Jump to content

Compensating Khadr


betsy

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, jacee said:

Trying anybody for 'murder' requires evidence.

So far, none has been provided.

 

Trial for 'attempted murder' or any other serious crime would also lead to being tried as an adult. I don't think it would be too hard to provide evidence that he attempted to murder any of the soldiers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, betsy said:

 

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.

It would be interesting to know what would have come out if this case had been argued in court, it's curious to wonder what the Trudeau Liberals are trying to hide by paying Omar off and trying to make this go away instead of putting certain people on the stand under oath and getting to the bottom of what he is really owed through the eyes of a court.  Unfortunately, we will never know.  This is nothing more than another Liberal Government trying to keep from shedding light on something they don't want to open up for public scrutiny.   

I don't buy for one single second that this is about Trudeau trying to be fiscally responsible with taxpayer money and avoid a bigger payout if litigated, as he has said.  Since when has Trudeau had any respect for taxpayer money?  He just spent another quarter of a billion dollars on global family planning, including a fat 20 million dollar donation to the Clinton Foundation of all things.  It's painfully obvious this clown has zero problem throwing loads of money at whatever he feels like, the more the better.

This lawsuit should have gone to court and been decided by a judge, even if it would have ended up costing twice as much.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, capricorn said:

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.

Could it? His claims of torture were considered by  both the federal and Supreme courts of this country. Granted they went out of their way to say that they weren't convinced he was tortured but they most certainly were convinced he was subjected to cruel and inhumane treatment. Torture is not necessary to the claim. Abusive treatment is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Peter F said:

 Torture is not necessary to the claim. Abusive treatment is.

IMO, abusive treatment on its own would not have been enough for a successful monetary claim. Seems to me as far as the SCOC was concerned, the interrogation without counsel present and sharing the information with the military lawyers were additional reasons to conclude his rights were violated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Not if you've followed him lately. He's moved swiftly to the Left. He wrote a book about "Why Catholics are Right". 

But then wrote a book about the revelation that Gay Marriage should be A-OK and why he's left the Catholic Church. He writes for the Star now. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Omni said:

 We all know why he was compensated. 

Not all of us...you don't.   You think he was compensated because he was he was charged by a bogus court, which is untrue, because he was held without access to legal representation, which is untrue, and because he was tortured, which is in true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spiderfish said:

Not all of us...you don't.   You think he was compensated because he was he was charged by a bogus court, which is untrue, because he was held without access to legal representation, which is untrue, and because he was tortured, which is in true.

You're allowed to hold your own opinions. I'll go with what the courts said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

There has to be a point in which your Canadian rights are taken away or severely diminished.  There obviously isn't one now, but in this day and age, we can't (like europe) get into a position where we have obvious "unlawful combatants" coming home from fighting ...us and getting a job, going on pogey or using our medical system to recover.  It's insanity.

Once it's known that someone has travelled off and fought against us or our allies - brown people...and yes, whites too, they should have their passport revoked and put on the next plane back, in the case that that is not possible, there should be treason charges levied upon arrival.  

I think the idea of; "Don't go away and fight against us, but if you do, we'll give you medical and a big fat cheque", may not be effective. 

Canadians do lose some rights when they are legitimately convicted of crimes and incarcerated. Medical care is not one of them. We're not animals.

And violations of charter rights must be financially compensated.

Lessons to learn:

Our governments must avoid violating people's Charter rights, to avoid having to compensate them.

You pick a bad case to make these points - a child taken out of the country into a war, incarcerated with harsh treatment with Canada complicit, and a 'confession' extorted without evidence of a crime.

You might have been able to make that case about his father back when, but it's too late for that now.

And of course you can't punish the son for the crimes of the father, though it appears that some people here would like to.

Edited by jacee
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Accountability Now said:

Trial for 'attempted murder' or any other serious crime would also lead to being tried as an adult. I don't think it would be too hard to provide evidence that he attempted to murder any of the soldiers. 

Sometimes can lead to trial as adult, if intentionality is clear ... but not always, can't be assumed

A kid forced into a war is not likely a candidate for that.

And so far there has never been any evidence produced that Omar Khadr is responsible for any specific death.

We'll see what happens at his appeal trial. I assume if there is any evidence, the US prosecution will bring it out then.

The US soldiers have presented more than one scenario to date, seeming to contradict themselves and obfuscate the facts, which doesn't bode well for their credibility. 

It will be the first time Khadr has an opportunity for due process and a fair trial ... maybe.

Edited by jacee
Add
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, jacee said:

You pick a bad case to make these points - a child taken out of the country into a war, incarcerated with harsh treatment with Canada complicit, and a 'confession' extorted without evidence of a crime.

You might have been able to make that case about his father back when, but it's too late for that now.

And of course you can't punish the son for the crimes of the father, though it appears that some people here would like to.

Would it have been so bad to bring his compensation case before a Canadian court?  What bad could possibly come from shedding light on what happened according to the legal system...not innuendo and rhetoric..but actual fact, and coming to an equitable judgement?  Maybe Omar was owed more from the Canadian Government...maybe Trudeau screwed him out of what he should of actually collected from us.  Maybe light would have been shed on the mistakes made by previous Governments...all of them... including the Conservatives.  We could have then acknowledged our mistakes and moved forward with a concerted effort to avoid these mistakes in the future, as determined by a court of law.

Instead we move forward by hiding the skeletons and avoid confronting our mistakes by paying for silence to avoid accountability.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/4/2017 at 11:22 AM, betsy said:

I knew something like this will be happening, when the narrative was about Canada "letting down Khadr" to rot in Guantanamo! 

 

The federal government is not obliged to make a public announcement, but the news outlet are saying Omar Khadr is likely to receive 10 millllion dollars and an apology.  He's apparently seeking 20 million (and if I'm not mistaken, there's also a civil suit).   It could be more - we won't know, unless the government decides to divulge it.

 

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/keeping-up-with-the-khadrs-a-family-tree-1.976666

 

Take note that the patriarch was already helped by Prime Minister Chretien! 

I don't understand why Canada has to issue an apology - and compensation to Omar Khadr.

It's over Betsy. The ISIS terrorist got his reward for killing an American soldier thanks to our dear leader PM. What a waste of taxpayer's tax dollars. Tax dollars that could have been better spent and gone to some needy Canadians. This joke of a PM still has two more years to go to continue on with showing us all his true love for Muslim terrorists. And to think that Canadian soldiers died in two world wars for this guy to be able to shaft them and steal their relatives tax dollars and to have to fork over millions of tax dollars to a loser like that Arab. With Muslim terrorists getting rewarded in the millions for their terrorism and killing, and another Muslim in Canada gets $12,000 of taxpayer's tax dollars because someone stepped on his carpet just should show us all by now that Canada is fast becoming a third world multicultural hell hole, and Canadians deserve it because they allow it to keep happening. Where have all the true Canadian patriots gone? Pathetic. :rolleyes: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Spiderfish said:

Would it have been so bad to bring his compensation case before a Canadian court?  What bad could possibly come from shedding light on what happened according to the legal system...not innuendo and rhetoric..but actual fact, and coming to an equitable judgement?  Maybe Omar was owed more from the Canadian Government...maybe Trudeau screwed him out of what he should of actually collected from us.  Maybe light would have been shed on the mistakes made by previous Governments...all of them... including the Conservatives.  We could have then acknowledged our mistakes and moved forward with a concerted effort to avoid these mistakes in the future, as determined by a court of law.

Instead we move forward by hiding the skeletons and avoid confronting our mistakes by paying for silence to avoid accountability.

The Supreme Court has already ruled on the mistakes made by governments. 

Nobody's hiding anything. Maybe you're not looking. There are plenty or articles you could read about it. If you haven't bothered to do that by now, another long court case isn't going to help you understand.

If you listened or read anything you would know the government could have fought it more in court but they were pretty sure they were going to lose, because of the existing Supreme Court rulings. So all that would have done is pushed the costs and the settlement higher - $30- $40m instead of $10m.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, betsy said:

READ HIS STATEMENT!

He didn't say, it's illegal.

That's not the point I was making. I said he never had the chance of closing it because the military did not allow him to close it.  Reading comprehension, Betsy , is key and might be the reason you post the way you do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jacee said:

Canadians do lose some rights when they are legitimately convicted of crimes and incarcerated. Medical care is not one of them. We're not animals.

And violations of charter rights must be financially compensated.

Lessons to learn:

Our governments must avoid violating people's Charter rights, to avoid having to compensate them.

You pick a bad case to make these points - a child taken out of the country into a war, incarcerated with harsh treatment with Canada complicit, and a 'confession' extorted without evidence of a crime.

You might have been able to make that case about his father back when, but it's too late for that now.

And of course you can't punish the son for the crimes of the father, though it appears that some people here would like to.

Well, i never said take away medical from inmates, but that's what you read.  I'm not using this case, i'm clearly saying - going forward - but you didn't understand that either.  Nobody has tried punishing the son for crimes of the father - you invented that!  I never said anything about compensation -I think Arar, Milgaard and the rest deserved it, but that post never brought any of that into question.

Nice work!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Omni said:

He had a trial alright, after ten years, and then only if he agreed to plead guilty. Nice "legal" system.

Lol.... 

You either  have none of the facts or twist it to fit  your anti Canadian/American views.

He got off easy because he plead guilty. You know why he plead guilty? Because he was and confessed .

Allahu Ahkbar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...