers are seen as protectors of our freedom but after my exchange with you it turns out it is just a lie. You don't care about the charter or rights at all. 

 

His appeal is going no where, This is not about the law this is about the politics behind it. I would be very surprised if any US court would reverse this decision. 

Quote

Criminal responsibility begins at age 12 in Canada, with individuals protected by the Youth Criminal Justice Act until age 17. By age 14, a youth could be sentenced as an adult.

Do you think that brain washing has an effect on judgement in a court of law, what was Patricia Hurst sentence in her case which was because of brainwashing, was she not found guilty ? .

Did you know right for wrong at age 15 years plus 11 months, would you say that most Canadians by age 15 know that taking a human life is wrong, even criminal, and yet all his actions plus all his recordings seem to display that he took great pride in what he was doing, even though he was armed with the fact it was wrong....But because of some UN policy we have to forget that US ruling,  The same policy that states it does not give any child soldier the freedom not to be prosecuted under the law... 

The level of evidence is not the same in a military tribunal, there is not the beyond a doubt standard, it is much lower. why is that do you think? could it have to do with the fact that the conflict takes priority or everything, each battle ground is not treated as a crime scene, that and the fact large aircraft bombs, mortars, arty shells tend to destroy any physical evidence, that and the fact the Afghans people are very poor, so all the brass and anything of value would have been salvaged once US military left. which was very quickly as they were worried about getting Omar to medical help and out of the area so not to be counter attacked...So with no physical evidence except the few pictures that were taken of the area, and a few witness statements, one could not expect to get a conviction in a regular criminal court...does that mean Omar is not a war criminal ? 

Once again you can call him what ever you like full stop, , but under the US military tribunal they classified him as a terrorist full stop, Under US civil law full stop, he was one of the first people to be classified as such full stop... thats not me making those rulings , that was US courts....Canada also now has similar laws, to which treat terrorist very differently...

Ya they did, some how this terrorist scumbag has won favor in your mind, you truly believe that his rights trumps everyone else, such as the widows rights, or  the Afghanis people rights what about those. His crimes were committed in Afghanistan which he did not answer for....And if not Afghanistan because shit what do they know right...then what about Canadian civil laws, the ones he blatantly broke, just being involved in a terrorist organization is against the law..., Assisting an enemy of this country through spying or passing on info is a big no no, what about taking up arms against a known allied to which Canada is fighting next to, , another big no no, just those 2 laws are grounds for treason alone....but we have no will to charge anyone with treason, let alone any other laws he broke during his time as a terrorist..... the last person charged with treason got a full pardon and an apology, sorry we hung you for crimes that were treasonous....atleast according to Justin...mind you well after the fact no more than a PR exercise...

We as a nation are so focused on his rights as a Canadian , that we forget he was not the only player in this sad story, first there is the death of US sf medic, then there was US intel reports that confirmed Omar's own story about planting mines, and the time stamp on the tape, those mines had killed and wounded US service persons, along with Afghans civilians. He also admitted to planting mines in other time frames as well, with no reports of any US military being wounded or killed, but they are unsure of Afghanis civilians. What other activities did he take part in, he admitted to spying, and passing that info to a known terrorist organization....all of this on tapes found at the same home where the fire fight broke out at....they were not under any integrations, or made under torture, like loud music or having the lights on....And what of the ones we don't know of because no one took that angle.

I think Omar actions made all his given rights to being Canadian null and void, I think once you declare war on this nation and her allies you should not be able to come home and piss all over the same constitution that protects the rest of Canadians, not Canadians of convenience, Omar's family , but Canadians that contribute to this nation, in this time and place we reward those that fought against this great nation, and we make it's Vets take the people of Canada to court over basic rights and needs that most Canadians already have... Sad really, and you have not yet wonder why so many military vets are bitter towards Omar and what he represents. And I'm the one that is insulted for not using my brain, or living up to your aspirations of what a soldier should be, should act like.....I feel the same way when I hear you and other take up for young Omar...., you have chosen a terrorist over the very people you once stood up for...….

This opinion is not just mine, many Canadians have it, along with many like minded nations, who believe this terrorist are a national security risk and their rights to what their nations has to offer them is null and void. upheld by their courts...Even our own nation is taking similar action only backwards we will let the fighters return offer them classes in the arts and poetry we just will not let their wifes and children back in the country...does that make sense to you, still sure your on the right side of this debate....

[Rue]

On ‎1‎/‎24‎/‎2020 at 4:01 PM, Abies said:

Regardless there is no evidence he threw the grenade and the testimony acquired from Khadr was obtained after being tortured. Khadr was only charged because he was pressured to take a plea deal for better treatment.

While you are correct there are no laws on child soldier and I should not be worded as such but that isn’t necessary to my point to be relevant. What is relevant is that in the eyes of the UN he is a child soldier and should be treated as such. This isn’t the same as a youth being radicalized on the internet and committing violence soon after. He was taken by his family to another country at a young age and exposed to violence and extremist rhetoric. 

Also one of your points contradicts what you are saying. “

You removed the Paris Principles from their actual contextual and reference points which was not terrorist groups and did not quote the actual convention that would be relevant. You will also note the protocol's last sentence which clearly like any law of any nation or any principle of the UN is notrecognized and is in fact rejected by terrorist groups.”

It states armed groups and armed forces which covers terrorists groups. So I did not not remove anything from their actual context and reference points.

You did remove it from its context and I explained why. It was not a stand alone document. It was written to extend the previous one I explained to you. It was not drafted in isolation of it to change it. You and others have chosen to use the term "soldier" to describe "terrorists". You are equating them to be one and the same because they both have weapons. Terrorists are not soldiers. Soldiers are members of armed forces designated by state governments. Terrorists are self empowered criminals who do not recognize any laws. The conventions  we have did not  and do not contemplate child terrorists only child soldiers. In fact we have no international conventions providing principles as to how to treat terrorists and until we do there is a vacuum in leadership as to how to deal with them leaving each nation on their own to decide how to deal with terrorists within their domestic laws.

Again I would state  your replies ignore that we can try minors in Canada as adults when the seriousness of their crime can be argued to warrant such a designation.

As well your contention there was no evidence he throw a grenade is not true. You are in fact confusing his lawyer's argument that any thing he said was not inadmissible and therefore his confession he threw a grenade was inadmissible with eye witness statements that corroborated what he threw a grenade as well as independent forensic evidence he threw the grenade. They are not the same. More to the point the person he killed did not have his stomach blown out because of an act of God.. They found shrapnel from the grenade throughout his body and they determined the proximity  and direction of the grenade being thrown before contact to cause the damage it did which precluded anyone but Kadr from having thrown it. So his confession was not necessary and the issue wasn't whether he threw the grenade but under which law he was held culpable and whether the law could find him culpable.

I can tell you under Afghanistan criminal law, there is no diminished capacity argument for brainwashing or differentiation between minors and adults and so he would have been charged and convicted of crimes on Afghani soil including murder. It was because he was removed from Afghanistan and tried under US laws his defence was triggered as it came under US constitutional laws requiring full disclosure of his charges  which was never provided him.

There is no convention on treating child terrorists that the US agreed to follow, none exist. The US had two choices.  Hold him as a prisoner of war in a US miltar prison until hostilities between his terrorist group and Afghan ended, but then he would have had to be released with no criminal record. The US was not obliged to do this as he was not a soldier and therefore covered under the Geneva convention as to treating war prisoners. The US chose instead to create a hybrid mix of domestic criminal and military tribunal procedures to try him but the glaring deficiency  was that this hybrid system did not allow him full disclosure of the evidence from which he was charged  which four times the US Supreme Court said was unconstitutional and made his trial meaningless under US law. George Bush Jr. tried to amend the law 3 times after the initial US Supreme Court rejection and each time it was struck out.

In regards toKadr  minor I showed you the assumption he could not be tried as an adult Is not true. You ignored that. 

Now in regards to your brainwashing defence you confuse it providing a legal defence to criminal guilt with Kadr being innocent . One allows him to be set free and not be found guilty of the crime but his actual innocence remains questionable. An analogy to that would be OJ Simpson. He certainly was found not guilty wasn't he. If you think OJ is innocent good for you. As a lawyer I do appreciate the argument he was/is entitled to a defence of diminished capacity to obtain a lesser sentence  but the concept he did not require any conviction from out state at all I question and I will try explain why. 

The  concept of brainwashing absolutely taking control of every part of a person's mind to prevent them from knowing right from wrong is a  simplistic fallacy. The degree of diminishment of capacity and therefore the ability to discern right from wrong its not automatically 100% because you say so. That is what has to be questioned through psychiatric exams and cross examination at a criminal trial. What we do know from the studies done on mind control is that the degree of control varies with each individual. More to the point if we accepted Kadr was brainwashed by your simplistic absolute definition that turned him into a mindless zombie we  must then accept he still is. and  did not end when he was removed from his captors and manipulators which negates everything we know about mind control. As well we know his brother who suffered under the same conditions has renounced the very beliefs, values and behaviour Kadr refuses to and Kadr avoids his brother like the plague. Why?

I say that because Kadr to this day will not apologize for what he did, or show remorse or regret for what he did. He has never conceded what he did might be wrong or that violence as a method to impose or express political opinion is a crime, just the exact opposite. In fact in the few public demonstrations allowed of him that were, he showed very clear evidence if anything of a sociopath, someone with a fixed flat expression and no emotion and someone who showed contempt with his face and body when asked certain questions or any question that asked him about what he did and why. 

Furthermore if  Mr. Kadr is noit  responsible for his actions, then necessarily his parents are culpable. His father is dead. So why is his mother not in jail for her role if for nothing else than endangering a child and abusing a child? His mother travels to many mosques in Toronto and Canada  preaching that terrorism is acceptable and she preaches an Islamic version of Islam that depicts Canadians, our system of laws and government and all non Muslims as infidel and that a war against us is a religious obligation.  Her daughter, Kadr's sister also preaches the same message. Both live in a large house on social welfare while describing Canada as an infidel nation not worthy of respect. Kadr has sought contact with them repeatedly while his brother has openly questioned their beliefs he avoids. Why?

Next while I can understand as a lawyer the argument that  claiming Kadr was a brain washed child tmay warrant a conviction concentrating on rehabilitation not punishment,  or even a lower sentence it can not ignore he had some degree of culpability. If it does as you argue, this does NOT mean automatically he was entitled to financial compensation let alone in the amount he was given. He could be totally hard done by in your mind as a victim, but anyone who engages in a crime however innocent he may be in law, under common law is not entitled to PROFIT from that crime which he did. Can and should we argue the $10 million was compensation for being wrongfully placed in prison? How? Even if he was brainwashed as you say he had to be institutionalized. You don't take a terrorist and simply drop him back into the society he left and condemned as an enemy to his religious values. He would have had to have been institutionalized prior to any release. That is not the same situation as a non terrorist wrongfully convicted of a crime he never did.  More to the point people who commit violent acts even if they are found not guilty are still subject to detention for psychiatric assessment or treatment. If anything we have released violent people too quickly for fear of detaining them when they are not legally defined as criminals.

The $10 million payment I think was an arbitrary amount Trudeau came up with. I think an entitlement to any amount, let alone the appropriate amount should have come from a  decision by the Supreme Court of Canada not from Lord Justin of Trudeau.

By the way Canadian courts have precluded the spouse of the person he killed to  any standing which leads me to this final  point.

Can  please explain as a supporter of Kadr, if he is a good Muslim as he claims has not taken the  money he received or even some if it and given it to the spouse and her family. Islam preaches he should have done that. See some of us have read the Koran even though we are not Muslim. We know Islam says in such a situation he should acknowledge the pain and suffering he caused the wife and the deceased's children with an apology and all or some if the money he received as an act of humility and remorse not just to the family but with  him before Allah. He has in fact displayed contempt to them both.

 You can romanticize him, I do not.

 

 

 

Edited January 28, 2020 by Rue

[eyeball]

18 hours ago, Army Guy said:

I did have a chioce, one I could have been released as a CO, and turned my backs on my brothers and sisters to leave them to their own devices in this conflict

I feel precisely the same way you do about leaving my fellow human beings under the fists of the dictators and warlords that our side supports. So long as our country chooses that path I'll turn my back on you and your brothers and sisters.

Edited January 28, 2020 by eyeball

[Rue]

19 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I feel precisely the same way you do about leaving my fellow human beings under the fists of the dictators and warlords that our side supports. So long as our country chooses that path I'll turn my back on you and your brothers and sisters.

Armchair sofa warrior talk. Its easy to sound like a warrior. Before you brag about going to war to an actual soldier, at least wear a uniform.

Next you want to go to war, I suggest you understand joining up with the people Kadr did to fight who you consider dictators and warlords is not the act of a hero. Stop romanticizing what Kadr did. He was no hero.

Is it just me. The very same people who portray Kadr as a hero against injustice also will quickly flip when its convenient and say he was brainwashed and had no idea what he was doing...so which is it.

Oh wait a brainwashed terrorist is a hero. Got it.

 

[eyeball]

38 minutes ago, Rue said:

Armchair sofa warrior talk. Its easy to sound like a warrior.

I'm actually trying to sound pacifist - something that's much much harder in today's world.

If you're trying to sound ridiculous with the rest of your post you've succeeded. 

[Rue]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

I'm actually trying to sound pacifist - something that's much much harder in today's world.

If you're trying to sound ridiculous with the rest of your post you've succeeded. 

No yer kidding. I had no idea. So let's see now....I am ridiculous because you claim you " feel the same way about dictators and warlords as Army Guy "...only he gets off his ass and puts on a uniform and puts his life out there to do something about it...and let's see now...you....you do exactly what? Oh right I got it, nothing....but hey you feel like him.

My point was, if you sit on your ass while people like Army Guy have to put their lives on the line you necessarily with your silence show the Kadrs of the world this country is not willing to support its soldiers contain them so you may as well stand next to Kadr and shoot at American, Canadian soldiers. 

You really think in the face of terrorism chanting Hari Krishna will make your boogy man go away? You romanticize conflict.

Take it from me...I  cleaned toilets and gave enemas. call me Mr. Poo Face, .I am  telling you, watch who you are so quick to turn your back on. Make sure they are still there cuz you need that enema. From the sounds if it you are full of it.

I do not claim to speak for AG or dare to. Toilets and the lowest level of cleaning butts and toes is all I know. Its enough to know though Eyeball you don't get it. You just take for granted you can shit.

Regards

Zog Enema

 

 

Edited January 28, 2020 by Rue

[eyeball]

Like I said Rue if you're trying to sound ridiculous you're succeeding...beyond expectations. 

[eyeball]

21 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Everyone has blood on their hands, so choose your loyalty and choose wisely.

I prefer to not choose a side because I believe it's wiser to remain loyal to our stated principles and values.

[Rue]

43 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Like I said Rue if you're trying to sound ridiculous you're succeeding...beyond expectations. 

Like I said your calling yourself a pacifist as your excuse for what you said is ridiculous.

[Rue]

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I prefer to not choose a side because I believe it's wiser to remain loyal to our stated principles and values.

That was ridiculous. You chose a side to be able to  state the above. When you finished visiting whatever dimension you transported yourself to remember your physical capsule is still here in this dimension.

 

Edited January 28, 2020 by Rue

[eyeball]

21 hours ago, Army Guy said:

You still don't get it, He was charged under a US military tribunal, that was using US laws...had nothing to do with the conventions...nothing...

I get this all just fine. What you don't get is why I think our country has made a horrible mistake by accepting this.

[eyeball]

1 minute ago, Rue said:

Like I said your calling yourself a pacifist as your excuse for what you said is ridiculous.

My excuses for pacifism are values and principles - like the ones my grandparents fought for - ending tyranny not supporting it.

[Rue]

7 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I get this all just fine. What you don't get is why I think our country has made a horrible mistake by accepting this.

 The lack of international convention to  provide a legal set of principles for nations to incorporate into their laws has led to a legal confusion as to how to treat terrorists-so necessarily all nations of the world made a mistake. In fact an inability of the UN to get the majority of its states to agree to such a convention because the majority of them are human rights violators who can't agree on basic fundamental principles of fairness.

So how does Turning your back on Canadian soldiers address that mistake?  It blames Canadian soldiers for this. That is ridiculous.

The US may have screwed up trying to come up with the legal system it did but at least it tried in the face of this legal vacuum What were the rest of our countries doing?  We delegated the task of dealing with terrorists to the US and sat back and did nothing until the US Supreme Court said no. What stopped any of us countries other than the US for either removing our citizens from Afghanistan and trying them or allowing them to be handed over to Afghan authorities for Afghani crimes?

The US operated in a vaccum of no help from anyone else and they only apprehended terrorists that attacked US soldiers deliberately and only began detaining others when we silently condoned what they did. The US would not have detained terrorists who attacked British or Canadian soldiers and not American soldiers. Harper agreed with what the US tried to do. I do too. My only argument is they should have allowed full disclosure of their evidence against Kadr et al. In regards to Kadr being a minor had Canada wanted to intervene on that ground we could have. We chose not to. Harper did not feel he made a mistake.

In hindsight you can blame the whole world. Good for you. Instead you piss on Canadian soldiers. Its Arm Guy's fault the world's nations did not come up with a treaty. Turn your back on him because we sent him in the absence of our ability to come up with a better solution. Its his fault.

Edited January 28, 2020 by Rue

[Rue]

19 minutes ago, eyeball said:

My excuses for pacifism are values and principles - like the ones my grandparents fought for - ending tyranny not supporting it.

Pacifists do not fight. So how did your grandparents fighting manifest pacifism. Ridicoulous.

Say Is that anything like Army Guy "feeling" just like you while he is in Afghanistan with his ass on the line while you are turning your back on him? Ridiculous.

We  didn't send our troops to Afghanistan to support tyranny as you stated....and hey say now,  didn't you claim you felt just like Army Guy in that  you want to fight tyranny in Afghanistan? What happened?  you are saying he did not go to fight tyranny but to support it.  So what's with that?  Hey now that is ridiculous.

Oy and gevalt and then some.

Edited January 28, 2020 by Rue

[eyeball]

51 minutes ago, Rue said:

 The lack of international convention to  provide a legal set of principles for nations to incorporate into their laws has led to a legal confusion as to how to treat terrorists-so necessarily all nations of the world made a mistake.

Thr exact opposite is the case. The degradation of our principles has led to a moral vacuum in which might makes right not the law.

I expect your usual encyclopedic response but as is usually the case I'm confident you'll demolish your own argument in the first sentence - either that or with some reference to ka ka and poo.

Further evidence of what the degradation of principles does to people.

[Abies]

5 hours ago, Rue said:

You did remove it from its context and I explained why. It was not a stand alone document. It was written to extend the previous one I explained to you. It was not drafted in isolation of it to change it. You and others have chosen to use the term "soldier" to describe "terrorists". You are equating them to be one and the same because they both have weapons. Terrorists are not soldiers. Soldiers are members of armed forces designated by state governments. Terrorists are self empowered criminals who do not recognize any laws. The conventions  we have did not  and do not contemplate child terrorists only child soldiers. In fact we have no international conventions providing principles as to how to treat terrorists and until we do there is a vacuum in leadership as to how to deal with them leaving each nation on their own to decide how to deal with terrorists within their domestic laws.

Again I would state  your replies ignore that we can try minors in Canada as adults when the seriousness of their crime can be argued to warrant such a designation.

As well your contention there was no evidence he throw a grenade is not true. You are in fact confusing his lawyer's argument that any thing he said was not inadmissible and therefore his confession he threw a grenade was inadmissible with eye witness statements that corroborated what he threw a grenade as well as independent forensic evidence he threw the grenade. They are not the same. More to the point the person he killed did not have his stomach blown out because of an act of God.. They found shrapnel from the grenade throughout his body and they determined the proximity  and direction of the grenade being thrown before contact to cause the damage it did which precluded anyone but Kadr from having thrown it. So his confession was not necessary and the issue wasn't whether he threw the grenade but under which law he was held culpable and whether the law could find him culpable.

I can tell you under Afghanistan criminal law, there is no diminished capacity argument for brainwashing or differentiation between minors and adults and so he would have been charged and convicted of crimes on Afghani soil including murder. It was because he was removed from Afghanistan and tried under US laws his defence was triggered as it came under US constitutional laws requiring full disclosure of his charges  which was never provided him.

There is no convention on treating child terrorists that the US agreed to follow, none exist. The US had two choices.  Hold him as a prisoner of war in a US miltar prison until hostilities between his terrorist group and Afghan ended, but then he would have had to be released with no criminal record. The US was not obliged to do this as he was not a soldier and therefore covered under the Geneva convention as to treating war prisoners. The US chose instead to create a hybrid mix of domestic criminal and military tribunal procedures to try him but the glaring deficiency  was that this hybrid system did not allow him full disclosure of the evidence from which he was charged  which four times the US Supreme Court said was unconstitutional and made his trial meaningless under US law. George Bush Jr. tried to amend the law 3 times after the initial US Supreme Court rejection and each time it was struck out.

In regards toKadr  minor I showed you the assumption he could not be tried as an adult Is not true. You ignored that. 

Now in regards to your brainwashing defence you confuse it providing a legal defence to criminal guilt with Kadr being innocent . One allows him to be set free and not be found guilty of the crime but his actual innocence remains questionable. An analogy to that would be OJ Simpson. He certainly was found not guilty wasn't he. If you think OJ is innocent good for you. As a lawyer I do appreciate the argument he was/is entitled to a defence of diminished capacity to obtain a lesser sentence  but the concept he did not require any conviction from out state at all I question and I will try explain why. 

The  concept of brainwashing absolutely taking control of every part of a person's mind to prevent them from knowing right from wrong is a  simplistic fallacy. The degree of diminishment of capacity and therefore the ability to discern right from wrong its not automatically 100% because you say so. That is what has to be questioned through psychiatric exams and cross examination at a criminal trial. What we do know from the studies done on mind control is that the degree of control varies with each individual. More to the point if we accepted Kadr was brainwashed by your simplistic absolute definition that turned him into a mindless zombie we  must then accept he still is. and  did not end when he was removed from his captors and manipulators which negates everything we know about mind control. As well we know his brother who suffered under the same conditions has renounced the very beliefs, values and behaviour Kadr refuses to and Kadr avoids his brother like the plague. Why?

I say that because Kadr to this day will not apologize for what he did, or show remorse or regret for what he did. He has never conceded what he did might be wrong or that violence as a method to impose or express political opinion is a crime, just the exact opposite. In fact in the few public demonstrations allowed of him that were, he showed very clear evidence if anything of a sociopath, someone with a fixed flat expression and no emotion and someone who showed contempt with his face and body when asked certain questions or any question that asked him about what he did and why. 

Furthermore if  Mr. Kadr is noit  responsible for his actions, then necessarily his parents are culpable. His father is dead. So why is his mother not in jail for her role if for nothing else than endangering a child and abusing a child? His mother travels to many mosques in Toronto and Canada  preaching that terrorism is acceptable and she preaches an Islamic version of Islam that depicts Canadians, our system of laws and government and all non Muslims as infidel and that a war against us is a religious obligation.  Her daughter, Kadr's sister also preaches the same message. Both live in a large house on social welfare while describing Canada as an infidel nation not worthy of respect. Kadr has sought contact with them repeatedly while his brother has openly questioned their beliefs he avoids. Why?

Next while I can understand as a lawyer the argument that  claiming Kadr was a brain washed child tmay warrant a conviction concentrating on rehabilitation not punishment,  or even a lower sentence it can not ignore he had some degree of culpability. If it does as you argue, this does NOT mean automatically he was entitled to financial compensation let alone in the amount he was given. He could be totally hard done by in your mind as a victim, but anyone who engages in a crime however innocent he may be in law, under common law is not entitled to PROFIT from that crime which he did. Can and should we argue the $10 million was compensation for being wrongfully placed in prison? How? Even if he was brainwashed as you say he had to be institutionalized. You don't take a terrorist and simply drop him back into the society he left and condemned as an enemy to his religious values. He would have had to have been institutionalized prior to any release. That is not the same situation as a non terrorist wrongfully convicted of a crime he never did.  More to the point people who commit violent acts even if they are found not guilty are still subject to detention for psychiatric assessment or treatment. If anything we have released violent people too quickly for fear of detaining them when they are not legally defined as criminals.

The $10 million payment I think was an arbitrary amount Trudeau came up with. I think an entitlement to any amount, let alone the appropriate amount should have come from a  decision by the Supreme Court of Canada not from Lord Justin of Trudeau.

By the way Canadian courts have precluded the spouse of the person he killed to  any standing which leads me to this final  point.

Can  please explain as a supporter of Kadr, if he is a good Muslim as he claims has not taken the  money he received or even some if it and given it to the spouse and her family. Islam preaches he should have done that. See some of us have read the Koran even though we are not Muslim. We know Islam says in such a situation he should acknowledge the pain and suffering he caused the wife and the deceased's children with an apology and all or some if the money he received as an act of humility and remorse not just to the family but with  him before Allah. He has in fact displayed contempt to them both.

 You can romanticize him, I do not.

 

 

 

No I didn't remove it from context you are simply cherry picking to fit your world view. I have already showed you your own sources do not agree with you.

You are just arguing in bad faith. 

Edited January 28, 2020 by Abies

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, Rue said:

We  didn't send our troops to Afghanistan to support tyranny as you stated...

That's correct, we sent our troops to Afghanistan because we're profoundly confused. We're confused because we stopped following our most cherished principles.  We went in pretending our allies support for other dictators in the region had nothing to do with helping to destabilize it to the point of being FUBAR. We're still pretending today and there's no end in sight. 

As you should well know by now I regard the support of dictators as being a crime against humanity that is even worse than the indiscriminate use of a WMD, especially when self-proclaimed shining beacons of freedom and liberty do it.

And we're with them.