cybercoma Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 But he was "assist[ing]... armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities." Even that's debatable. He allegedly threw a grenade when American troops showed up at their home uninvited with their guns drawn. He wasn't with "armed forces," which typically means a military nor was he with a group of al-Qaeda terrorists holding a position against US troops. Quote
cybercoma Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 As has already been pointed out more than once, he "assist[ed] an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are." He didn't assist an enemy at war with Canada, nor was he fighting in a battle alongside an enemy against Canadian forces. Quote
cybercoma Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 Lets go through this.... Did he? No he didnt. They were not at war with Canada. DId he assist? No he didnt because he never helped any armed force ,since there were no countries force in play at the time. (Except the American force) There are no forces from any country Believe me, I read this a long tome ago, over and over and could not see what i was missing. It's not even clear whether her was helping al-Qaeda. It's not like he went to battle for them. Quote
cybercoma Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 Does it matter if a country has armed forces involved? Yes....but wee Omar was not assisting a countries forces since they do not exist in this fight. More particularly, the specific incident he was involved in wasn't exactly a fight or battle between the US forces and al-Qaeda. Quote
g_bambino Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) Even that's debatable. He allegedly threw a grenade when American troops showed up at their home uninvited with their guns drawn. He wasn't with "armed forces," which typically means a military nor was he with a group of al-Qaeda terrorists holding a position against US troops. He was obviously with an armed force since the whomever he was with was armed and used force against those US troops. However, what the law defines as an "armed force" is important here, and the wording of the Criminal Code does seem to indicate that an armed force, in the context of the law, is one beloning to a country. [ed.: sp] Edited May 4, 2012 by g_bambino Quote
Army Guy Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 assists an enemy at war with Canada or any armed force against whom Canadian forces are engaged in hostilities, even if no state of war exists Not in Canada . Ergo, no charges here and he walks. Where in that entire link does it say the crimes must be done and completed in Canada. Maybe you should research the last man Canada charged for treason, find out were that crime took place, I'll give you a hint, it was Japan , my next question is japan in any form considered part of Canada....there fore he does not walk, and it is an option. How does one assist armed forces against Canadian forces (remember it was US troops that were attacked/killed) when lying under a pile of rubble? Keep reading it also includes our allieds any action again'st them is an action again'st us....but if you don't like the treason angle , read the laws on terrorism...one way or the other he can be charged. Why is this so complicated it is spelled out in black and white in the links i provided...all you have to do is read it... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 I did not comment on the treason part in my response. I was commenting on the fact there is no official war against Afghanistan (because there was no delcaration). The invasion was part of the war on terror to root out Al-queda and kick out the Taliban. So no, there was and is no war against Afghanistan. Once again "A STATE OF WAR does not need to exist for the Cnadian Amred forces to engage our enemies...your repeating it does not make it true...in fact you have already stated there was nop war, OK but our armed forces were there kicking someone ass....what are the odds our liberal government broke any laws in sending us there...think about it... Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
Army Guy Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 Even that's debatable. He allegedly threw a grenade when American troops showed up at their home uninvited with their guns drawn. He wasn't with "armed forces," which typically means a military nor was he with a group of al-Qaeda terrorists holding a position against US troops. This is Bullshit, read the statements again, 3 Afghanis soldiers were going door to door "knocking on doors" in a war zone don't need an invitation , warrent, or any other peace nik shit....your proven Al Qaeda terrorist responded to the knock with a hail of bullets killing all 3 Aghanis soldiers opening the engagement, which ended with everyone dead and the capture of Omar... He was'nt with them, give me a break, he was part of a Al-Qaeda bomb factory, with the vidios to prove it...don't kid yourself Al Qaeda was a very real part of the taliban regime, and her armed forces... Your claim that he was not with the grouop of Al quada is laughable at best, who was he with then ...US forces had already indentified the group he was with, but please tell us.. .....and they were not part of the boy scout organization you suggest, in fact when does the boy scouts plant IED to be used on NATO forces, More particularly, the specific incident he was involved in wasn't exactly a fight or battle between the US forces and al-Qaeda. If you have proof of that lets see it. And perhaps answer this question why is it the others that were with him have links back to Al quada, It's not even clear whether her was helping al-Qaeda. It's not like he went to battle for them. this is rich, lets see his parents , play a huge role in AQ, he is trained by the AQ, he is put under protectorite by AQ members....the pers he was with and were killed were AQ...and you doubt he was AQ....how did you come up with that ? Quote We, the willing, led by the unknowing, are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. We have now done so much for so long with so little, we are now capable of doing anything with nothing.
GostHacked Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 "Even if war wasn't declared." They most definitely were at war/engaging in hostilities with Canada. Canadian forces were there fighting al Qaeda and the Taliban. Are you denying that? Maybe you can point out what Al-Queda/Taliban operations were happening within Canada? Yet you said to g_bambino that the crime didn't occur in Canada, therefore he wasn't charged in Canada; yet, as I pointed out, it is treason even when committed outside of Canada - it doesn't have to be in Canada as you said. So you're changing the reason he wasn't charged now? - It's no longer because it didn't occur in Canada but rather that it didn't occur at all? There were no charges of treason brought against Omar by Canada, so it's a dead issue regarding treason. The US declared him an illegal enemy combatant and sped him off to Gitmo. I think you're (dis)missing the fact that al Qaeda and the taliban are "armed forces" within Afghanistan; I think the law says that it's treason even if no war is declared against the country because if if there are armed forces within that country engaging in war/hostilities against Canada, then it is still treason. Al-queda is operating in at least 10 other countries, why have the US and other forces not invade those countries? The Taliban is also running parts of Afghanistan as well as taking up residence in parts of Pakistan. They have not exactly been run out of the country. Part of the reason Karzai and the US want to have negotiations with the Taliban... the US knows they cannot beat them .. might as well make them part of the solution (ahahahahaha more blowback I would suspect)... Quote
eyeball Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) this is rich, lets see his parents , play a huge role in AQ, he is trained by the AQ, he is put under protectorite by AQ members....the pers he was with and were killed were AQ...and you doubt he was AQ....how did you come up with that ? What's this under AQ protectorate thingy you're talking about, is is some sort of military child services that watch over service members children? You're telling me our allies attacked a Kindergarten? Edited May 4, 2012 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
g_bambino Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 Once again "A STATE OF WAR does not need to exist for the Cnadian Amred forces to engage our enemies... No. But the enemy has to be an armed force of another country. Quote
cybercoma Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) He was obviously with an armed force since the whomever he was with was armed and used force against those US troops. However, what the law defines as an "armed force" is important here, and the wording of the Criminal Code does seem to indicate that an armed force, in the context of the law, is one beloning to a country. [ed.: sp] Right. I'm not clear on all the details of the case, but the US troops showed up at a private residence in Afghanistan, then Khadr allegedly threw a grenade from inside the house, no? I mean Afghanis have been embroiled in war for decades, so it's hardly surprising that they would have weapons in their homes. Meanwhile, a foreign country invades, hunting down al-Qaeda and shows up at someone's home guns drawn, do they not have the right to defend their home? I mean, Khadr should have never been there. A child should have never been raised that way and put in that situation. It disgusts me that his parents would do that to their child. I can't for the life of me wrap my mind around a 15-year-old child being the 'bad' guy in this situation. I can't wrap my mind around the US being the 'bad' guys in this situation either. The responsibility lies entirely with whomever raised him this way and put him in that situation. Edited May 4, 2012 by cybercoma Quote
Guest American Woman Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 No. But the enemy has to be an armed force of another country. The Taliban was the armed forces of Afghanistan at the time; it was the Taliban who was asked to hand over bin Laden. Who would you say were Afghanistan's armed forces at the time? Quote
Guest American Woman Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 Maybe you can point out what Al-Queda/Taliban operations were happening within Canada? What difference does it make if it was happening within Canada or not? AS I said, they were definitely involved in an armed conflict with Canadian forces. There were no charges of treason brought against Omar by Canada, so it's a dead issue regarding treason. The US declared him an illegal enemy combatant and sped him off to Gitmo. So if something doesn't happen, it's a dead issue? Good to know. Perhaps we've heard the last of your calling for charges being brought against Bush/Cheney et al. Al-queda is operating in at least 10 other countries, why have the US and other forces not invade those countries? Because their training camps were in Afghanistan. You honestly didn't know that? The Taliban is also running parts of Afghanistan as well as taking up residence in parts of Pakistan. They have not exactly been run out of the country. Part of the reason Karzai and the US want to have negotiations with the Taliban... the US knows they cannot beat them .. might as well make them part of the solution (ahahahahaha more blowback I would suspect)... Is that the reason? I didn't realize you were privy to that information. Quote
jacee Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 Once again "A STATE OF WAR does not need to exist for the Cnadian Amred forces to engage our enemies...your repeating it does not make it true...in fact you have already stated there was nop war, OK but our armed forces were there kicking someone ass....what are the odds our liberal government broke any laws in sending us there...think about it... Whether Omar's actions can be called 'treason' or not ... do you really think Harper will want to pursue that and dredge up the whole case again, including whether Canada should have done more to help a minor? Can a minor even be convicted of treason? I don't think so. In fact, I think Harper hopes the whole issue will stay as quiet as possible. I think it's more reasonable to muse whether the actions of Omar's father constituted treason ... or his mother: This is Canada, and you're not off the hook for child endangerment because your husband told you to ... but I'm still not sure that treason applies. Quote
g_bambino Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) The Taliban was the armed forces of Afghanistan at the time... The Taliban was the political group that governed Afghanistan. It had an armed force, but Omar belonged to Al Qaeda and, as far as I know, Al Qaeda was not a part of Taliban Afghanistan's armed forces; it was merely allowed by the ruling mullahs to base itself in the country. [ed.: -] Edited May 4, 2012 by g_bambino Quote
Guest American Woman Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 The Taliban was the political group that governed Afghanistan. It had an armed force, but Omar belonged to Al Qaeda and, as far as I know, Al Qaeda was not a part of Taliban Afghanistan's armed forces; it was merely allowed by the ruling mullahs to base itself in the country. Omar Khadr is a young Canadian who is being held at the U.S. detention camp for suspected terrorists in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Khadr was just 15 years old when he was captured by U.S. forces in 2002, while fighting for the Taliban in Afghanistan. link Quote
jbg Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 The Taliban was the political group that governed Afghanistan. It had an armed force, but Omar belonged to Al Qaeda and, as far as I know, Al Qaeda was not a part of Taliban Afghanistan's armed forces; it was merely allowed by the ruling mullahs to base itself in the country. [ed.: -] The West, as we know it, will literally die of this kind of hair splitting. Unless the West gets serious, folks like Omar will destroy us while we debate the finer points of jihad. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
guyser Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) The West, as we know it, will literally die of this kind of hair splitting. Unless the West gets serious, folks like Omar will destroy us while we debate the finer points of jihad. Oh you have got to be f'in kidding me. Post of the day.....comedy attempt was that? For the record, 15 yr olds dont particularly scare me much. You got a bed? Get under it and wait it out. We'll come and get you when the coast is clear. Bring lots of food and water and Depends. You'll need it. Edited May 4, 2012 by guyser Quote
Guest American Woman Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 For the record, 15 yr olds dont particularly scare me much. Everything else aside, you do realize that Omar isn't 15 years old any more, right? And you also realize that teenagers have killed people in suicide bomber terrorist attacks? Quote
guyser Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) Where in that entire link does it say the crimes must be done and completed in Canada. Um...in the link...'in Canada' Maybe you should research the last man Canada charged for treason, find out were that crime took place, I'll give you a hint, it was Japan , my next question is japan in any form considered part of Canada....there fore he does not walk, and it is an option. Dont need to. We already established that Sec 2 and its addendum stipulates that outside of Canada works too. But the caveat is a countries Armed Forces, and an attack on CDN Forces, and you know that aint happening. Ergo, no charges. Keep reading it also includes our allieds any action again'st them is an action again'st us....but if you don't like the treason angle , read the laws on terrorism...one way or the other he can be charged. Why is this so complicated it is spelled out in black and white in the links i provided...all you have to do is read it... Because you have a misunderstanding of treason laws and how they work. Re-read my last couple of posts where I tried to dispell the notions of armed forces and countries. I have read the terrorism law too. I highly doubt any of that would ever stick. And for the most part here is why..... but, for greater certainty, does not include an act or omission that is committed during an armed conflict and that, at the time and in the place of its commission, is in accordance with customary international law or conventional international law applicable to the conflict, or the activities undertaken by military forces of a state in the exercise of their official duties, to the extent that those activities are governed by other rules of international law. Edited May 4, 2012 by guyser Quote
Guest American Woman Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 Um...in the link...'in Canada' Yet, as has been pointed out, the law also says that it's a crime if committed outside of Canada, too. Quote
guyser Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 These two statements should not have been paired. The Taliban was the armed forces of Afghanistan at the time; No they weren't That would be the Afghan National Army, established in 1709 , current form 2002. The same army that paired up with the Russians to fight the mujahadeen it was the Taliban who was asked to hand over bin Laden. Who would you say were Afghanistan's armed forces at the time? Because the Taliban knew where he was (supposedly) , so of course they asked them for him. I would say the Afghan National Army. Quote
guyser Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 (edited) Yet, as has been pointed out, the law also says that it's a crime if committed outside of Canada, too. Hey come on now, you know that was mentioned in the next paragraph.You've rightfully stated that folks should read and not misquote based on one part.....right ? ( not to mention it does say In Canada which is what I was answering to AG) Edited May 4, 2012 by guyser Quote
Guest American Woman Posted May 4, 2012 Report Posted May 4, 2012 No they weren't That would be the Afghan National Army, established in 1709 , current form 2002. The same army that paired up with the Russians to fight the mujahadeen After President Najibullah's resignation in 1992 and the end of Soviet support, the military dissolved into portions controlled by different warlord factions and the mujahideen took control over the government. This era was followed by the rise of the Pakistan-backed Taliban, who established a military force on the basis of Islamic sharia law. link 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.