Compensating Khadr

jacee · July 8, 2017

9 minutes ago, AngusThermopyle said:

Yes I do indeed believe they should have fought it, thus sending a strong message that they do not condone the situation that led up to this. It would have been the right thing to do. Instead they did the opposite of the right thing and sent a very unfavorable message.

Do not condone what situation? You are talking in circles. The settlement has nothing to do with what Khadr did or didn't do.

It has to do with the government's failure to uphold his Charter rights, eg, access to a lawyer, free from cruel and unusual punishment, held (10 years!) without charges, tortured, a minor, etc etc.

"Khadr’s suit claimed Canada had violated his rights and was complicit with the United States when he was detained at the U.S. base in Cuba, denied access to a lawyer and tortured.

The Supreme Court of Canada in 2010 ruled Khadr’s rights had been violated.

The apology sparked fresh public debate about Khadr, but Trudeau says the settlement is not about the details of Khadr’s case but the fact his rights were violated.

Trudeau says the Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects all Canadians, “even when it is uncomfortable.”

“When the government violates any Canadian’s Charter rights, we all end up paying for it,” he said."

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/07/08/pm-defends-payout-to-convicted-terrorist-omar-khadr

99 American citizens were among the insurgents apprehended in Afghanistan. Only 1 went to Guantanamo, and only until they realized he was a US citizen.

The US did not violate the rights of its citizens, despite them being adult enemy insurgents.

Only Canada was stupid enough to violate the rights of its citizens, and this one a minor at that!

It's embarrassing.

I'm glad it's over and he has his settlement.

Rue · July 8, 2017

2 hours ago, AngusThermopyle said:

You are factually incorrect. Neither Trudeau nor the GoC were ordered to make any monetary award by any court. In fact this matter was still before the courts in a civil suit and no determination of damages, if any had yet been made. This was purely a Liberal decision and they've publicly stated that to be the case.

Trudeau made a political decision to do 3 things: 1-leak the fact they were going to pay him last Friday when in fact they paid him a week earlier to fool the lawyers seeking an injunction on the day they thought he was being paid-this Friday-that makes Trudeau complicit in a pre-meditated ad deliberate attempt to prejudice a party in an on-going law dispute against Kadr-this is blatant government abuse of power and interference in a legal action and for that reason alone Trudeau should resign; ii Trudeau -decided on the amount of compensation-even if you believe Kadr'svcharter rights were violated, the AMOUNT of compensation was YET to be determined but Trudreau decided it arbitrarily showing his contempt for Canadians and the belief he is not accountable to us. The compensation could have been a nominal amount like say $1 dollar to symbolize the charter was violated but that this individual should not profit from what he did-that is what the government's position could have been but, iii-Trudeau long before this pay-out, had made it clear he saw Kadr not as a terrorist but as a victim of Steven Harper and entitled to large compensation. This belief comes from his advisors, specifically his Middle East advisor. Omar Alleghbra who is a member of Parliament for Missisauga and is an open advocate for Hamas. Trudeau's political biases should surprise no one. Trudeau turned a legal issue into a partisan political one. THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION was a legal issue he had no right arbitrarily deciding. He should have left it to the Supreme Court of Canada. Now we will never know if they would have only awarded a nominal amount which they have in the past when people have had their rights violated but have engaged in crimes or acts against public morality.

If the federal government said any public compensation would have to be accountable in amount to the public the lawyer seeking that compensation would not hold up a settlement simply on the issue of confidentiality. That is absolute and utter b.s.

This government is gutless. If it had any guts, any integrity, any spinal code, it would have said you get an apology but no money pushing the money issue to court arguing not withstanding the charter violation the principal of not profiting from a crime must over-ride the compensation principal. This government never bothered with that arguement because they see Kadr as a victim of Steven Harper. They turned this into a partisan anti Harper issue using our taxpayer's money and this Kadr as their prop.

Kadr is nothing but a stooge. His responses to he CBC journalist yesterday were prepared, canned sound bites.His true cynical nature came out. He barely could keep his smile. The tell tale sign was when he was asked why not give his money to the widow of the deceased soldier. His teddy bear grin quickly faded and his body language showed he felt entitled to the money and sees nothing wrong in what he did. His platitudes about being sorry are a crock. A remorseful person knowing he killed a father of children would not profit from that father's death-a manipulate scum would.

Now speaking of manipyulative scum he admitted he is in contact with his family. His family are open supporters of Al Quaeda living on Canadian welfare. They should be deported. Any person who acquires Canadian citizenship as the Kadrs did and assist or agree or side with terrorists should lose their right to be a Canadian and be deported. No you should not avail yourself or be allowed to avail yourself of the Charter's protection if you engage in or support terrorism. Its not what it was drafted to protect.. Peace, oder and good government is an over-riding principal in the charter and should be applied to prevent any protection of terrorist supporters.

The Kadrs including Omar support Al Quaeda. This is a belief in terrorists at war against Canada. This is treason. The Charter should not be used to protect and facilitate such beliefs and behaviour because that is the most blatant example of an attack against peace, order and good government.

What country pays its treasonous citizens millions? What country has a charter that says you can over-ride its clauses if you undermine peace, order and good government and then ignores that over-riding clause and awards terrorists and allows them to profit from their crimes?

Canada. But hey, according to Omni, I and millions of others don't understand the law.

On we understand it and the partisan liberals pandering for minority votes. We also know there is nothing magic at 15 14 13 12, 11, 10, 9, 16, 17, 18, and that our youth laws in Canada were drafted in contemplation of domestic and not political crimes or terrorist crimes. They were never created in anticipation of terrorists.

So unlike Omni, we don't selectively for partisan reasons ignore the peace, order ad good government clause that this government did not test in court as to determining the amount of compensation, and we understand we need to revise our laws so that terrorists of any age are treated in a different manner than domestic criminals or youth offenders, preciselhy so that Kadrs can't manipulate the system when its convenient for them to avoid the consequences of the terror they engage in or hide behind the Canadian passport and Charter of Rights when they get caught murdering someone in an illegal act.

Kadr was no child at the time of his terrorist crimes. He had long since been a child. The transformation from child to cold blooded unrepentant killer had happened long before he turned 15.

What makes me puke and many others is the realization that in World War Two for example, brave young men lied about their age to defend Canada against Hitler and ideologies no different than the one Kadr to this day supports. How dare these Kadr apologists put this Kadr in the same category as them. My father enlisted way under age. DO NOT equate Kadr to him.

How about Sgt. Speer and his family? Their victimization and suffering-who compensates it? Why should Kadr profit from it?

How can any rational person think paying 10 million to a terrorist is justified? How do they magically ignore the concept of not profiting from a crime? The idiot Minister of Security whose name I won't mention but should return to Saskatchewan and overdose on potash had the audacity to say yesterday if these Trudeauites hadn't paid Kadr they would have undermined the legal system.

What a stupid, moronic thing to say from an insipid Trudeau toad of a flunkee. The moment they paid, they undermined the legal system. They would not have undermined the legal system but protected its integrity if they said, o.k. we violated the charter, we apologize for that but that apology does not require we pay in this case-because we should only pay, if the person whose rights were violated has clean hands. That is the most basic of legal principles CLEAN HANDS.

The Supreme Court could very well have said, if given the chance in an argument presented to them by our government, to respond and sayyes his charter rights were violated, that is wrong, but the compensation can be or should be limited to a nominal amount because the concept of clean hands over-rides the consideration of the amount of compensation to prevent a terrorist from profiting from engaging in terrorism and engaging in activities that at their very essence, pith and substance violate peace, order and good government.

The Liberals did not argue the clean hands theory and they lie now and act as if it does not exist and we have legal experts such as Omni who interestingly won't discuss it but they claim people like me don't understand the law because we think it outrageous this most fundamental of legal principles was pre-empted from consideration byt he Supreme Court of Canada.

The Liberals engaged in crass political partisanship to assure the clean hands theory will never be tested in court precisely because if it did this would make Steven Harper appear to have been justified in what he did..

I say the Canadian people should demand Trudeau resign and hold the Liberal caucus and Trudeau responsible and a citizen's group file a Supreme Court of Canada challenge to the compensation AMOUNT arguing he clean hands theory can not be ignored. Citizens have the right to form what is called an intervenor group and challenge this decision although Trudeau has deliberately handed the money to Kasdr knowing he will hide it making it impossible to retrieve in future law suits.

Lets be clear for Omni the legal expert and Jacee- the law and Charter NEVER defined how much the compensation should have been and the amount of compensation is a different legal issue is a different issue than the issue as to the right to compensation.

Trudeau used his political power to impose the amount pre-empting a legal challenge as to that amount. For that he is nothing but a crass, contemptuous elitist prig having the audacity to talk down through his nose to me and other Canadians lecturing us on what is the law.

Not the amount was not a forgone conclusion-that is a lie an absolute, bold faced, crass, political lie.

Edited July 8, 2017 by Rue

hot enough · July 8, 2017

11 minutes ago, Rue said:

How about Sgt. Speer and his family. Their victimization and suffering-who compensates it?

That is what happens sometimes when you join up with an illegal terrorist/war criminal invasionary force.

Quote

Why should Kasr profit from it?

Learn to spell, Rue. He didn't profit, he was paid compensation for having his rights abused by the war criminal/terrorist USA, with their torture chambers. That sure isn't a sign of a freedom loving people.

Edited July 8, 2017 by hot enough

hot enough · July 8, 2017

15 minutes ago, Rue said:

Trudeau made a political decision to do 3 things: 1-leak the fact they were going to pay him last Friday to fool the lawyers seeking an injunction from having filed it earlier; ii-decided on the amount of compensation-even if you believe his charter rights were violated, the AMOUNT of compensation was left to be determined but Trudreau decided it arbitrarily. The compensation could have been a nominal amount like say $1 dollar to symbolize the charter was violated but that this individual should not profit from what he did; iii-Trudeau long before this pay-out made it clear he saw Kadr not as a terrorist but as a victim entitled to large compensation. This belief comes from his advisors, specifically his Middle East advisor. Omar Alleghbra who is a member of Parliament for Missisauga and is an open advocate for Hamas. Trudeau's political biases should surprise no one.

...

You must be lying about being a lawyer, Rue, for no lawyer could be this clueless. Jacee is ten times the lawyer you pretend to be.

Are you a lawyer, Rue?

Edited July 8, 2017 by hot enough

AngusThermopyle · July 8, 2017

42 minutes ago, wulf42 said:

Well just a guess but the Conservatives will probably win a majority by a landslide in 2019.

I'm not sure about that. What I am sure about is the fact that the Liberals handled this as poorly as they possibly could and have managed to outrage a large amount of Canadians. This was a cluster f*ck that they orchestrated and it will surely hurt them.

Omni · July 8, 2017

8 minutes ago, AngusThermopyle said:

I'm not sure about that. What I am sure about is the fact that the Liberals handled this as poorly as they possibly could and have managed to outrage a large amount of Canadians. This was a cluster f*ck that they orchestrated and it will surely hurt them.

The actual cluster was how the whole thing was mishandled in the first place.

Rue · July 8, 2017

55 minutes ago, hot enough said:

That is what happens sometimes when you join up with an illegal terrorist/war criminal invasionary force.

Learn to spell, Rue. He didn't profit, he was paid compensation for having his rights abused by the war criminal/terrorist USA, with their torture chambers. That sure isn't a sign of a freedom loving people.

Learn to think Hot Enough. Being paid $10 million means he profited.

Hal 9000 · July 8, 2017

58 minutes ago, Rue said:

The Liberals engaged in crass political partisanship to assure the clean hands theory will never be tested in court precisely because if it did this would make Steven Harper appear to have been justified in what he did..

That's a good point. It'll be lost on most people, but that idea surely came into play.

hot enough · July 8, 2017

11 minutes ago, Rue said:

Learn to think Hot Enough. Being paid $10 million means he profited.

That means Omar was compensated for something you would have been screaming to high heaven about if it had been anyone but a Muslim.

You must be lying about being a lawyer, Rue, for no lawyer could be this clueless.

Are you a lawyer, Rue?

Edited July 8, 2017 by hot enough

hot enough · July 8, 2017

47 minutes ago, Omni said:

The actual cluster was how the whole thing was mishandled in the first place.

Canada has pretty much always supported the US in its war crimes and terrorism.

Rue · July 8, 2017

1 hour ago, hot enough said:

You must be lying about being a lawyer, Rue, for no lawyer could be this clueless. Jacee is ten times the lawyer you pretend to be.

Are you a lawyer, Rue?

26 minutes ago, hot enough said:

That means Omar was compensated for something you would have been screaming to high heaven about if it had been anyone but a Muslim.

You must be lying about being a lawyer, Rue, for no lawyer could be this clueless.

Are you a lawyer, Rue?

First of all your childish baiting speaks for itself.

Next the issue with Kadr has nothing to do with him being Muslim and everything to do with his being an unrepentant terrorist and apologist for terrorism and in particular Al Quaeda Muslim terrorism. Many Muslim Canadians feel exactly as I do and do not think Kadr should be compensated and believe his family in Canada should be deported and that he undermines and harm speace loving Muslims who chose to come to this country to live in freedom and get away from idiots like him. Your pathetic and crass attempt to play the Muslim card to try defend Kadr speaks to your ignorance as to the subject. So does the baiting which shows you have nothing to exchange in debate.

The issue as to whether Kadr's charter rights were violated is a moot point. The US Supreme Court stated the hybrid-civil/military tribunal courts in Guantanomo Bay which tried Kadr were unconstitutional. That is a legal fact. The moment they did that it meant it tied to the Supreme Court of Canada's hands and they had no choice but to determine the duration of detention in Guantaamo Bay because of that decision was thrown into ill repute. I am not arguing that.

What I have argued is that while its legally true his rights were violated under the Charter, the AMOUNT of compensation is not automatic and whatever he asks for.

What I have stated and you can't understand clearly or you would not respond with pre-bar mitzvah comments, is that the amount of compensation could and should have been challenged in a referral to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The federal government could have made an argument that the amount of compensation should only be nominal arguing 3 basic grounds:

1-the clean hands doctrine;

2-any non nominal value would undermine public morality;

3-any non nominal amount by appearance would undermine the fundamental principles of peace, order and good government and therefore trigger that clause in the charter to over-ride the amount of compensation and reduce it accordingly.

Trudeau has made a political decision behind closed doors not to pursue a challenge on the above 3 grounds.

By so doing he undermines the basic fundamental principles of law in this country which believe:

a-no one should profit from a crime directly or indirectly

b-no one should profit from terrorism directly or indirectly

c-the rights of someone engaged in terrorism should never be placed in a position of importance higher than the victim of that terrorism.

It is precisely because I am a lawyer Hot Enough I know the above and understand that the implication of not making this legal challenge is political, is partisan, is an abuse of the government's power and undermines everything our country stands for.

His compensation should be limited to his legal bill even if you believe he is entitled to compensation.

The lawyer in me would have to agree to that much if pushed. The person in me, the human being in me says it is a damn shame Omar Kadr and his family are in Canada.

If I had my way we would pass a law that says you forfeit your Canadian citizenship and are deported to your country of origin if you come here get citizenship as the Kadrs did then openly join a terrorist group bent on destroying the West not to mention giving speeches in Canada recruiting Muslim Canadians to wage war against the West, This was treason.

I believe Kadr engaged in terrorism, treason and homicide. I believe for those reasons he is not entitled to compensation. His hands are dirty and the charter should not be used to protect him. He should be excluded from using the Charter because of his undermining peace, order and good government therefore triggering that clause to cancel any application of the charter to him.

As well the Charter should not be used to ignore the doctrine of clean hands and basic values of public morality because both undermine peace, order and good government.

I argue that since Al Quaeda is still in a state of hostilities with Canada and Kadr supports al Quaeda, he belongs in prison in Canada with his family or expelled to Afghanistan or Egypt or the U.S.

I have argued from the get go Dick Chaney should not have over-ridden the US Marines and should have allowed them to place him as a pow in a military stockade where he still should be until Al Quaeda disbands.

As for you Hot Enough, spit it out, because you initiated it. Do you claim to me a Muslim who supports terrorism?

Do you think its appropriate for Muslims to be terrorists?

As for your calling the US terrorist the difference between us is I have been outside my Mama's basement and witnessed terrorism and I can tell you only an idiot would suggest living next to the US is more dangerous than living next to Al Quaeda, Iran, Isil, Hamas Hezbollah, Taliban, etc.

.

jacee · July 8, 2017

1 hour ago, Rue said:

Trudeau made a political decision to do 3 things: 1-leak the fact they were going to pay him last Friday when in fact they paid him a week earlier to fool the lawyers seeking an injunction on the day they thought he was being paid-this Friday-that makes Trudeau complicit in a pre-meditated ad deliberate attempt to prejudice a party in an on-going law dispute against Kadr-this is blatant government abuse of power and interference in a legal action and for that reason alone Trudeau should resign; ii Trudeau -decided on the amount of compensation-even if you believe Kadr'svcharter rights were violated, the AMOUNT of compensation was YET to be determined but Trudreau decided it arbitrarily showing his contempt for Canadians and the belief he is not accountable to us. The compensation could have been a nominal amount like say $1 dollar to symbolize the charter was violated but that this individual should not profit from what he did-that is what the government's position could have been but, iii-Trudeau long before this pay-out, had made it clear he saw Kadr not as a terrorist but as a victim of Steven Harper and entitled to large compensation. This belief comes from his advisors, specifically his Middle East advisor. Omar Alleghbra who is a member of Parliament for Missisauga and is an open advocate for Hamas. Trudeau's political biases should surprise no one. Trudeau turned a legal issue into a partisan political one. THE AMOUNT OF COMPENSATION was a legal issue he had no right arbitrarily deciding. He should have left it to the Supreme Court of Canada. Now we will never know if they would have only awarded a nominal amount which they have in the past when people have had their rights violated but have engaged in crimes or acts against public morality.

If the federal government said any public compensation would have to be accountable in amount to the public the lawyer seeking that compensation would not hold up a settlement simply on the issue of confidentiality. That is absolute and utter b.s.

This government is gutless. If it had any guts, any integrity, any spinal code, it would have said you get an apology but no money pushing the money issue to court arguing not withstanding the charter violation the principal of not profiting from a crime must over-ride the compensation principal. This government never bothered with that arguement because they see Kadr as a victim of Steven Harper. They turned this into a partisan anti Harper issue using our taxpayer's money and this Kadr as their prop.

Kadr is nothing but a stooge. His responses to he CBC journalist yesterday were prepared, canned sound bites.His true cynical nature came out. He barely could keep his smile. The tell tale sign was when he was asked why not give his money to the widow of the deceased soldier. His teddy bear grin quickly faded and his body language showed he felt entitled to the money and sees nothing wrong in what he did. His platitudes about being sorry are a crock. A remorseful person knowing he killed a father of children would not profit from that father's death-a manipulate scum would.

Now speaking of manipyulative scum he admitted he is in contact with his family. His family are open supporters of Al Quaeda living on Canadian welfare. They should be deported. Any person who acquires Canadian citizenship as the Kadrs did and assist or agree or side with terrorists should lose their right to be a Canadian and be deported. No you should not avail yourself or be allowed to avail yourself of the Charter's protection if you engage in or support terrorism. Its not what it was drafted to protect.. Peace, oder and good government is an over-riding principal in the charter and should be applied to prevent any protection of terrorist supporters.

The Kadrs including Omar support Al Quaeda. This is a belief in terrorists at war against Canada. This is treason. The Charter should not be used to protect and facilitate such beliefs and behaviour because that is the most blatant example of an attack against peace, order and good government.

What country pays its treasonous citizens millions? What country has a charter that says you can over-ride its clauses if you undermine peace, order and good government and then ignores that over-riding clause and awards terrorists and allows them to profit from their crimes?

Canada. But hey, according to Omni, I and millions of others don't understand the law.

On we understand it and the partisan liberals pandering for minority votes. We also know there is nothing magic at 15 14 13 12, 11, 10, 9, 16, 17, 18, and that our youth laws in Canada were drafted in contemplation of domestic and not political crimes or terrorist crimes. They were never created in anticipation of terrorists.

So unlike Omni, we don't selectively for partisan reasons ignore the peace, order ad good government clause that this government did not test in court as to determining the amount of compensation, and we understand we need to revise our laws so that terrorists of any age are treated in a different manner than domestic criminals or youth offenders, preciselhy so that Kadrs can't manipulate the system when its convenient for them to avoid the consequences of the terror they engage in or hide behind the Canadian passport and Charter of Rights when they get caught murdering someone in an illegal act.

Kadr was no child at the time of his terrorist crimes. He had long since been a child. The transformation from child to cold blooded unrepentant killer had happened long before he turned 15.

What makes me puke and many others is the realization that in World War Two for example, brave young men lied about their age to defend Canada against Hitler and ideologies no different than the one Kadr to this day supports. How dare these Kadr apologists put this Kadr in the same category as them. My father enlisted way under age. DO NOT equate Kadr to him.

How about Sgt. Speer and his family? Their victimization and suffering-who compensates it? Why should Kadr profit from it?

How can any rational person think paying 10 million to a terrorist is justified? How do they magically ignore the concept of not profiting from a crime? The idiot Minister of Security whose name I won't mention but should return to Saskatchewan and overdose on potash had the audacity to say yesterday if these Trudeauites hadn't paid Kadr they would have undermined the legal system.

What a stupid, moronic thing to say from an insipid Trudeau toad of a flunkee. The moment they paid, they undermined the legal system. They would not have undermined the legal system but protected its integrity if they said, o.k. we violated the charter, we apologize for that but that apology does not require we pay in this case-because we should only pay, if the person whose rights were violated has clean hands. That is the most basic of legal principles CLEAN HANDS.

The Supreme Court could very well have said, if given the chance in an argument presented to them by our government, to respond and sayyes his charter rights were violated, that is wrong, but the compensation can be or should be limited to a nominal amount because the concept of clean hands over-rides the consideration of the amount of compensation to prevent a terrorist from profiting from engaging in terrorism and engaging in activities that at their very essence, pith and substance violate peace, order and good government.

The Liberals did not argue the clean hands theory and they lie now and act as if it does not exist and we have legal experts such as Omni who interestingly won't discuss it but they claim people like me don't understand the law because we think it outrageous this most fundamental of legal principles was pre-empted from consideration byt he Supreme Court of Canada.

The Liberals engaged in crass political partisanship to assure the clean hands theory will never be tested in court precisely because if it did this would make Steven Harper appear to have been justified in what he did..

I say the Canadian people should demand Trudeau resign and hold the Liberal caucus and Trudeau responsible and a citizen's group file a Supreme Court of Canada challenge to the compensation AMOUNT arguing he clean hands theory can not be ignored. Citizens have the right to form what is called an intervenor group and challenge this decision although Trudeau has deliberately handed the money to Kasdr knowing he will hide it making it impossible to retrieve in future law suits.

Lets be clear for Omni the legal expert and Jacee- the law and Charter NEVER defined how much the compensation should have been and the amount of compensation is a different legal issue is a different issue than the issue as to the right to compensation.

Trudeau used his political power to impose the amount pre-empting a legal challenge as to that amount. For that he is nothing but a crass, contemptuous elitist prig having the audacity to talk down through his nose to me and other Canadians lecturing us on what is the law.

Not the amount was not a forgone conclusion-that is a lie an absolute, bold faced, crass, political lie.

That's a big long load of hooey, Rue.

It's very simple:

Canada violated Khadr's Charter rights.

Canada got sued for $20m for that.

Canada settled the lawsuit for $10.5m

Case closed.

jacee · July 8, 2017

1 hour ago, AngusThermopyle said:

I'm not sure about that. What I am sure about is the fact that the Liberals handled this as poorly as they possibly could and have managed to outrage a large amount of Canadians. This was a cluster f*ck that they orchestrated and it will surely hurt them.

Harper could have avoided this if he'd provided proper support for Khadr's rights. Instead he sent CSIS to participate in interrogation knowing that Khadr was being tortured.

Neither party's hands are clean on this.

Rue · July 8, 2017

4 minutes ago, jacee said:

That's a big long load of hooey, Rue.

.

Hey watch your language Jacee. Tone it down will yah?

Hey Jacee here's a poem for you

you say hooey

I say phooey

and you aint got a cluey

and about Kadr

he gives me a pain in my bladder

I mean holy cow

he has only one eye brow

you call him a victim

I say evict him

sure kadr you adore

until he moves next door

hey but wait for this

soon will come Omar Jr. and his sis

if I were you i'd get a fence

before things get tense.

.

Omni · July 8, 2017

9 minutes ago, jacee said:

That's a big long load of hooey, Rue.

Indeed. Yet another lengthy screed with a load of incongruous statements. The one about charter rights not being important is quite special!

Rue · July 8, 2017

8 minutes ago, jacee said:

Harper could have avoided this if he'd provided proper support for Khadr's rights. Instead he sent CSIS to participate in interrogation knowing that Khadr was being tortured.

Neither party's hands are clean on this.

If Harper took him back earlier which is hindsight while soldiers from Canada were dying he would have had to release him which is why he did not. It was a political decision for sure.

Rue · July 8, 2017

4 minutes ago, Omni said:

Indeed. Yet another lengthy screed with a load of incongruous statements. The one about charter rights not being important is quite special!

Who stated the charter rights were not important. Yet another misrepresentation.

hot enough · July 8, 2017

10 minutes ago, Rue said:

What I have argued is that while its legally true his rights were violated under the Charter, the AMOUNT of compensation is not automatic and whatever he asks for.

Whine, whine whine, Rue. That is how the legal system works. You couldn't possibly be a lawyer unless you are a Roy Cohn lawyer. That seems possible.

By so doing he undermines the basic fundamental principles of law in this country which believe:

a-no one should profit from a crime directly or indirectly

b-no one should profit from terrorism directly or indirectly

c-the rights of someone engaged in terrorism should never be placed in a position of importance higher than the victim of that terrorism.

The US and all its military were and are the terrorists.

It is precisely because I am a lawyer Hot Enough

I call BS.

If I had my way we would pass a law that says you forfeit your Canadian citizenship and are deported to your country of origin if you come here get citizenship as the Kadrs did then openly join a terrorist group bent on destroying the West not to mention giving speeches in Canada recruiting Muslim Canadians to wage war against the West, This was treason.

How can you be a lawyer? You can't commit treason against the "WEST".

I believe Kadr engaged in terrorism, treason and homicide.

You believe! You believe all the lies the US tells you. You are a dupe, a huge dupe!

10 minutes ago, Rue said:

As for you Hot Enough, spit it out, because you initiated it. Do you claim to me[sic] a Muslim who supports terrorism?

No, I don't believe you are a Muslim. You are a guy who supports terrorism and war crimes/war criminals. That is abundantly clear.

Do you think its appropriate for Muslims to be terrorists?

There would be no Muslim terrorism if there hadn't been over a century of US/UK/France/... terrorism.

As for your calling the US terrorist the difference between us is I have been outside my Mama's basement and witnessed terrorism and I can tell you only an idiot would suggest living next to the US is more dangerous than living next to Al Quaeda, Iran, Isil, Hamas Hezbollah, Taliban, etc.

Silly boy, and silly argument. Of course Canada is "safe" from US terrorism. But ask Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, Korea, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, China, Russia, Angola, Somalia, Libya, Syria, Tunisia, Egypt, Guatemala, Chile, Indonesia, Hawaii, Guam, Panama, Grenada, El Salvador, the Philippines, ... .

.

You must be lying about being a lawyer, Rue, for no lawyer could be this clueless.

hot enough · July 8, 2017

14 minutes ago, Rue said:

Hey watch your language Jacee. Tone it down will yah?

Hey Jacee here's a poem for youyou say hooey

Give it up, Henny!

hot enough · July 8, 2017

14 minutes ago, Omni said:

Yet another lengthy screed with a load of incongruous statements.

That's Rue, playing at being a lawyer.

Edited July 8, 2017 by hot enough

Omni · July 8, 2017

23 minutes ago, Rue said:

The issue as to whether Kadr's charter rights were violated is a moot point.

Here's a quote. Would it be a moot point if it were your charter rights being violated? Or is it OK in this case because you don't like him?

Edited July 8, 2017 by Omni

capricorn · July 8, 2017

Khadr is out on bail as of April 2015. In essence he is a convicted criminal on release from prison with strict conditions. He was charged and convicted of a number of crimes and is currently appealing such conviction. Should not have the $10.5M been placed in an escrow account pending the outcome of his appeal? What if the courts uphold the guilty verdict? If that should happen, no way would Khadr be entitled to access that money. It's a well established premise in Canada that convicted criminals not profit from their crimes.

jacee · July 8, 2017

If anyone is interested ...

Canada's Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC) conducted this review of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service's (CSIS) involvement in interrogating Omar Khadr in Guantanamo:

http://www.sirc-csars.gc.ca/opbapb/2008-05/index-eng.html

Rue · July 8, 2017

4 minutes ago, Omni said:

Here's a quote.

Right and the quote proves you misrepresented what I said because you removed moot point out of its actual context to deliberately misstate what I said. The issue as to Kadr' rights being violated was a moot point, i.e, already resolved because as I stated, the US Supreme Court tied the Canadian Supreme Court's hands by declaring the entire Guantanamo Bay legal apparatus unconstitutional. No where did I say that made the decision of the US Supreme Court of Supreme Court of Canada's subsequent decision not important. I stated the decision was a moot point because the issue of the GBay proceedings and incarceration issue that were originally legally challenged one calle unconstitutional by the US Supreme Court made it impossible for them to conform to the Charter of Rights making something that at one point was debatable, no longer practically applicable which is what a moot point is.

The lack of disclosure of information pertaining to Kadr's charges which render Gbay's proceedings unconstitutional were the same fundamental rules of natural justice the Canadian constitution upholds. In fact the British and Australian legal opinions on Gbay as well as thw US Supreme Court's findings all rendered whether his charter's rights were violated a moot point or foregone conclusion.

Don't misrepresent. If you don't understand what a moot point is ask.

Rue · July 8, 2017

5 minutes ago, jacee said:

If anyone is interested ...

Canada's Security Intelligence Review Committee (SIRC) conducted this review of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service's (CSIS) involvement in interrogating Omar Khadr in Guantanamo:

http://www.sirc-csars.gc.ca/opbapb/2008-05/index-eng.html

Yes indeed and it shows the committee applied the YCJA to child terrorists when determining reasonable standards of treatment and interrogation. This was an error. The YCJA was never drafted in contemplation of interrogating child terrorists and the committee was aware of this but made the political decision none-the-less to use that law as its reference point for discussing treatment of detained minors.

As stated you are arguing a moot point. Kafrr's charter rights being violated are not the issue. The amount of compensation is.