Signals.Cpl Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 One more time for those who still can't quite figure it out. American Woman asked what I based my assumption that Omar was brought to Afghanistan against his will. I said because he was 8 (turns out I was wrong and he went at 10)... Omar at 10, if he did make the decision to go to Afghanistan, legally it's up to his parents... correct? He could not just go on his own, correct? Several pages later and people are still trying to make an argument out of this when it was an assumption. Most people would say .'hmm I guess that would be a possibility' and then debate the possibility of it... but no, I get treated like a retard because people can't think for themselves. Happens all the time here and it's getting annoying. And it's the usual suspects who continually do this. 1 - I made no attempt to hide the assumption ... I guess that is the only point I need to make here. But we can go on for a few more pages if that suits all of you. Carry it away guys and gals. The problem is that he was given weapons training and assisting Taliban/Al-Qaeda while he was 15 years old. The relevant part is that I remember when I was 15 I knew the difference between right and wrong. If he had become involved with the Taliban/Al-Qaeda when he was 8 or 10 then it would be a different story, but at age 15 two months shy of age 16 he knew or ought to have known right from wrong and good from bad. The Canadian Forces Recruit 16 year olds in to the Reserves and 17 year olds as Officer Cadets, saying that a 16 year old is responsible to make a decision like that(with parental consent) while Khadr being 15 years and 9 months old was unable to make a decision of similar magnitude because he was only 15 does not fly with me. Quote Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
Signals.Cpl Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Except the propaganda from your side is more akin to defamation which is another war crime when it's perpetrated against a prisoner of war. The discussion likely will continue, it started in Ottawa amongst government officials when the decision to "claw back on the fact that he is a minor" was made and it will likely end in a supreme court. I expect the din and the divisiveness between the two extremes outside the court room to get a lot louder too. I wonder if it will finally bring to a head the hatred so many Canadians also have for our Charter and Supreme Court? When Khadr is brought back to Canada, would you be willing to let him live with you and your family? Quote Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
guyser Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 When Khadr is brought back to Canada, would you be willing to let him live with you and your family? Relevance? He is a citizen. If he moves in near you , you can move. See how easy that is? Quote
eyeball Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 When Khadr is brought back to Canada, would you be willing to let him live with you and your family? Absolutely. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
DogOnPorch Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Relevance? He is a citizen. If he moves in near you , you can move. See how easy that is? Conrad Black is a frickin' citizen, too. He and Omar can share a very chilly arctic island. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 If he had become involved with the Taliban/Al-Qaeda when he was 8 or 10 then it would be a different story Is this a classic face-palm moment or what? Jesus Christ I've heard everything now. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Signals.Cpl Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Relevance? He is a citizen. If he moves in near you , you can move. See how easy that is? The relevance is that some people make this grand argument about him being a victim but would not want to live near him. If you support bringing him back to Canada and letting him go free you should be willing to have him as a next door neighbour. The point is that some people hold certain beliefs but when those beliefs are challenged they would fold and by that I mean people who are adamant about him being a victim and he should be released but would not want to live in the same province as him let alone as a next-door neighbour. I am a citizen as well and I think of myself as much more valuable to Canada then someone who uses the passport as a get out of jail card, and I don't see why I should move or have my family uprooted and move due to some terrorist moving next-door to me. Its easy and cheap to say that he should be freed if he is to live somewhere over there meaning anywhere other then where you live. Quote Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
Signals.Cpl Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Is this a classic face-palm moment or what? Jesus Christ I've heard everything now. And why is that? Quote Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
Signals.Cpl Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Absolutely. Highly doubt that. Quote Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
DogOnPorch Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 (edited) The relevance is that some people make this grand argument about him being a victim but would not want to live near him. If you support bringing him back to Canada and letting him go free you should be willing to have him as a next door neighbour. The point is that some people hold certain beliefs but when those beliefs are challenged they would fold and by that I mean people who are adamant about him being a victim and he should be released but would not want to live in the same province as him let alone as a next-door neighbour. I am a citizen as well and I think of myself as much more valuable to Canada then someone who uses the passport as a get out of jail card, and I don't see why I should move or have my family uprooted and move due to some terrorist moving next-door to me. Its easy and cheap to say that he should be freed if he is to live somewhere over there meaning anywhere other then where you live. C'mon...Omar wasn't making roadside bombs or anything...oh...wait. Edited May 11, 2012 by DogOnPorch Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 And why is that? He WAS involved with them at 8 - 10. I think if you'd become involved with them, at any age, I'd strongly suspect you be innocent due to your obvious diminished capacity to even comprehend what you write. Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
jbg Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 The problem is that he was given weapons training and assisting Taliban/Al-Qaeda while he was 15 years old. The relevant part is that I remember when I was 15 I knew the difference between right and wrong. If he had become involved with the Taliban/Al-Qaeda when he was 8 or 10 then it would be a different story, but at age 15 two months shy of age 16 he knew or ought to have known right from wrong and good from bad. The Canadian Forces Recruit 16 year olds in to the Reserves and 17 year olds as Officer Cadets, saying that a 16 year old is responsible to make a decision like that(with parental consent) while Khadr being 15 years and 9 months old was unable to make a decision of similar magnitude because he was only 15 does not fly with me. Even if he was 8 or 10 his activities were dangerous to our interests. That bears repetition and emphasis. 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).
jbg Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Conrad Black is a frickin' citizen, too. He and Omar can share a very chilly arctic island. Devon? Ellesmere? Frobisher Bay, err, Iqaluit, on Baffin? 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).
Signals.Cpl Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Devon? Ellesmere? Frobisher Bay, err, Iqaluit, on Baffin? All of them on rotating basis. only 2 will have accommodations though. Quote Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
Signals.Cpl Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Even if he was 8 or 10 his activities were dangerous to our interests. That bears repetition and emphasis. And where do you get the figure that he was involved with them at 8? Got a source that he was fighting at 8? Quote Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
guyser Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 The relevance is that some people make this grand argument about him being a victim but would not want to live near him. No, there is no relevance , thats the point. People caqn make a case of his victim past all they want , and for all I care. I dont make that case . If you support bringing him back to Canada and letting him go free you should be willing to have him as a next door neighbour. The point is that some people hold certain beliefs but when those beliefs are challenged they would fold and by that I mean people who are adamant about him being a victim and he should be released but would not want to live in the same province as him let alone as a next-door neighbour. Heres the thing. I know what the govt has to do. I know the govt cant take my feelings, nor yours, as anything but feelings. They have a job to do, and thats bring him back, or accept him from the US authorities. That is the only thing they can legally do. Same goes for you. I am a citizen as well and I think of myself as much more valuable to Canada then someone who uses the passport as a get out of jail card, and I don't see why I should move or have my family uprooted and move due to some terrorist moving next-door to me. Its easy and cheap to say that he should be freed if he is to live somewhere over there meaning anywhere other then where you live. His passport is not a get outr of jail card. He is servng his sentence. Should he finish it the US, then he comes home a free man. If he is sent earlier than finishing his sentence (and we should take him back early)then we can impose restrictions on him. Its easy and cheap to post abpout your emotions and why he should loive here there or anywhere, but the facts are he will live in Canada, he may or may not be a free man, and if he moves near you , call Century 21. Quote
g_bambino Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Thank you Mr. Obvious. You're welcome. Glad I could help you see as obvious what the rest of us already did. Quote
g_bambino Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Except the propaganda from your side... Straw man. The discussion likely will continue, it started in Ottawa amongst government officials when the decision to "claw back on the fact that he is a minor" was made and it will likely end in a supreme court. I'm not certain what "clawing back" means, or how it's done to a fact. Further, of what relevance is his status as a minor under Canadian law to his incarceration in a foreign jurisdiction? Quote
Signals.Cpl Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 No, there is no relevance , thats the point. People caqn make a case of his victim past all they want , and for all I care. I dont make that case . Heres the thing. I know what the govt has to do. I know the govt cant take my feelings, nor yours, as anything but feelings. They have a job to do, and thats bring him back, or accept him from the US authorities. That is the only thing they can legally do. Same goes for you. His passport is not a get outr of jail card. He is servng his sentence. Should he finish it the US, then he comes home a free man. If he is sent earlier than finishing his sentence (and we should take him back early)then we can impose restrictions on him. Its easy and cheap to post abpout your emotions and why he should loive here there or anywhere, but the facts are he will live in Canada, he may or may not be a free man, and if he moves near you , call Century 21. Its not like his brother is getting free healthcare on our dime because he was injured by the Americans fighting Afghanistan. Its not like we will have to foot the bill for the RCMP/CSIS personnel who will be monitoring his activities for the next decade or more.What about the costs associated with lawyers and such and his continued healthcare? Honestly, fighting against Canada and/or our allies should be life in prison and revoking citizenship. He wanted to fight for the Taliban so let them take care of him. Quote Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst
g_bambino Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 He WAS involved with them at 8 - 10. What does "involved" entail, as you use it in your statement? Quote
jbg Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 And where do you get the figure that he was involved with them at 8? Got a source that he was fighting at 8? Then what are posters saying happened at 8 or 10 to make it inhumane to try him at Guantanamo? 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).
GostHacked Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 You're welcome. Glad I could help you see as obvious what the rest of us already did. Geeze, it was not obvious from the start where I said I made the assumption? Glad to see some of you are a bit sharper than some tacks I have in my desk drawer here. Quote
Guest American Woman Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 One more time for those who still can't quite figure it out. American Woman asked what I based my assumption that Omar was brought to Afghanistan against his will. I said because he was 8 (turns out I was wrong and he went at 10)... Omar at 10, if he did make the decision to go to Afghanistan, legally it's up to his parents... correct? He could not just go on his own, correct? Which in NO WAY means that he was forced to go. As you already recognized, "forced" means "against one's will." Again. You have no evidence at all; nothing that he's said has indicated that he was there against his will. Nothing that his parents have said indicates that he didn't want to be there. Nothing that his siblings said indicates that he didn't want to be there. It's a total fabrication, an assumption based on nothing. Quote
g_bambino Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Geeze, it was not obvious from the start where I said I made the assumption? So you said it was an assumption, and I missed that. I'm sorry. But, so what? If your argument is based on an assumption, its pretty much, well, useless. There's so far no evidence Omar wanted to do something other than what his parents decided for him, which means one can't make with any certainty the claim that he was forced. It's entirely possible the kid had a real interest in dad's work. Quote
guyser Posted May 11, 2012 Report Posted May 11, 2012 Its not like his brother is getting free healthcare on our dime because he was injured by the Americans fighting Afghanistan. Its not like we will have to foot the bill for the RCMP/CSIS personnel who will be monitoring his activities for the next decade or more.What about the costs associated with lawyers and such and his continued healthcare? Honestly, fighting against Canada and/or our allies should be life in prison and revoking citizenship. He wanted to fight for the Taliban so let them take care of him. And a large 'big deal' to this post. Once again, he is a CDN citizen, ergo, enititled to healthcare. He may be/is a risk thus a cost to our forces, CSIS or RCMP. Big deal.....and so what? 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.