Omni Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, capricorn said: At 15, he was not a child. He was an adolescent and knew perfectly well what he was doing when he planted the IEDs he built. He was a child but regardless, the accused have a right to seek legal council, that was denied him. Unless of course you are a fan of Russia or Saudi Arabia legal systems. Edited July 14, 2017 by Omni Quote
betsy Posted July 14, 2017 Author Report Posted July 14, 2017 9 minutes ago, Omni said: people held without access to legal council is illegal. Where does it say that Guantanamo itself, is illegal? If Gitmo is illegal, it would've been closed long time ago. Even Obama - of all people - didn't close it asap. Read his statement: Quote Keeping the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay open is "contrary to our values," President Obama said Tuesday, https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/02/23/obama-release-plan-close-guantanamo-bay/80793530/ He didn't say, it's illegal. Quote
betsy Posted July 14, 2017 Author Report Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Omni said: He was a child but regardless, He was 15 - and an unlawful combatant! Edited July 14, 2017 by betsy Quote
Omni Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 Just now, betsy said: He was 15 - and an unlawful combatant! As has already been shown that charge was dismissed. He has won his case. Why not move on? Quote
betsy Posted July 14, 2017 Author Report Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Omni said: As has already been shown that charge was dismissed. He has won his case. Why not move on? This thread is about the money given to Khadr. It's hard to move on when we reward terrorists with taxpayers money. Especially that amount. If Justin had chosen to reward him instead, through his Trudeau Foundation - maybe, we can move on. Edited July 14, 2017 by betsy Quote
Omni Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 1 minute ago, betsy said: It's hard to move on when we reward terrorists with taxpayers money. If Justin had chosen to reward him instead, from his Trudeau Foundation - maybe, we can move on. Ignoring peoples charter rights gets expensive it turns out. Quote
betsy Posted July 14, 2017 Author Report Posted July 14, 2017 Just now, Omni said: Ignoring peoples charter rights gets expensive it turns out. Bye Omni. You're going circular. Quote
Omni Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 32 minutes ago, betsy said: Bye Omni. You're going circular. Sometimes it's the only way to get a point across to some people. Hope you've got it fifinally. Bye bye. Quote
dialamah Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 19 hours ago, Spiderfish said: Here you go... Omar Khadr Not Tortured: Judge Thanks. It's a US Military Judge deciding on a case that could make the US Military look bad, so I would take that with a large grain of salt. But to each their own. Quote
eyeball Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 18 hours ago, betsy said: A lot of them do. If given the choice between working in sweat shops (which means food in their tummies), or hunger.....what do you think they'll choose? If it will help you survive starvation - wouldn't you volunteer? The problem with bleedin' hearts - they try to equate their charmed lives with those that are barely surviving. Their priorities aren't quite the same as yours! Do you think that's what Jesus would say Betsy? 1 Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Hal 9000 Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 6 hours ago, The_Squid said: Yes, I'm sure Khadr is going to be charged for treason! LOL What have you been smoking??? The SCOC says his rights were violated, Canada pays him $10 MIL and apologizes... and you think he'll be charged with treason! I didn't say he will be, I said he should be. What a difference one small word makes to sentence. No, I think he closer to getting the "Order of Canada" than he is getting charges levied. 1 Quote The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball
Omni Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 9 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said: I didn't say he will be, I said he should be. What a difference one small word makes to sentence. No, I think he closer to getting the "Order of Canada" than he is getting charges levied. Wow. Sounds like you have quite the inner conflict boiling away. Quote
betsy Posted July 14, 2017 Author Report Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) Quote betsy A lot of them do. If given the choice between working in sweat shops (which means food in their tummies), or hunger.....what do you think they'll choose? If it will help you survive starvation - wouldn't you volunteer? The problem with bleedin' hearts - they try to equate their charmed lives with those that are barely surviving. Their priorities aren't quite the same as yours! 1 hour ago, eyeball said: Do you think that's what Jesus would say Betsy? I don't think you have any idea at all what Jesus would say. Your post reveal that. Read again what I've stated above.....and study the Bible. If you're going to bring up something, at least you better get a grasp on it. Anyway, if you want to continue this line of argument - raising the Jesus card - create your own thread for it. Edited July 14, 2017 by betsy Quote
betsy Posted July 14, 2017 Author Report Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) 1 hour ago, eyeball said: Do you think that's what Jesus would say Betsy? Why Jesus is even brought up when we talk about natural reaction of people who are starving, is beyond me. It's not like as if a starving person wouldn't try to do anything to get something to eat. Get a grip. Be realistic. Just look at your response. Like I said...... The problem with bleedin' hearts - they try to equate their charmed lives with those that are barely surviving. Their priorities aren't quite the same as yours! I suppose........ stealing and robbing is more to your liking. After all, you've already got the justification. At least, give these poor folks major plus points for still trying to do the right thing in the face of their impoverished existence. We need not take away their livelihood in the name of politicking - we can call for humane laws that would protect people from all kinds of exploitation. Edited July 14, 2017 by betsy Quote
GostHacked Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 18 hours ago, Argus said: More conspiracy ranting. Not at all. It is a known fact that the CIA/US supplied weapons to Osama Bin Laden back in the Muhajedeen days. That can be ignored since it does not fit your view of events. Quote
GostHacked Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 2 hours ago, betsy said: Where does it say that Guantanamo itself, is illegal? If Gitmo is illegal, it would've been closed long time ago. Even Obama - of all people - didn't close it asap. Read his statement: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/02/23/obama-release-plan-close-guantanamo-bay/80793530/ He didn't say, it's illegal. Obama wanted to, but the military would not let him close it. Quote
betsy Posted July 14, 2017 Author Report Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, GostHacked said: Obama wanted to, but the military would not let him close it. READ HIS STATEMENT! He didn't say, it's illegal. Edited July 14, 2017 by betsy Quote
SpankyMcFarland Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 Interesting to see Rempel and Polievre finally poking their snouts out again. I did not notice them much during the leadership campaign. Quote
capricorn Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 33 minutes ago, GostHacked said: Obama wanted to, but the military would not let him close it. Some Commander in Chief, letting the military run him by the nose. Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
Peter F Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 (edited) 4 hours ago, betsy said: He's just spouting off ignorant opinion! 4 hours ago, capricorn said: http://www.weeklystandard.com/a-jihadist-hits-the-jackpot/article/2008843#! I would not categorize Omar Khadr's treatment in Gitmo as torture. There is just too much evidence against such a claim. Yet, if it's repeated often enough that he was tortured some people begin to believe it, just as the claim that he was a child soldier. Check the MC trial of Muhammad Jawad, also a juvenile charged with war crimes at Guantanamo. His military-appointed lawyers argued that the sleep deprivation regime carried out at Guantanamo was torture and therefore his charges should be dismissed. The Military Judge in that case didn't actually agree that sleep-deprivation was torture but it most certainly was abusive, so ruled that all Jawads statements of guilt need be tossed being the result of inhumane treatment. The evidence presented by the defence to prove the abuse were the same methods applied to Omar Khadr during that same period that Jawad suffered them. They had the prison records to prove it. When this was presented by the defence in Khadr's trial, in a motion to dismiss, the judge there determined that it may or may not be inhumane treatment or even torture - let the panel decide. The judge most certainly did not find that Khadr wasn't tortured; only that he (the judge) was not convinced and so not dismissing the charges. He certainly allowed that the defence could make the argument when it presented its case to the panel. Of course this did not preclude many headlines announcing "Khadr Not Tortured Rules Judge" ...the panel never got to consider the question since the Khadr's lawyers never had the opportunity to present the evidence to them. Edited July 14, 2017 by Peter F Quote A bayonet is a tool with a worker at both ends
jacee Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 16 hours ago, Army Guy said: Yes , it does, however show me the quote where it says that children CAN NOT be held responsible for their crimes...And are you saying that we here in Canada have not given a child an adult sentence for serious crimes? well he had to have been sitting up to get 2 bullet holes into the back .....time line is everything here.... Consider nothing.....every been to a car accident, or robbery, something traumatic.....talk to 100 people and you'll get 100 different stories....on top of that not everyone was in the same location, their stories will be from different angles....different stories.... No one will ever get the same level of evidence from a battle field engagement that is required here in Canada....there is no CSI unit that comes in after the battle to make sure it was all above board....and yet there are investigations that happen all the time, Take a look at the Capt Semeau case...very little evidence and what was collected would be in no way to the same level as here at home....and yet he was charged. You are trying to argue both ways: 'He should be convicted. Childhood doesn't matter' And 'You cannot get enough evidence.' I don't really see how any of that makes sense. Quote
capricorn Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 28 minutes ago, Peter F said: ...the panel never got to consider the question since the Khadr's lawyers never had the opportunity to present the evidence to them. So, there was never a definitive answer as to whether he was tortured or not. Of course, Khadr and his lawyers can maintain he was tortured and, given the situation, claiming torture can be seen as a self-serving accusation. One red flag is the fact Khadr never wanted to testify on the matter of alleged torture. Had he done so and not presented credible corroborating evidence, his claim for compensation could have been impacted. Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
jacee Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 13 hours ago, Accountability Now said: At what point does that not matter though? As a previous poster stated, what if he was brought in when he was 10 and captured when he was 25? I think the only thing to consider is the age at which he was when captured. If a child in this country can be tried as an adult for murder here then there should be rules available to do the same in this case. So what's the youngest that a child was ever tried for murder? I believe the minimum age for this is 14 which seems to reflect the thought that many posters have stated in that at that age the person should have an idea of what they are doing. Trying anybody for 'murder' requires evidence. So far, none has been provided. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 I keep forgetting that Islam allows for MULTIPLE subservient brides. Good luck to you remaining contenders for Omar's attentions. 1 Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Spiderfish Posted July 14, 2017 Report Posted July 14, 2017 14 hours ago, Omni said: I get your point But in this particular case we are talking about someone who was a kid when this tale began. If you're 10 years old and your dad says we are going to Afghanistan, what are you going to do? You're going to go to Afghanistan. And his dad took him down this path and he paid a big price for that. We have to be careful when we talk about when we talk about depriving people of their charter/human rights. We didn't compensate him because his dad corrupted him. His charter rights were not violated because his dad "took him down this path". You have chosen not to accept this so I realize I'm talking to a brick wall, but it was determined that his charter rights were violated by improper interrogation procedures by our Liberal Government and CSIS, and information exchange with the commission...that's it....that's all....That's the extent of the SCOC ruling, period. 3 Quote
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.