Khadr should make us ashamed to be Canadian

Signals.Cpl · May 11, 2012

A person's lack of regard for human life isn't a justification for ending that person's life, in my opinion.

Some people forfeit the right to life that Includes the Senior leadership of Nazi germany and the SS, as well as many SS guards who were especially cruel to their prisoners. The Hutu extremists who planned and executed the massacres, as well as the multitude of officers and soldiers who committed atrocities in the Balkans amongst others. I believe the US soldier who murdered the Afghan civilians gave up the right to life when he took it away from innocent children regardless of his experiences. I believe in the death penalty for a number of US soldiers serving in Iraq who committed atrocities against civilians just as I believe in the death penalty for any Canadian soldiers should they commit atrocities against civilians.

He did? I know he admitted to attacking US soldiers, namely with a grenade, in a firefight; but I haven't heard of him being involved in a terrorist attack on anyone.

Being a member of a terrorist organization and attacking soldiers is a terrorist attack.

Signals.Cpl · May 11, 2012

Evidently there are Canadians who do not want Omar living in their communities; they don't want him for a neighbor:

Communities unite against Khadr return

The link has a photo of the flyer; it's very clear how those involved in this campaign feel.

ha ha this is not the US we actually coddle our murderers and rapists.

g_bambino · May 11, 2012

Some people forfeit the right to life...

Perhaps. But, committing murder is not inherently the equivalent of.

Being a member of a terrorist organization and attacking soldiers is a terrorist attack.

Mmmm... No, it's not. The soldiers went to the house Omar was in because a monitored satellite phone thought to be used by the Khadrs had been detected in the area. They were prepared for possible hositilty and set themselves up around the house accordingly (well, somewhat, since the commanding officer apparently told some of the men off for having their backs to the house, rather than covering it properly).

[ed.: c/e]

Edited May 11, 2012 by g_bambino

jbg · May 11, 2012

I do too, if we go down that path any childhood trauma could excuse the same behaviour as an adult.

At least we agree on something even if I think your spelling of "behavior" is a typo.

Signals.Cpl · May 11, 2012

At least we agree on something even if I think your spelling of "behavior" is a typo.

My bad spelling does not change my underlying my argument .

jbg · May 11, 2012

My bad spelling does not change my underlying my argument .

My underlying my argument? Is that good grammar in Canadian?

Signals.Cpl · May 11, 2012

Perhaps. But, committing murder is not inherently the equivalent of.

Mmmm... No, it's not. The soldiers went to the house Omar was in because a monitored satellite phone thought to be used by the Khadrs had been detected in the area. They were prepared for possible hositilty and set themselves up around the house accordingly (well, somewhat, since the commanding officer apparently told some of the men off for having their backs to the house, rather than covering it properly).

[ed.: c/e]

He was a Canadian citizen who was captured while fighting for terrorists therefore he is a terrorist.

Signals.Cpl · May 11, 2012

My underlying my argument? Is that good grammar in Canadian?

I speak English not "Canadian"

eyeball · May 11, 2012

...

Edited May 11, 2012 by eyeball

eyeball · May 11, 2012

Straw man.

Why? How?

Edited May 11, 2012 by eyeball

g_bambino · May 11, 2012

He was a Canadian citizen who was captured while fighting for terrorists therefore he is a terrorist.

Okay. But, that doesn't mean he ever committed an act of terrorism.

Signals.Cpl · May 11, 2012

Okay. But, that doesn't mean he ever committed an act of terrorism.

I was in the Army, I never went to Afghanistan yet I was and still am a soldier.

He was a member of a known terrorist organization might or might not have committed an act of terrorism yet he was and is a terrorist.

capricorn · May 12, 2012

I was in the Army, I never went to Afghanistan yet I was and still am a soldier.

Thank you for your service Signals.Cpl.

eyeball · May 12, 2012

Further, of what relevance is his status as a minor under Canadian law to his incarceration in a foreign jurisdiction?

I doubt anyone who actually needs an answer to that is capable of benefiting from it very much but for what it's worth here's a clue.

The interrogation of a youth detained without access to counsel, to elicit statements about serious criminal charges while knowing that the youth had been subjected to sleep deprivation and while knowing that the fruits of the interrogations would be shared with the prosecutors, offends the most basic Canadian standards about the treatment of detained youth suspects.

http://scc.lexum.org/en/2010/2010scc3/2010scc3.html

Army Guy · May 12, 2012

g_bambino :

Mmmm... No, it's not. The soldiers went to the house Omar was in because a monitored satellite phone thought to be used by the Khadrs had been detected in the area. They were prepared for possible hositilty and set themselves up around the house accordingly (well, somewhat, since the commanding officer apparently told some of the men off for having their backs to the house, rather than covering it properly).

That was not what they were in the area for, you should re read the entire mission statement again, hours before an american column came under indirect and direct fire. they were conducting sweeps of the area, couple of nights before another American column had hit serveral IED's close to the villiage that was being searched. I'd like to see a source on the sat phone thing as you claim.

If that was the case as you state they would have taken the complex by force, a planned assault to capture little mr Omar, that assault would have included air and possiable arty plan, and yet none was there, the plan would also included multi approach angles, and yet according to statements, they entire engagement orginated after 3 afghanis troops knocked on the front door...Anyone familar with assualt plans knows you don't knock on the front door...you blow it off the hinges, followed up by flash bangs, then enter from multi entry pionts....something that was not done...the assult team would have knwon exactly who they were looking for , ID by pictures, and yet no one even knew you Omar was until id'd later, the fact he spoke english was another surprise, one that saved his life...SF guys on scene thought he would prove to be an intel asset, so he gets med treatment....Nothing is left for chance it's well planned and well reheased, because murphies law is a bitch...

Just to let you know, even when your knocking on someones you set up a cordone , ensuring that everything is watched, just incase things go south like in this case, so that is standard practice, if it's not then your dealing with amateurs...and these guys were SF...

As for Omar being a terrorist thats already a fact, he has been convicted of such activity, Planting IED's or making IED's is a death sentence in Afghanistan, these guys are given pri to be hunted down and engaged...And yet this fact runs off the back of most Canadians who want to see him returned and given a win fall of money.....

I guess i don't really blame them, they have no idea on what it is like to be blown up by an IED or wAITING TO GET BLOWN UP....what they do know is that most of our buried comrads came home in a casket due to IED's...during the height of the conflict, it was not if you were going to get blown up but where....everytime we went out someone got blown up....from little mines 20 LB anti tank mines, to having them stacked as high as 6 high....to IED's that contained 5 to 1000 lbs of explosives....YA you don't need that much to take down a sky scrapper...craters in the road some 20 ft deep and 60 ft across....massive diesel engines thrown as far as 1000 meters...thats from an armoured veh....

Blasts so loud your hearing does not recover for a full week, you bleed from the eyes and hears, thats 500 meters away...your comrads well apart form the veh that was over the blast site ceased to exist,,,we scoured the ground for hours so we could pick up enough human body parts to be declared a body, you need 20 LBs....we were lucky to find fingers...

the crew of the next veh just up from the blast 100 meters were in perfect condition, dead , killed by the over preasure, that was until we went to touch them for vitals....imigine seeing one of your comrads turn to jello in front of you...ceasing to look even like a human, but instead a sack of jello....

Omar took part in planting these devices, not the ones that killed so many of my comrads but none the less, he was a bomber...ones that did not target just soldiers but anyone unfortunit to set of the device...really nice guys , and we want to bring one of them home , not only to fondle and reap heaps of money on....but so we can show the world we are champions of human rights, even though our faces are full of spit and shit that these pukes have thrown there....turn the other cheek or so the saying goes....I don't care how old he was or is, he will never wash off the blood he has on his hands...he is a terrorist and will always be a terrorist...

TheNewTeddy · May 12, 2012

I used to be Catholic. Then I found out that denouncing said religion gets you automatically kicked out.

Attacking Canada and her allies should automatically revoke your citizenship. Therefore I don't consider this asshat to be Canadian, and thus, have nothing to be ashamed about.

bleeding heart · May 13, 2012

I used to be Catholic. Then I found out that denouncing said religion gets you automatically kicked out.

Attacking Canada and her allies should automatically revoke your citizenship.

Her allies? Really?

Which ones?

Alliances shift and change and alter all the time. And sometimes, Canada's allies are gangsters, and sometimes our enemies are not.

For example, when Canada, France and the United States determined that the duly elected leader of Haiti should be illegally overthrown...he was. And his party's opponents, who felt that the democratic process was insufficient for their ambitions, were very happy to have these three great democracies aid them in subverting democracy itself.

So, ok, in this case we plainly see that Canada, along with her two allies, despised democracy. At least, thought democracy irrelevant. And Canada's opponent, Aristide, was legally elected, but was ushered out of office at gunpoint.

That's our doing. Makes one shiver with pride, yes? Canada rocks!

So I'm interested in your view on this (as well as other times Canada supported gangsters and thugs, against democratic forces, an important aspect of Canadian history): would showing support for the ousted, elected President be wrong....and showing support for the thugs who took over be correct?

It's an honest question, covering both legal and moral issues, and I'm interested in how you feel about it.

dre · May 13, 2012

You're kidding right? Child soldier? He moved from one side of the world to the other to fight Americans. You can't compare a Canadian coming from Canada to fight for the Taliban the same as a kid with a gun to his/her head and told to fight. He made the choice to kill an American Soldier and wound a number of others and I think he should be held responsible for that. If he had chosen to surrender and Identify himself as a Canadian the Americans would have most likely viewed him in a different light, as a child who didn't want to be there and thus surrendered because he knew his actions were wrong but he chose to kill and maim American on his own free will. Would it be different if he were captured on his 18th birthday?

You can't compare a Canadian coming from Canada to fight for the Taliban the same as a kid with a gun to his/her head and told to fight.

Hold on... theres nothing about the term child soldier that implies a gun must be put to their heads. They are often indoctrinated by their parents or peers, or coerced into participation in a whole host of different ways.

He made the choice to kill an American Soldier and wound a number of others and I think he should be held responsible for that.

Yeah isnt that what the 8 year vacation to cuba complete with a free complimentary orange jump suit is about? He attacked US troops during a war, and they caught him... you certainly cant expect them to let him go and return to the theatre. But that doesnt change the fact that he didnt do anything any more wrong than anyone else that tries to kill the enemy during a war. Theres nothing wrong with Afghans or their supporters trying to kill us over there... that what we expected, and thats what you prepare for when you invade another country.

Signals.Cpl · May 13, 2012

Hold on... theres nothing about the term child soldier that implies a gun must be put to their heads. They are often indoctrinated by their parents or peers, or coerced into participation in a whole host of different ways.

And none of that is relevant.

1Yeah isnt that what the 8 year vacation to cuba complete with a free complimentary orange jump suit is about? He attacked US troops during a war, and they caught him... you certainly cant expect them to let him go and return to the theatre. 2But that doesnt change the fact that he didnt do anything any more wrong than anyone else that tries to kill the enemy during a war. 3Theres nothing wrong with Afghans or their supporters trying to kill us over there... that what we expected, and thats what you prepare for when you invade another country.

1)Not enough

2)Im sorry is that an argument?

3)Sure there is, most Afghans want to live in peace while the Taliban who in many cases are not even from Afghanistan are killing western soldiers and Afghan civilians.

Khadr should have lost his citizenship the second he was captured his family has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are terrorists. I just don't see the desire for people to make him a victim, his family has fought for terrorists and turn to Canada only when it benefits them. You want to fight for the taliban send him back to Afghanistan. He is not a victim, he is a cold blooded killer.

Edited May 13, 2012 by Signals.Cpl

Army Guy · May 14, 2012

Yeah isnt that what the 8 year vacation to cuba complete with a free complimentary orange jump suit is about? He attacked US troops during a war, and they caught him... you certainly cant expect them to let him go and return to the theatre. But that doesnt change the fact that he didnt do anything any more wrong than anyone else that tries to kill the enemy during a war. Theres nothing wrong with Afghans or their supporters trying to kill us over there... that what we expected, and thats what you prepare for when you invade another country.

So your familar with inter national law, the genva convention, not to mention Canadian law....your also familar with the fact he is a terrorist...and yet you just said there is nothing wrong any of his actions...it is to be expected....And yet he was a Canadian Citizen WTF is he doing carrying out terrorist activies in someone elses war, why was he not giovwen over to the afghan government for his crimes ? ....and now there is talk of him being compensated for Canada not reacting fast enough to rescue him...he was only a boy of 15 , "insert tears here" real big frigging tears to....

Well here is something that can be expected, fly a couple of planes into US buildings on US soil and you can expect more than a orange jump suit, in Cuba, you can expect not only the US fighting machine to gear up to rape your ass, but NATO's as well.

But here in Canada thats not how things work , get caught in a foreign land doing terrorist acts and we pay you for it.....look after your family, support them , Shit no wonder they don't want to leave, we treat them better than the taliban does....To Bad Canadians can't treat their own as well....

g_bambino · May 14, 2012

[H]e was and is a terrorist.

Was. But, that was never in doubt. What you said that was unfounded was: "Omar Khadr participated in a terrorist attack on US forces."

Signals.Cpl · May 14, 2012

Was. But, that was never in doubt. What you said that was unfounded was: "Omar Khadr participated in a terrorist attack on US forces."

Right, absolutely no evidence of that...

g_bambino · May 14, 2012

[F]or what it's worth here's a clue.

It's not worth much at all. It explains nothing about what bearing his being a minor according to Canadian law has on his being held in custody in a foreign jurisdiction. You do realise that Canadian law doesn't bind foreign governments, right?

[ed.: +]

Edited May 14, 2012 by g_bambino

g_bambino · May 14, 2012

[A]bsolutely no evidence of that...

Correct, as far as I know.

g_bambino · May 14, 2012

I'd like to see a source on the sat phone thing as you claim.

On July 27, 2002, intelligence analysts asked U.S. forces on the ground near Khost in southeastern Afghanistan to check out a compound in a small village. They had picked up radio transmissions that might have been from Khadr, according to Sgt. Layne Morris, a Special Forces soldier with the National Guard in Utah, who was then operating near Khost.
U.S. forces surrounded the compound and sent in two Afghan translators. The Afghans were slaughtered in a hail of rifle fire. A fierce battle followed, with grenades being thrown both ways over the mud wall, according to Master Sgt. Hansen...

In Canada, an Outcast Family Finds Support

It was here, in the early morning of July 27, 2002, that the unit received word that a satellite phone being tracked by Washington had been used from a location just down the road. Morris and five other soldiers were sent to check it out.
They arrived at a series of mud huts surrounded by a stone wall with children milling around the edges. Morris set up a security perimeter until the rest of the soldiers arrived. They knew that the men on the inside had weapons, but this was not uncommon in the area.

Khadr goes on trial

As for Omar being a terrorist thats already a fact...

Yes, I think that's well established. And I don't think anyone's pretending he wasn't participating in making IEDs intended to kill and/or maim his enemy. But, since he was doing so against armed forces of other countries within the context of a military invasion, it doesn't qualify as "terrorism". There is, admittedly, no singular definition of "terrorism"; however, it seems to me that terrorism is generally considered to be violence committed deliberately against or without concern for non-combatant civilians in a country not in a state of war as a political/ideological statement.