Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Khadr Sentenced To 40 Years By Military Tribunal


  • Please log in to reply
803 replies to this topic

#211 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,009 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 09:50 AM

So yet another uninformed opinion?



In your unwavering bullish fight it to death you can't possibly be wrong about anything opinion? I guess so.

You can say it a millions times but it doesn't make it so.

And besides, right or wrong, I guess we shot, jailed, and tortured him anyways.

What you going to do about it?

Edited by ronthecivil, 27 October 2010 - 09:53 AM.

  • 0

#212 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,009 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 09:52 AM

All of you folks that claim what was done to Khadr was no big deal, I'd love to see you volunteer to 8 years in Gitmo, or Bagram, or any of these notorious locations. By all accounts (except for those from Dick Cheney and cretins of the like) people there have been tortured mercilessly.

Those of you that want to talk about terrorists, think about both sides of the coin. The US has killed more people in the last ten years (or more) than Iran, Hezbollah, the Taliban, AQ, Hamas, North Korea, and any other country you want to put on there combined.

So, when they're in the process of raiding and killing mercilessly in a foreign country, some poor kid got caught in the middle. Then they charge him with murder for it.

Can you imagine if there was a murder case for every time a US soldier threw a grenade? How about just a murder trial and decade long torture session without legal representation or due process for any soldier that killed outside of the boundaries of the "sanctioned" murder.

Stories come out on a daily basis about abuses of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. But people in the US (and many in Canada it seems) don't seem to care about that.

It's just about "Rabble Rabble Terrorism Rabble Rabble".

Think of who you would be most terrified of: some dudes in a bunch of caves in the third poorest country in the world, or the country with the most advanced, well funded, sophisticated killing machine in the world. I know who would freak me out a little bit more.



Ok, I will.

Too bad for them.

And if you don't like, too bad for you.

Now that's some knuckle dragging! Enjoy!
  • 0

#213 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 27 October 2010 - 10:30 AM

We might have been able to stop it, but the states could have said "nope, we're keeping him" though they didn't to others. But who knows?

It should be noted that at the time a majority of people in Canada supported letting the states keep him, probably due to to the less than sympathetic comments of mom and sis.

As such, the government went with the will of the people, not the courts. That will has been shifted now and as such you can rejoice that a majority now supports bring him "home".

But it's too late now. It already happened.

What do you want to do about it?


Had we pressured them to return 'our' citizen back to us...they would have been obliged to. They needed us, a hell of a lot more in 2002 than we needed the. Our involvement in the war provided legitimacy and it still does. And we could have easily made a fuss of the fact that they three months before, committed fratricide, on four of our brave young men. Had we kicked up a fuss, they would have been all to eager to placate us. So yeah, I know.

No, the majority didn't support keeping him....the majority supported the war effort in Afghanistan and they also supported helping our friends and neighbour to the south, after getting attacked. Show me where, the majority of the population supported the torture and illegal detention of Omar Khadr.

This had nothing to do with the will of the people....what people were storming Parliament, forcing the gov't to keep Khadr in Guntanamo. That's just a false assertion and a stupid one at that. If anything the courts had nothing to do with it at the time either, and stepped in only after the issue was brought up to foce the gov't to protect Khadr's rights and investigate and work on his behalf...which they failed to do miserably.

It's too late now, because too many like minded such as yoursel, in gov't, decided to pick and choose which Canadians to fight for. Maybe they were looking at residency or skin colour before birth certificate. But who knows? You liked using that question, so I thought i'd ask a similar one too. Did I do it right?

What I would like, personally, is for the gov't to immediately and without delay, reassert their jurisdition and support for its citizen and have him brought back to Canada, promptly. I would like to see a psychological assessment and treatment done, most likely through a short term hospitalization procedure, to also assess his physical well being. I would like to see his family have the oppurtunity to see their brother and son. I would like to see constant and credible attempts by our gov't to reintegrate and redoctrinate Khadr into a form of 'normalcy' and 'normal' life. I would like to see the gov't give this kid every help and assistance to become educated...and pay for all of it as well. I would like to see him recieve compensation as a pittance of a gesture to the treatment he has endured because of our gov't's inaction and ambivalence towards him and his plight. I would like to see all politicians, who circumvented the Charter, International Conventions, and World recognised Human Rights, and did not afford Omar his protections under these treaties and laws, on trial themselves. I would like to see a special prosecutor and investigation, with full access and authority to this case.

That's what I'd like to see done now, Ron.

Edited by Sharpshooter, 27 October 2010 - 10:31 AM.

  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#214 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,009 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 10:41 AM

Had we pressured them to return 'our' citizen back to us...they would have been obliged to. They needed us, a hell of a lot more in 2002 than we needed the. Our involvement in the war provided legitimacy and it still does. And we could have easily made a fuss of the fact that they three months before, committed fratricide, on four of our brave young men. Had we kicked up a fuss, they would have been all to eager to placate us. So yeah, I know.

No, the majority didn't support keeping him....the majority supported the war effort in Afghanistan and they also supported helping our friends and neighbour to the south, after getting attacked. Show me where, the majority of the population supported the torture and illegal detention of Omar Khadr.

This had nothing to do with the will of the people....what people were storming Parliament, forcing the gov't to keep Khadr in Guntanamo. That's just a false assertion and a stupid one at that. If anything the courts had nothing to do with it at the time either, and stepped in only after the issue was brought up to foce the gov't to protect Khadr's rights and investigate and work on his behalf...which they failed to do miserably.

It's too late now, because too many like minded such as yoursel, in gov't, decided to pick and choose which Canadians to fight for. Maybe they were looking at residency or skin colour before birth certificate. But who knows? You liked using that question, so I thought i'd ask a similar one too. Did I do it right?

What I would like, personally, is for the gov't to immediately and without delay, reassert their jurisdition and support for its citizen and have him brought back to Canada, promptly. I would like to see a psychological assessment and treatment done, most likely through a short term hospitalization procedure, to also assess his physical well being. I would like to see his family have the oppurtunity to see their brother and son. I would like to see constant and credible attempts by our gov't to reintegrate and redoctrinate Khadr into a form of 'normalcy' and 'normal' life. I would like to see the gov't give this kid every help and assistance to become educated...and pay for all of it as well. I would like to see him recieve compensation as a pittance of a gesture to the treatment he has endured because of our gov't's inaction and ambivalence towards him and his plight. I would like to see all politicians, who circumvented the Charter, International Conventions, and World recognised Human Rights, and did not afford Omar his protections under these treaties and laws, on trial themselves. I would like to see a special prosecutor and investigation, with full access and authority to this case.

That's what I'd like to see done now, Ron.


Good luck with that. You'll need it.

I would like to see him back in Afganistan. My desire is way more likely than yours.
  • 0

#215 Carpe Diem

Carpe Diem

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,224 posts
  • Joined: 19-January 03

Posted 27 October 2010 - 10:43 AM

we probably should bring him back to Canada as he is a Canadian citizen (if that is his wish)

and then we should promptly charge him with treason.
  • 0

#216 JAH

JAH

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,284 posts
  • Joined: 19-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 10:44 AM

Had we pressured them to return 'our' citizen back to us...they would have been obliged to.


No they would not be.

Our involvement in the war provided legitimacy and it still does.


The legitimacy is gained by the dozens of UNSC Resolutions, not the involvment of Canada.

And we could have easily made a fuss of the fact that they three months before, committed fratricide, on four of our brave young men.


I agree that we should have done more regarding the Tarnak Farms incident, but it is completely irrelevant to this issue.

So yeah, I know.


Actually, you're lack of knowlege about the mission in Afghanistan and military operations in general is on full display in this thread.

Maybe they were looking at residency or skin colour before birth certificate.


I was wondering when you were going to play the race card! Well done, you have now hit the bottom of the barrel.

I would like to see all politicians, who circumvented the Charter, International Conventions, and World recognised Human Rights, and did not afford Omar his protections under these treaties and laws, on trial themselves.


That cannot and will not happen. They have broken no laws.
  • 0
'It's just a job. Grass grows, birds fly, waves pound the sand. I beat people up.' - Muhammad Ali

#217 inane

inane

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,715 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 27 October 2010 - 10:46 AM

Good luck with that. You'll need it.

I would like to see him back in Afganistan. My desire is way more likely than yours.


The ease at which you disregard the rights of Canadian citizens is sickening.
  • 0

#218 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 27 October 2010 - 10:51 AM

Good luck with that. You'll need it.

I would like to see him back in Afganistan. My desire is way more likely than yours.

Angus Reid Global Monitor) – Canadian adults remain divided about the fate of Omar Khadr, according to a poll by Angus Reid Strategies released by the Toronto Star. 42 per cent of respondents demand his repatriation to face due process under Canadian Law, while 40 per cent would leave Khadr to face trial by military commission in Guantanamo Bay.

In June 2007, U.S. military judge Peter Brownback dismissed the charges of murder and terrorism against Omar Khadr
, claiming he was authorized to try "unlawful enemy combatants" exclusively. An earlier review had deemed Omar Khadr was an "enemy combatant." However, the case against Omar Khadr was reopened in September 2007, when the new Court of Military Commission Review ruled that Brownback’s decision was in error.

Earlier this year, two Canadian courts called for Khadr’s repatriation. The Canadian federal government has indicated it will challenge their decision before the Supreme Court of Canada.

Last month, Canadian foreign minister Lawrence Cannon released a statement, which read: "Our position regarding Mr. Khadr remains unchanged. In fact, it is the same policy held by two previous governments. Omar Khadr has been accused of serious crimes (including murder, attempted murder, conspiracy, material support for terrorism and spying, all in violation of the laws of war)."


This kid's been conciously forced through the ringer, even after hving charges dismissed. Reminds me of the movie 'The Hurricane', a bit.

You can desire all you want...till your head pops off, for all i care....I see the Charter, justice and the Canadian court system on his side....and that trumps your desire, as mighty as it may be.


  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#219 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,009 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 10:55 AM

This kid's been conciously forced through the ringer, even after hving charges dismissed. Reminds me of the movie 'The Hurricane', a bit.

You can desire all you want...till your head pops off, for all i care....I see the Charter, justice and the Canadian court system on his side....and that trumps your desire, as mighty as it may be.




A couple bullets and seven years in Gitmo is suffecient punishment for me.

I figure if he leaves the country it will be on his own free will. As you point out, there's a solid 40 percent of Canadians that aren't exactly fond of him.

I wouldn't want to live somehere that 40% of people don't want me around.
  • 0

#220 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,009 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 10:56 AM

The ease at which you disregard the rights of Canadian citizens is sickening.


Gravol?

Obviously as Mr. Carlin would point out, poor old Omar's rights are imaginary.
  • 0

#221 JAH

JAH

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,284 posts
  • Joined: 19-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 10:58 AM

This kid's been conciously forced through the ringer, even after hving charges dismissed. Reminds me of the movie 'The Hurricane', a bit.

You can desire all you want...till your head pops off, for all i care....I see the Charter, justice and the Canadian court system on his side....and that trumps your desire, as mighty as it may be.

I noted in your post that the 42% of Canadians wanted him tried in Canadian COurt and the other half wanted him tried in Gitmo. Funny, there is no indication in your stat that anyone wants him to receive the King's Ransom for Treason that you proposed.

And that whole 'enemy combatant/ unlawful combatant' thing is smoke and mirros. The GC is very clear on who is a lawful combatant and sets very specific criteria. He did not fall under that criteria and is therefore not protected under the GC as a normal PW would be. He's neither a civilian nor a soldier, and is not afforded the protections of either.
  • 0
'It's just a job. Grass grows, birds fly, waves pound the sand. I beat people up.' - Muhammad Ali

#222 inane

inane

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,715 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 27 October 2010 - 10:59 AM

Gravol?

Obviously as Mr. Carlin would point out, poor old Omar's rights are imaginary.


Imaginary? And who gets to decide that?

Come on Ron...
  • 0

#223 inane

inane

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,715 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:00 AM

A couple bullets and seven years in Gitmo is suffecient punishment for me.

I figure if he leaves the country it will be on his own free will. As you point out, there's a solid 40 percent of Canadians that aren't exactly fond of him.

I wouldn't want to live somehere that 40% of people don't want me around.


What were the latest #'s for Gordon Campbell?

Right, opinion polls are pretty useless Ron. Give me a break...
  • 0

#224 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:03 AM

No they would not be.


Spain and the U.K. would argue.


The legitimacy is gained by the dozens of UNSC Resolutions, not the involvment of Canada.


A threat to pull support by Canada would have had enough of a symbolic gesture against the U.S., to make other NATO allies think twice, as France did.

I agree that we should have done more regarding the Tarnak Farms incident, but it is completely irrelevant to this issue.


Precedent...and an establishment of pattern of behaviour.

Actually, you're lack of knowlege about the mission in Afghanistan and military operations in general is on full display in this thread.


My knowledge is pretty good. You saying the contrary doesn't hold water. You can continue to argue the earth is flat.

I was wondering when you were going to play the race card! Well done, you have now hit the bottom of the barrel.

That cannot and will not happen. They have broken no laws.


Well, if you had any historical knowldege of the Reform Party in Canada and its progeny from the joinig of the Progressive Conservative Party and the Canadian Alliance Party(Reform Party) and Harper's involvement with them around Preston Manning's time, you wouldn't be so clueless to the reason why I said what I said. Read up on your domestic political history, if you have no experiential knowledge to speak from.


  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#225 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:05 AM

A couple bullets and seven years in Gitmo is suffecient punishment for me.

I figure if he leaves the country it will be on his own free will. As you point out, there's a solid 40 percent of Canadians that aren't exactly fond of him.

I wouldn't want to live somehere that 40% of people don't want me around.


I assure you, given enough propaganda and time, I could muster 40% too.
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#226 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,009 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:12 AM

What were the latest #'s for Gordon Campbell?

Right, opinion polls are pretty useless Ron. Give me a break...



I wouldn't want to be Gordo either!

Mind you, being BC, it's not without question that he could be reborn phoenix like in 20 year just like Bill!
  • 0

#227 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,009 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:13 AM

I assure you, given enough propaganda and time, I could muster 40% too.



:PYour going to have to better than complaining on a message board to accomplish that :P
  • 0

#228 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,009 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:15 AM

Imaginary? And who gets to decide that?

Come on Ron...



The elected governments of the US and Canada if I recall. Aren't you paying attention?

Certainly better than our unelected judges. Score one for the bad guys I guess! :lol:
  • 0

#229 JAH

JAH

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,284 posts
  • Joined: 19-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:16 AM

Spain and the U.K. would argue.


Spain and the UK have nothing to do with the extradition treaty between the US and Canada. The US was not obligated to extradite Mr. Khadr in this case.

A threat to pull support by Canada would have had enough of a symbolic gesture against the U.S., to make other NATO allies think twice, as France did.


Again, just as the legitimacy of the mission is not granted by Canada, it is also not granted by France. The legitimacy of the mission is granted by the United Nations Security Council's repeated authorization. Symbolic gestures get you nothing (isn't that the definition?).

Precedent...and an establishment of pattern of behaviour.


Of what? Bad marksmanship? It's irrelevant to the issue at hand.

My knowledge is pretty good. You saying the contrary doesn't hold water. You can continue to argue the earth is flat.


No it is not. You know next to nothing of the laws of war, the constraints or lack thereof of a soldier in kinetic operations, or the legal requirements of our politicians wrt to Canadian citizens accused of crimes abroad.

You make wild claims and when I challenge you to post proof you ignore it or put up some youtube vids. This is hardly the mark of a knowlegeable expert in this area.


Well, if you had any historical knowldege of the Reform Party in Canada and its progeny from the joinig of the Progressive Conservative Party and the Canadian Alliance Party(Reform Party) and Harper's involvement with them around Preston Manning's time, you wouldn't be so clueless to the reason why I said what I said. Read up on your domestic political history, if you have no experiential knowledge to speak from.


wtf are you talking about? Khadr was treated as a treasoness bastard because that's what he is. His colour is not the issue.
  • 0
'It's just a job. Grass grows, birds fly, waves pound the sand. I beat people up.' - Muhammad Ali

#230 inane

inane

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,715 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:22 AM

The elected governments of the US and Canada if I recall. Aren't you paying attention?

Certainly better than our unelected judges. Score one for the bad guys I guess! :lol:


He's a Canadian citizen. He gets all the benefits that come with that. End of story. You can't pick and choose whos rights to defend. You defend them all.

Maybe he is a criminal and should be put away for life. I don't know. The point is he should have been brought back here and dealt with by our government. Eight years in a foreign jail, no trial, probable torture. If you're happy treating your citizens that way, I'd hate to see how you treat others.
  • 0

#231 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:24 AM

In your unwavering bullish fight it to death you can't possibly be wrong about anything opinion? I guess so.

You can say it a millions times but it doesn't make it so.

And besides, right or wrong, I guess we shot, jailed, and tortured him anyways.

What you going to do about it?

How about 10.5 million times?

I suppose now the courts may now weigh in and Omar Khadr may be due some major compensation as has occurred with Maher Arar - that one cost Canada $10.5 million and the government of Canada was forced to make an official apology for cooperating with the US to "render" Arar to Syria where he was tortured. Arar was jailed and tortured in Syria after being sent there by U.S. authorities in September 2002 following his arrest at New York's JFK airport.

BTW Maher Arar has a connection to the Omar Khadr case. As a result of the torture and coercion of Khadr he allegedly identified Arar as a terrorist associate. That was used as basis to render Arara to Syria.

One of Khadr's interrogators - FBI Special Agent Robert Fuller testified that Khadr said he recognized a photo of Arar during an October 2002 interrogation. Under questioning Tuesday, Fuller said Khadr saw Arar in Afghanistan during late September or October 2001.

When the notes of the interrogation were finally produced they did not quite bear out what Fuller had claimed on the stand. Fuller’s evidence was further undercut by revelations that the FBI notes taken during the interrogation stated Khadr was shown a photograph of Arar and at first said he “looked familiar.” The notes recorded that “in time” Khadr stated “he felt he had seen” Arar.

Problem with that claim was that during the times in question Arar was indisputably in North America as the 2006 judicial inquiry by Justice Dennis O’Connor into the circumstances of Arar's arrest in the US and rendition to Syria determined.
http://www.thestar.c.../article/574190

There is a reason real courts (unlike illegal military tribunals) do not allow confessions that are obtained by torture, under duress or are otherwise involuntary - they are inherently unreliable. Victims will often say anything to stop the abuse.

Unfortuantely for the US military and former Bush Administration, Canadian courts will not ignore evidence as has been the hallmark of the illegal military tribunal.

Once Khadr is back in Canada (assuming the Canadian government signs off on the transfer and that is not a sure thing), I expect a habeas corpus application or similar motion will be made to get Khadr before the civil Canadian courts so the whole sordid affair can be laid bare.
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#232 JAH

JAH

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,284 posts
  • Joined: 19-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:26 AM

He's a Canadian citizen. He gets all the benefits that come with that. End of story. You can't pick and choose whos rights to defend. You defend them all.

Maybe he is a criminal and should be put away for life. I don't know. The point is he should have been brought back here and dealt with by our government. Eight years in a foreign jail, no trial, probable torture. If you're happy treating your citizens that way, I'd hate to see how you treat others.

The US and Afghanistan (or any other country) is not obligated to enforce and uphold the rights afforded to Khadr by the Charter. They are not required to extradite him either. He was accused (and convicted of I might add) of a serious crime in a foreign land.

The lesson here? Don't take up arms against a forign army....unless you are IN an army.
  • 0
'It's just a job. Grass grows, birds fly, waves pound the sand. I beat people up.' - Muhammad Ali

#233 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:26 AM

we probably should bring him back to Canada as he is a Canadian citizen (if that is his wish)

and then we should promptly charge him with treason.

That charge would not hold up.
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#234 Sharpshooter

Sharpshooter

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,379 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 07

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:28 AM

I noted in your post that the 42% of Canadians wanted him tried in Canadian COurt and the other half wanted him tried in Gitmo. Funny, there is no indication in your stat that anyone wants him to receive the King's Ransom for Treason that you proposed.

And that whole 'enemy combatant/ unlawful combatant' thing is smoke and mirros. The GC is very clear on who is a lawful combatant and sets very specific criteria. He did not fall under that criteria and is therefore not protected under the GC as a normal PW would be. He's neither a civilian nor a soldier, and is not afforded the protections of either.


I never asked for a King's ransom....and i'm glad you didn't use any hyperbole either.

I also want him to be tried in a Canadian court over a military tribunal. Don't you? Oh, that's right, he's a scary super soldier of the highest order and should, nay, needs to be shackled in a Dr. Lector type body restraint at all times, for if he is brought back to Canada we will all die! So you, probably want him in Gitmo, till the day he dies.
:frantic:

He's protected under International Conventions, which we and the U.S. have signed. Why don't you understand that? Am I not saying it correctly?

Convention on the Rights of the Child <H5 align=center>Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 44/25 of 20 November 1989

Entry into force 2 September 1990, in accordance with article 49

Article 19</H5>1. States Parties shall take all appropriate legislative, administrative, social and educational measures to protect the child from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of parent(s), legal guardian(s) or any other person who has the care of the child.

2. Such protective measures should, as appropriate, include effective procedures for the establishment of social programmes to provide necessary support for the child and for those who have the care of the child, as well as for other forms of prevention and for identification, reporting, referral, investigation, treatment and follow-up of instances of child maltreatment described heretofore, and, as appropriate, for judicial involvement.




Article 38
1. States Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for rules of international humanitarian law applicable to them in armed conflicts which are relevant to the child.

2. States Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure that persons who have not attained the age of fifteen years do not take a direct part in hostilities.

3. States Parties shall refrain from recruiting any person who has not attained the age of fifteen years into their armed forces. In recruiting among those persons who have attained the age of fifteen years but who have not attained the age of eighteen years, States Parties shall endeavour to give priority to those who are oldest.

4. In accordance with their obligations under international humanitarian law to protect the civilian population in armed conflicts, States Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure protection and care of children who are affected by an armed conflict.


Article 39
States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to promote physical and psychological recovery and social reintegration of a child victim of: any form of neglect, exploitation, or abuse; torture or any other form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment; or armed conflicts. Such recovery and reintegration shall take place in an environment which fosters the health, self-respect and dignity of the child.






Article 37
States Parties shall ensure that:

(a) No child shall be subjected to torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. Neither capital punishment nor life imprisonment without possibility of release shall be imposed for offences committed by persons below eighteen years of age;

(B) No child shall be deprived of his or her liberty unlawfully or arbitrarily. The arrest, detention or imprisonment of a child shall be in conformity with the law and shall be used only as a measure of last resort and for the shortest appropriate period of time;

© Every child deprived of liberty shall be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of the human person, and in a manner which takes into account the needs of persons of his or her age. In particular, every child deprived of liberty shall be separated from adults unless it is considered in the child's best interest not to do so and shall have the right to maintain contact with his or her family through correspondence and visits, save in exceptional circumstances;

(d) Every child deprived of his or her liberty shall have the right to prompt access to legal and other appropriate assistance, as well as the right to challenge the legality of the deprivation of his or her liberty before a court or other competent, independent and impartial authority, and to a prompt decision on any such action.




Article 40
1. States Parties recognize the right of every child alleged as, accused of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law to be treated in a manner consistent with the promotion of the child's sense of dignity and worth, which reinforces the child's respect for the human rights and fundamental freedoms of others and which takes into account the child's age and the desirability of promoting the child's reintegration and the child's assuming a constructive role in society.

2. To this end, and having regard to the relevant provisions of international instruments, States Parties shall, in particular, ensure that:

(a) No child shall be alleged as, be accused of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law by reason of acts or omissions that were not prohibited by national or international law at the time they were committed;

(B) Every child alleged as or accused of having infringed the penal law has at least the following guarantees:

(i) To be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law;

(ii) To be informed promptly and directly of the charges against him or her, and, if appropriate, through his or her parents or legal guardians, and to have legal or other appropriate assistance in the preparation and presentation of his or her defence;

(iii) To have the matter determined without delay by a competent, independent and impartial authority or judicial body in a fair hearing according to law, in the presence of legal or other appropriate assistance and, unless it is considered not to be in the best interest of the child, in particular, taking into account his or her age or situation, his or her parents or legal guardians;

(iv) Not to be compelled to give testimony or to confess guilt; to examine or have examined adverse witnesses and to obtain the participation and examination of witnesses on his or her behalf under conditions of equality;

(v) If considered to have infringed the penal law, to have this decision and any measures imposed in consequence thereof reviewed by a higher competent, independent and impartial authority or judicial body according to law;

(vi) To have the free assistance of an interpreter if the child cannot understand or speak the language used;

(vii) To have his or her privacy fully respected at all stages of the proceedings.

3. States Parties shall seek to promote the establishment of laws, procedures, authorities and institutions specifically applicable to children alleged as, accused of, or recognized as having infringed the penal law, and, in particular:

(a) The establishment of a minimum age below which children shall be presumed not to have the capacity to infringe the penal law;

(B) Whenever appropriate and desirable, measures for dealing with such children without resorting to judicial proceedings, providing that human rights and legal safeguards are fully respected. 4. A variety of dispositions, such as care, guidance and supervision orders; counselling; probation; foster care; education and vocational training programmes and other alternatives to institutional care shall be available to ensure that children are dealt with in a manner appropriate to their well-being and proportionate both to their circumstances and the offence.


<H5><A name=art41>Article 41
Nothing in the present Convention shall affect any provisions which are more conducive to the realization of the rights of the child and which may be contained in:

(a) The law of a State party; or

(B) International law in force for that State.

</H5>
  • 0

Posted Image Pittsburgh Penguins - CDC GML Posted Image


"My goal is to win the Stanley Cup, and after the offer I received from Buffalo, I believe this is the best place to make it happen." - Christian Ehrhoff


#235 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:29 AM

Gravol?

Obviously as Mr. Carlin would point out, poor old Omar's rights are imaginary.

No they clearly are not imaginary as the Supreme Court of Canada has pointed out on several occasions.
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#236 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,009 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:29 AM

He's a Canadian citizen. He gets all the benefits that come with that. End of story. You can't pick and choose whos rights to defend. You defend them all.

Maybe he is a criminal and should be put away for life. I don't know. The point is he should have been brought back here and dealt with by our government. Eight years in a foreign jail, no trial, probable torture. If you're happy treating your citizens that way, I'd hate to see how you treat others.




The evidence in the field disagrees.
  • 0

#237 JAH

JAH

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,284 posts
  • Joined: 19-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:31 AM

I never asked for a King's ransom....and i'm glad you didn't use any hyperbole either.

I also want him to be tried in a Canadian court over a military tribunal. Don't you? Oh, that's right, he's a scary super soldier of the highest order and should, nay, needs to be shackled in a Dr. Lector type body restraint at all times, for if he is brought back to Canada we will all die! So you, probably want him in Gitmo, till the day he dies.
:frantic:

He's protected under International Conventions, which we and the U.S. have signed. Why don't you understand that? Am I not saying it correctly?
[b]</H5>

I also want him to be tried by a civilian court, he's not a soldier and is therefore not one of the super variety, and he should not be shckled Lecter style. A standard cell will do.

He was neither a soldier nor a child soldier when he committed his crimes.

Edited by JAH, 27 October 2010 - 11:31 AM.

  • 0
'It's just a job. Grass grows, birds fly, waves pound the sand. I beat people up.' - Muhammad Ali

#238 inane

inane

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,715 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:33 AM

jesus ron and jah, you guys are having me agree with wetcoaster here...i feel dirty.

as much as you'd like to pretend he doesn't, he has rights.
  • 0

#239 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,009 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:34 AM

How about 10.5 million times?

I suppose now the courts may now weigh in and Omar Khadr may be due some major compensation as has occurred with Maher Arar - that one cost Canada $10.5 million and the government of Canada was forced to make an official apology for cooperating with the US to "render" Arar to Syria where he was tortured. Arar was jailed and tortured in Syria after being sent there by U.S. authorities in September 2002 following his arrest at New York's JFK airport.

BTW Maher Arar has a connection to the Omar Khadr case. As a result of the torture and coercion of Khadr he allegedly identified Arar as a terrorist associate. That was used as basis to render Arara to Syria.

One of Khadr's interrogators - FBI Special Agent Robert Fuller testified that Khadr said he recognized a photo of Arar during an October 2002 interrogation. Under questioning Tuesday, Fuller said Khadr saw Arar in Afghanistan during late September or October 2001.

When the notes of the interrogation were finally produced they did not quite bear out what Fuller had claimed on the stand. Fuller's evidence was further undercut by revelations that the FBI notes taken during the interrogation stated Khadr was shown a photograph of Arar and at first said he "looked familiar." The notes recorded that "in time" Khadr stated "he felt he had seen" Arar.

Problem with that claim was that during the times in question Arar was indisputably in North America as the 2006 judicial inquiry by Justice Dennis O'Connor into the circumstances of Arar's arrest in the US and rendition to Syria determined.
http://www.thestar.c.../article/574190

There is a reason real courts (unlike illegal military tribunals) do not allow confessions that are obtained by torture, under duress or are otherwise involuntary - they are inherently unreliable. Victims will often say anything to stop the abuse.

Unfortuantely for the US military and former Bush Administration, Canadian courts will not ignore evidence as has been the hallmark of the illegal military tribunal.

Once Khadr is back in Canada (assuming the Canadian government signs off on the transfer and that is not a sure thing), I expect a habeas corpus application or similar motion will be made to get Khadr before the civil Canadian courts so the whole sordid affair can be laid bare.


English please.

Sounds like a lot of money for lawyers either way. No wonder you're so keen to get involved.

Khader is only a young offenders act away from being a traitor under the law. Certainly less sympathetic.
  • 0

#240 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,009 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 27 October 2010 - 11:35 AM

jesus ron and jah, you guys are having me agree with wetcoaster here...i feel dirty.

as much as you'd like to pretend he doesn't, he has rights.


Breaking out of your ideological boundaries can only be healthy.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.