Khadr should make us ashamed to be Canadian

[Army Guy]

So would that explain why Canadians are not really taking this war seriously, because it has not affected them on the home front.

Perhaps that is something to keep in mind before we go and commit to another adventure or mission. The government has to involve and effect the public in greater ways in order for these accomplish these quests to spread our good deeds around the world.

[ScottSA]

We are not in a state of war. Afghanistan is more like a prolonged skirmish than even being at war.

Something like being "all most a virgin" you either are or your not. We are asking our youth to fight and die because our nation has made a commitment. Only it seems now that the only ones living up to that commitment are our soldiers and the minority of Canadians....

I was thinking of " state of war " as meaning more when an entire country must mobilize in order to conduct the business of war, as in World Wars I and II. When industry is converted to producing weapons and vehicles, when hobbies and everyday pleasures are abandoned in order to serve the war effort. I make the distinction mostly to illustrate that there must be a certain level of conflict before the leader of a country can presume to rightly take the mantle of " war leader " and all of the tyrannical powers that comes with it.

That would be the distinction between limited and total war, to put the field's fine point on it, but it doesn't make a whit of difference when your people are in danger of being killed. It doesn't matter what "mantle" a leader puts on; what matters is how safe his people are. You will, I suspect, be among the first to be howling for the leader's blood if the enemy DOES succeed in hitting us hard with bio, chemical, or radioactive weapons, and shrilly demanding to know why you weren't protected, so it behooves you to understand that a state of war is qualitative, not quantitative. It can always get bigger and uglier later, but it will always be a state of war. And it's the leader's responsibility to keep it as safe, if not as small, as possible. If that means an outside chance that someone might be listening over your shoulder, it's a far cry better than someone blowing your head off, eh wot? The funny thing about freedom is that it's meaningless to dead people.

[Remiel]

So would that explain why Canadians are not really taking this war seriously, because it has not affected them on the home front.

Perhaps that is something to keep in mind before we go and commit to another adventure or mission. The government has to involve and effect the public in greater ways in order for these accomplish these quests to spread our good deeds around the world.

Exactly.

[M.Dancer]

Between you and me I hope we remain solucky as to be untouched directly by war.

The brief chaos following 911 didn't really touch us, not if we didn't need to fly that week or work in travel or cross borded trade....

but some might suggest that we would be immune from attacks if we distance ourselves from the US...they may be right, I don't know....is there merit in being only collateral damage?

[jbg]

War is such a broadly defined term as to be nearly useless as a measurement of what can and cannot be allowed. The idea that you can declare war on some piddling little country and then limit rights and exert power as if you were fighting the Third Reich is simply ridiculous, yet that is what you imply by saying we are in a " state of war " . Being at war, and being in a state of war, could be defined as two different things. We are not in a state of war. Afghanistan is more like a prolonged skirmish than even being at war.

Al Quaeda killed more American civilians than the Nazis and Japanese combined did.

[Remiel]

Al Quaeda killed more American civilians than the Nazis and Japanese combined did.

Only because they were too busy slaughtering civilians in their own neighbourhoods.

[geoffrey]

Al Quaeda killed more American civilians than the Nazis and Japanese combined did.

I'd be careful with that statement. It could easily be turned around. The US hasn't been the definition of clean combat since.

And I thought this was a West vs. Them war.

In that case, Europe lost far more to the Nazi's then the Americans ever will lose to al-Qaeda.

And by the way, your factually wrong. The Americans lost 11,600 civilians in WWII if you include the civilian Merchant Marine, which IMO should be considered.

[Argus]

Can you name one any particular incidents which would result in a belief press freedom in Canada has deteriorated? Any government policies or actions which have limited media freedom?

For that matter, can you name any government policy or law in the US which has cut the scale of media freedom?

For Media:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reporters_Without_Borders

I've tried looking for the other one, but I can't remember exactly how I found it. The one I saw had Venezuela at 5/5, instead of 4/4 like the Freedom House one, but it had been updated in the last week of May, I believe. I do not know when Freedom House released theirs.

As far as policys go, it seems it is the policy of the U.S. to obfuscate anything and everything. Same here, to a lesser degree. Media freedom is a meaningless gesture without transparency and truth. That is tied to political rights, because what good is the right to participate in decision making without the right to know the truth?

That is not a policy or law, that has nothing to do with the freedom of the press. You are confusion the press being free to report what they want with the government being required to tell the press whatever the press asks. Not the same thing.

The group above seems to have a very rough method of calculating press freedom, but it's far from exact and wide open to abuse, either deliberate or unintentional. From your own quote:

The report is based on a questionnaire sent to partner organisations of Reporters Without Borders (14 freedom of expression groups in five continents) and its 130 correspondents around the world, as well as to journalists, researchers, jurists and human rights activists.[11]

The survey asks questions about direct attacks on journalists and the media as well as other indirect sources of pressure against the free press. RWB is careful to note that the index only deals with press freedom, and does not measure the quality of journalism. Due to the nature of the survey's methodology based on individual perceptions, there are often wide contrasts in a country's ranking from year to year. The ranking also states it takes into account pressure on journalists by non-governmental groups,

So the report is based on the perceptions of 1 or 2 "freedom of expression groups" in North America, and a couple of "correspondants" whatever that is. But we get no idea of exactly why they perceieve press freedom to be higher or lower in any particular year. Freedom House, for example, will explain why a country's rating rises or falls. Is it because of government action, or pressure groups, or simply that the reporters don't like the current government and resent its lack of cooperation? Switzerland's number rose by 500% in one year - apparently meaning it is 5 times more restrictive of press freedom. Any particular reason why? Sweden's doubled, but Bolivia's was cut in half. Why?

[Radsickle]

I recently left a forum of people that I'd known for a long time over this topic. I was ashamed at how many of them couldn't give a rat's behind about this kid. The majority of them thought that, while it's not right for him to wait so long for a `trial', he should stay where he is because he deserves it. The majority of them assume the trial will be a fair one because, hey, it's the Americans. The majority of them think he deserves what he gets and anyone who disagrees is in league with the Taliban... The majority of them were letting their anger cloud their judgement and/or letting today's political leadership define what's `ok'.

I left a bunch of ignorant people.

They couldn't see that our treatment of this citizen is wrong; It's against our own laws, it's against international treaties that we've signed, it gives the average Afghani a good reason to hate us, it puts our soldiers at greater risk, it says to the world that we endorse torture and/or that we're too weak to tell our Allies when to back off.

I'm glad to see a broader mix of opinions in this forum. I hope the Supreme Court will tell our Prime Minister to get Omar out of that circus.

Today's news:

Buckshot

Edited September 27, 2008 by Radsickle

[Argus]

I recently left a forum of people that I'd known for a long time over this topic. I was ashamed at how many of them couldn't give a rat's behind about this kid. The majority of them thought that, while it's not right for him to wait so long for a `trial', he should stay where he is because he deserves it. The majority of them assume the trial will be a fair one because, hey, it's the Americans. The majority of them think he deserves what he gets and anyone who disagrees is in league with the Taliban... The majority of them were letting their anger cloud their judgement and/or letting today's political leadership define what's `ok'.

I left a bunch of ignorant people.

They couldn't see that our treatment of this citizen is wrong; It's against our own laws, it's against international treaties that we've signed, it gives the average Afghani a good reason to hate us, it puts our soldiers at greater risk, it says to the world that we endorse torture and/or that we're too weak to tell our Allies when to back off.

I'm glad to see a broader mix of opinions in this forum. I hope the Supreme Court will tell our Prime Minister to get Omar out of that circus.

Today's news:

Buckshot

Maybe you should leave this forum too, because most of us here couldn't give a rat's ass what happens to this guy either. Many of us don't consider him or his family to be Canadians of any kind anyway.

[DogOnPorch]

Over on another website, I'm being accused of being racist (gasp!) because I was pointing out the problems with using the Long March rocket to do manned space flights (not safe due to lack of automated refueling and draining for the dangerous hypergolic fuels). I'll be damned if I could make them see a simple point. Too wrapped up with China's success to be objective. Khadr is perhaps your Long March...lol. Sh*t just happens...not always the way you think it should.

People are going to hold strong opinions on some subjects, right or wrong. The only things I really note re: judging Khadr myself is that his dad was apparently the #2 Al-Qaeda man before his death and the family is openly anti-West...but live here. Those points plus that Omar was captured in Afghanistan...not Starbucks.

Welcome to MLW

----------------------------------------------------------

If Life Is a Bowl of Cherries, What Am I Doing in the Pits?

---Erma Brombeck

[jbg]

I'm glad to see a broader mix of opinions in this forum. I hope the Supreme Court will tell our Prime Minister to get Omar out of that circus.

Today's news:

Buckshot

For someone whose family hates Canada? Bah humbug.

[Radsickle]

No one's saying we should bring him back and immediately set him free. Just bring him back so we can deal with our own, our own way, just like every other country has done with their citizens who ended up in Gitmo.

He's a Canadian kid who was dragged into his father's nightmare. To not show him some mercy only galvanizes the attitude of his father's buddies.

While his mom and sisters were a national embarrassment on TV a while ago, here's what Omar said recently:

Omar's Letter

Edited September 29, 2008 by Radsickle

[jbg]

He's a Canadian kid who was dragged into his father's nightmare. To not show him some mercy only galvanizes the attitude of his father's buddies.

Oh yes, a future hockey star like Ken Dryden. Now I get the picture, a true, normal, typical Canadian.

Hah hah. I needed a laugh.

[Peter F]

Oh yes, a future hockey star like Ken Dryden. Now I get the picture, a true, normal, typical Canadian.

Hah hah. I needed a laugh.

Khadr is a Canadian citizen wether you think he should be or not. Thats why Canadian government functionaries were allowed access to him in Guatanamo. He's 100% as Canadian as I am. Y'see, I never played hockey either.

Radsickle's right,

[Argus]

No one's saying we should bring him back and immediately set him free. Just bring him back so we can deal with our own, our own way, just like every other country has done with their citizens who ended up in Gitmo.

He broke no Canadian laws. I don't think we have any laws against going somewhere else and causing trouble. We leave it up to other countries to arrest Canadians when they get in trouble overseas. If a Canadian commits murder in France we don't try them here. And if the French elected not to try him we wouldn't do anything to the killer.

So if we bring him home then he's set free immediately. That's all there is to that.

[Argus]

Khadr is a Canadian citizen wether you think he should be or not. Thats why Canadian government functionaries were allowed access to him in Guatanamo. He's 100% as Canadian as I am. Y'see, I never played hockey either.

Radsickle's right,

Apparently he's spent most of his life overseas. Does he even speak English?

[Peter F]

Apparently he's spent most of his life overseas. Does he even speak English?

I do not know if he speaks English. I do know he is a Canadian citizen whose parents dragged him around to pakistan, afghanistan and perhaps other places as well and left him in the care of his fathers cronies when he was fifteen.

And during all that time and the time to come, he was a Canadian Citizen.

edit to add:

This government is expected to intervene and assist every other Canadian Citizen held in foriegn lands, hell, we'll even invoke Canadian citizenship to justify why we are in a War On Terror (Canadian citizens died on 9/11). Nobody asks if those Canadians can speak English or play hockey.

But for Omar Khadr - no, because we think his parents are/were scum.

Edited September 29, 2008 by Peter F

[Rue]

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/aldridge060507.htm

Decent Canadians don't do this - Decent Canadians don't do that -

I'm sick to death of conforming to some boneheads idea of a 'Decent Canadian'.

That's down right indecent of you. Kind of ironic. This obsession with being decent is a decidedly Canadian characteristic. Me I love running naked all through Leaf's bushes and scaring his cats. Its the evil foreign blood in moi that causes me to do that,

[Radsickle]

He broke no Canadian laws. I don't think we have any laws against going somewhere else and causing trouble...

...So if we bring him home then he's set free immediately. That's all there is to that.

Actually, our new anti-terrorism laws just finished their first test in a Brampton courtroom and led to a guilty verdict. We have the capability to try him here. We just currently lack the political will to try.

[bush_cheney2004]

Apparently he's spent most of his life overseas. Does he even speak English?

Isn't he allowed to speak French instead?

[jay22]

He broke no Canadian laws. I don't think we have any laws against going somewhere else and causing trouble. We leave it up to other countries to arrest Canadians when they get in trouble overseas. If a Canadian commits murder in France we don't try them here. And if the French elected not to try him we wouldn't do anything to the killer.

So if we bring him home then he's set free immediately. That's all there is to that.

1)He did break international law.

2)There would have to be a trial.

I would suggest you do some research if you have not already on the kadr family.With all of that said he does need a fair trial there is no question abouut that.

Edited September 30, 2008 by jay22

[Peter F]

1)He did break international law.

2)There would have to be a trial.

I would suggest you do some research if you have not already on the kadr family.With all of that said he does need a fair trial there is no question abouut that.

1) Which international law did he break? and if so why is he not before an International court?

2) There certainly would, in a timely manner one would hope. Justice delayed is justice denied and all that

Researching the Khadr family is a waste of time. Omar khadr should be held responsible for his own actions, not those of his brothers sisters aunts uncles or parents.

[Argus]

Actually, our new anti-terrorism laws just finished their first test in a Brampton courtroom and led to a guilty verdict. We have the capability to try him here. We just currently lack the political will to try.

You cannot try someone for an offence commited prior to the law being created.

[Army Guy]

I have to ask, was it alright for a Canadian during WWII with german decent travel back to germany, to take up arms and fight again'st the allieds, then expect to travel back to Canada at the end of the war to collect Canadian benifits....Is it fair to our own vets, our own tax payers,

Would we be having this conversation if it was Canadian soldiers in which he engaged....and are we just having trouble with this because all he engaged is the US army.

Did he break inter national law, terrorist activities are clearly again'st inter national law , as well as the UN charter...as well again'st the law here in Canada in fact in most western countries....

How will we accept those Canadians that have made there way over to Iraq to fight again'st the coalition be treated...As our CSIS dept head has stated it is happening right now....and the numbers are growing....