drummindiver Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 Good luck peddling that at the truth, reconciliation and reparation phase of the peace treaty negotiations. Do you have information to the contrary? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 No, the Cold War definitely happened alright I just disagree with the idea that we had no choice but to fight tyranny with tyranny. Unless I'm mistaken it's just as much against the law not to mention human decency if we retaliate against mustard gas with mustard gas, especially if we use it against civilian populations. I think the same should apply when countries start launching dictatorships at one another because the sheer toll and scale of human suffering it causes is on par with a weapon of mass destruction. So when the Russians plead the same excuse - we were scared and had no choice - how do you expect people caught in our crossfire are likely to reply - too bad so sad...that's okay...it's water under the bridge now...no worries...or what? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 29, 2015 Report Share Posted May 29, 2015 That's right...it's the same thing that Canada tells First Nations all the time..."get over it". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted May 30, 2015 Report Share Posted May 30, 2015 Actually Canada honours its First Nations treaties. Did Minnesota honour the bounties it put on the scalps of Native Americans? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 30, 2015 Report Share Posted May 30, 2015 Actually Canada honours its First Nations treaties. Did Minnesota honour the bounties it put on the scalps of Native Americans? Sure...that's why there are so many unsettled land and resource claims, environmental degradation, lack of potable water...a veritable paradise for natives in Canada. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted May 30, 2015 Report Share Posted May 30, 2015 Because Minnesota opted for genocide? I doubt it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted May 30, 2015 Report Share Posted May 30, 2015 No, because Khadr opted for genocide...for a U.S. medic. Now he is a convicted war criminal and murderer. No cross border shopping for him ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted May 30, 2015 Report Share Posted May 30, 2015 First Nations don't have potable water because Khadr committed genocide with one grenade? Something must be in the Regina drinking water for you to be posting like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted May 30, 2015 Report Share Posted May 30, 2015 No, because Khadr opted for genocide...for a U.S. medic.Genocide of one, eh? I knew the rabid nationalism in the US was way over the top when it came to the troops, but to call the death of one soldier genocide....that's a new low. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Especially when the circumstances of how that ONE died are so hazy. It is a new low, but ya know, source... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 There is nothing hazy about how the medic died. Stop trying to spin what happened into something hazy. Eye witnesses saw what happened. As for the semantic argument about genocide, Bush never stated the act of klilling the medic itself was an act of genocide. Some of you are trying to suggest he did and go off on a tangent on that word swell as try spin out of what he did. He engaged in terrorism. He entered a country illegally, engaged that country in terrorism and attacked the US Armed Forces, Afghani military forces, and civilians. He engaged in illegal crimes against humanity. Killing a US soldier, engaging in terrorism on foreign soil is exactly what he did. Its interesting the discussion on Khadr at some time was about not what whether he did was wrong but that he was a child at the time he did it and so therefore should be treated as a child. Now the agenda turns to trying to spin out of what he did and who he was. No amount of spinning changes what Kadr was and did. The only question now is whether he is someone who has genuinely renounced his ways or is just part of a p.r. spin by people trying to turn him into a victim, martyr or messiah. He is none of those. He was an enemy combatant terrorist. The soldier he killed had a family and had rights no different than he did. Some of you believe since he was an American soldier you can devalue his life and its value for politically partisan reasons. I call that out. I also found the CBC documentary once we are on the subject portraying Kadr as a grinning clumsy boy like figure in a nice suburban house complete with morally righteous white people one with a burr in his accent to remind us how white he is, pathetic manipulation. How about the CBC now do a documentary on the family of the soldier who was killed by Kadr or the thousands upon thousands of civilians murdered by Khadr's terror cell.Let them do a documentary on what they did to people. Then get back to me on how cute Omar looks. This spin and trying to turn him into a Jethro Bodine like character to cuddle is horse sheeyit. He committed crime.You want to adore him go ahead. Those of you that do would be the first to pee your pants if he married your daughter so do me a favour you spin all you want, I will remember that brave dead medic and the other US soldiers that saved Kadr's life precisely because unlike terrorists they followed their code of honour. Some of us know the difference between a soldier and a terrorist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 There is nothing hazy about how the medic died. Stop trying to spin what happened into something hazy. Eye witnesses saw what happened. As for the semantic argument about genocide, Bush never stated the act of klilling the medic itself was an act of genocide. Some of you are trying to suggest he did and go off on a tangent on that word swell as try spin out of what he did. He engaged in terrorism. He entered a country illegally, engaged that country in terrorism and attacked the US Armed Forces, Afghani military forces, and civilians. He engaged in illegal crimes against humanity. Killing a US soldier, engaging in terrorism on foreign soil is exactly what he did. Its interesting the discussion on Khadr at some time was about not what whether he did was wrong but that he was a child at the time he did it and so therefore should be treated as a child. Now the agenda turns to trying to spin out of what he did and who he was. No amount of spinning changes what Kadr was and did. The only question now is whether he is someone who has genuinely renounced his ways or is just part of a p.r. spin by people trying to turn him into a victim, martyr or messiah. He is none of those. He was an enemy combatant terrorist. The soldier he killed had a family and had rights no different than he did. Some of you believe since he was an American soldier you can devalue his life and its value for politically partisan reasons. I call that out. I also found the CBC documentary once we are on the subject portraying Kadr as a grinning clumsy boy like figure in a nice suburban house complete with morally righteous white people one with a burr in his accent to remind us how white he is, pathetic manipulation. How about the CBC now do a documentary on the family of the soldier who was killed by Kadr or the thousands upon thousands of civilians murdered by Khadr's terror cell.Let them do a documentary on what they did to people. Then get back to me on how cute Omar looks. This spin and trying to turn him into a Jethro Bodine like character to cuddle is horse sheeyit. He committed crime.You want to adore him go ahead. Those of you that do would be the first to pee your pants if he married your daughter so do me a favour you spin all you want, I will remember that brave dead medic and the other US soldiers that saved Kadr's life precisely because unlike terrorists they followed their code of honour. Some of us know the difference between a soldier and a terrorist. It is totally hazy, because no one actually saw Khadr throw a grenade. And, there in forensic evidence that the wounds on Speer were in fact caused by an ISAF grenade. Friendly fire in other words. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Of course...we all know that Khadr was only in Afghanistan to sell Girl Guide cookies to win a trip to Disney World. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Of course...we all know that Khadr was only in Afghanistan to sell Girl Guide cookies to win a trip to Disney World. Who the hell would want to go to Disney world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Seems that Khadr killed a combatant in war time in a location at war. What about the quarter million old men, women and children that were roasted, toasted and fatally irradiated in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Should Tibbets have been brought to trial or was he "only following orders"? I have read accusations of genocide on this site. What do you call the attempt of indiscriminate annihilation of a specific population in its own country? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted June 1, 2015 Report Share Posted June 1, 2015 Seems that Khadr killed a combatant in war time in a location at war. What about the quarter million old men, women and children that were roasted, toasted and fatally irradiated in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Should Tibbets have been brought to trial or was he "only following orders"? I have read accusations of genocide on this site. What do you call the attempt of indiscriminate annihilation of a specific population in its own country? Certainly not "genocide" in the case of Hiroshima and Nagasaki....far more Japanese were killed with very conventional incendiary and HE bombs, the same kind that Canada's empire used in Europe. Genocide ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted June 2, 2015 Report Share Posted June 2, 2015 Certainly not "genocide" in the case of Hiroshima and Nagasaki....far more Japanese were killed with very conventional incendiary and HE bombs, the same kind that Canada's empire used in Europe. Genocide ! Of course. The TYPE of bomb used completely changes the picture. Wow! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted June 2, 2015 Report Share Posted June 2, 2015 It is totally hazy, because no one actually saw Khadr throw a grenade. And, there in forensic evidence that the wounds on Speer were in fact caused by an ISAF grenade. Friendly fire in other words. Kadhr threw the grenade. Kadhr is Canadian. Killing an American ally is murder. These, again, are the facts. Again, keep trying to spin it so it was those "damn muricans" fault. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted June 2, 2015 Report Share Posted June 2, 2015 Kadhr threw the grenade. Kadhr is Canadian. Killing an American ally is murder. These, again, are the facts. Again, keep trying to spin it so it was those "damn muricans" fault. Where you in Afghanistan and saw him throw the grenade.....because if you were, the US government would like to talk to you because you seem to be the only one, and without you, Khadrs appeal will in all likelihood be successful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted June 2, 2015 Report Share Posted June 2, 2015 Kadhr threw the grenade. These, again, are the facts. Facts are not something that flow from the rich sources of propaganda you so enthusiastically imbibe, DD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Je suis Omar Posted June 2, 2015 Report Share Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) Kadhr threw the grenade. Killing an American ally is murder. Again, keep trying to spin it so it was those "damn muricans" fault. 'An American ally', that was part of an illegal invasionary force that murdered untold numbers of Afghans. These war criminals have been using and abusing Afghans for 40 years. Hospitals in Afghanistan are treating large numbers of war wounded, including amputees and burn victims. The war has also inflicted invisible wounds. In 2009, the Afghan Ministry of Public Health said fully two-thirds of Afghans suffer mental health problems. http://costsofwar.org/article/afghan-civilians What kind of a human being is it that focuses on the death of a terrorist/war criminal to the exclusion of some 30,000 Afghans killed because of this massive series of USA war crimes, these vicious acts of terrorism that make ISIS look like choir boys. Edited June 2, 2015 by Je suis Omar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted June 2, 2015 Report Share Posted June 2, 2015 Where you in Afghanistan and saw him throw the grenade.....because if you were, the US government would like to talk to you because you seem to be the only one, and without you, Khadrs appeal will in all likelihood be successful. Really? We're using the Ken Ham "were you there" argument? July 14, 2014 Omar Khadr loses his bid to have his war-crimes convictions tossed in a military commission appeals court decision. He will now have to wait even longer to make his case to a regular American court. Oct. 31, 2010 Jurors sentence Khadr to 40 years in prison for war crimes but a pre-trial deal limits the actual sentence to eight years. DOES IT MATTER? In the court of public opinion – yes. In court – likely no. Until the latest revelations, the common story was that, since Khadr was the only survivor in the compound, he must have thrown the grenade. But prosecutors do not have to prove he threw the grenade for his conviction of "murder in violation of the laws of war." Similar to the domestic charge of "felony murder," Khadr could be found guilty for being armed in the compound (similar to an armed bank robber who can be convicted of murder even if he did not shoot the gun that killed). Khadr's only defence would be he was unwillingly in the compound or didn't take part in the fighting. If acquitted, he still faces charges of spying, providing support to terrorism, attempted murder and conspiracy. While I think it is necessary to stick to the facts about this case, I see a new argument rather than a chasm between pleading guilty and being guilty. What we do know that is a fact is that Mr. Khadr was convicted of war crimes including murder. He pleaded guilty to murder, spying and terrorism charges at a U.S. military tribunal as part of a 2010 deal that included a sentence of eight years – of which only one additional year was to be spent in Guantanamo before he was eligible to be returned to Canada. He did so with the advice of Canadian and American lawyers. This February he spoke to a psychologist at Bowden Institution, near Calgary, about how he had thrown the grenade and for eight years believed he had killed the U.S. soldier, and how he came to hope that it was not his grenade that killed the soldier. The psychologist’s report was in court documents made public at his bail hearing which saw him freed this month. "He acknowledges throwing a grenade, but still hopes it wasn’t the grenade that killed U.S. soldier Christopher Speer." We are not talking about Gitmo here. We are talking in a Canadian institution. I'm sure OGFT and Omar will somehow blame the "damn muricans" or "terrorist hooligans", the USA, of somehow forcing Kadhr's confession in a Canadian institution. Regardless. He threw the grenade. He killed. He is convicted. Those are the facts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted June 2, 2015 Report Share Posted June 2, 2015 Really? We're using the Ken Ham "were you there" argument? July 14, 2014 Omar Khadr loses his bid to have his war-crimes convictions tossed in a military commission appeals court decision. He will now have to wait even longer to make his case to a regular American court. Oct. 31, 2010 Jurors sentence Khadr to 40 years in prison for war crimes but a pre-trial deal limits the actual sentence to eight years. DOES IT MATTER? In the court of public opinion – yes. In court – likely no. Until the latest revelations, the common story was that, since Khadr was the only survivor in the compound, he must have thrown the grenade. But prosecutors do not have to prove he threw the grenade for his conviction of "murder in violation of the laws of war." Similar to the domestic charge of "felony murder," Khadr could be found guilty for being armed in the compound (similar to an armed bank robber who can be convicted of murder even if he did not shoot the gun that killed). Khadr's only defence would be he was unwillingly in the compound or didn't take part in the fighting. If acquitted, he still faces charges of spying, providing support to terrorism, attempted murder and conspiracy. While I think it is necessary to stick to the facts about this case, I see a new argument rather than a chasm between pleading guilty and being guilty. What we do know that is a fact is that Mr. Khadr was convicted of war crimes including murder. He pleaded guilty to murder, spying and terrorism charges at a U.S. military tribunal as part of a 2010 deal that included a sentence of eight years – of which only one additional year was to be spent in Guantanamo before he was eligible to be returned to Canada. He did so with the advice of Canadian and American lawyers. This February he spoke to a psychologist at Bowden Institution, near Calgary, about how he had thrown the grenade and for eight years believed he had killed the U.S. soldier, and how he came to hope that it was not his grenade that killed the soldier. The psychologist’s report was in court documents made public at his bail hearing which saw him freed this month. "He acknowledges throwing a grenade, but still hopes it wasn’t the grenade that killed U.S. soldier Christopher Speer." We are not talking about Gitmo here. We are talking in a Canadian institution. I'm sure OGFT and Omar will somehow blame the "damn muricans" or "terrorist hooligans", the USA, of somehow forcing Kadhr's confession in a Canadian institution. Regardless. He threw the grenade. He killed. He is convicted. Those are the facts. His confession was forced after years at Gitmo. You probably would too if it would stop the torture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted June 2, 2015 Report Share Posted June 2, 2015 What kind of a human being is it that focuses on the death of a terrorist/war criminal to the exclusion of some 30,000 Afghans killed because of this massive series of USA war crimes, these vicious acts of terrorism that make ISIS look like choir boys. The kind of human that is debating one issue. You are debating another issue (with all your usual rhetoric, I may add). Your "what kind of human" remark is uncalled for, but due to your leanings, will go unmentioned by the powers that be. I honestly think you have a mental issue that forces you to drone on about the American governments' foreign policies. I truly do not think you can stick to a thread's issue without reverting to your agenda. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted June 2, 2015 Report Share Posted June 2, 2015 His confession was forced after years at Gitmo. You probably would too if it would stop the torture. Again. This February he spoke to a psychologist at Bowden Institution, near Calgary, about how he had thrown the grenade and for eight years believed he had killed the U.S. soldier, and how he came to hope that it was not his grenade that killed the soldier. The psychologist’s report was in court documents made public at his bail hearing which saw him freed this month. He was not in Gitmo, he was in a Canadian institution, talking to a Canadian doctor. No one coerced this from him. He admitted of his own free will that he threw the grenade. 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.