Medak Pocket (info, documentaries, etc. - merged)

[48Highlander]

Criminal Code
            PART II OFFENCES AGAINST PUBLIC ORDER
               Treason and other Offences against the Queen's Authority and Person

High treason

46. (1) Every one commits high treason who, in Canada,

(a) kills or attempts to kill Her Majesty, or does her any bodily harm tending to death or destruction, maims or wounds her, or imprisons or restrains her;

(b) levies war against Canada or does any act preparatory thereto; or

(c) assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.

Treason

(2) Every one commits treason who, in Canada,

(a) uses force or violence for the purpose of overthrowing the government of Canada or a province;

(b) without lawful authority, communicates or makes available to an agent of a state other than Canada, military or scientific information or any sketch, plan, model, article, note or document of a military or scientific character that he knows or ought to know may be used by that state for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or defence of Canada;

(c) conspires with any person to commit high treason or to do anything mentioned in paragraph (a);

(d) forms an intention to do anything that is high treason or that is mentioned in paragraph (a) and manifests that intention by an overt act; or

(e) conspires with any person to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) or forms an intention to do anything mentioned in paragraph (b) and manifests that intention by an overt act.

Canadian citizen

(3) Notwithstanding subsection (1) or (2), a Canadian citizen or a person who owes allegiance to Her Majesty in right of Canada,

(a) commits high treason if, while in or out of Canada, he does anything mentioned in subsection (1); or

(b) commits treason if, while in or out of Canada, he does anything mentioned in subsection (2).

And then there's the PUNISHMENT

Punishment for high treason

47. (1) Every one who commits high treason is guilty of an indictable offence and shall be sentenced to imprisonment for life.

Punishment for treason

(2) Every one who commits treason is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

(a) to be sentenced to imprisonment for life if he is guilty of an offence under paragraph 46(2)(a), (c) or (d);

(b) to be sentenced to imprisonment for life if he is guilty of an offence under paragraph 46(2)(b) or (e) committed while a state of war exists between Canada and another country; or

(c) to be sentenced to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years if he is guilty of an offence under paragraph 46(2)(b) or (e) committed while no state of war exists between Canada and another country.

Corroboration

(3) No person shall be convicted of high treason or treason on the evidence of only one witness, unless the evidence of that witness is corroborated in a material particular by evidence that implicates the accused.

Minimum punishment

(4) For the purposes of Part XXIII, the sentence of imprisonment for life prescribed by subsection (1) is a minimum punishment.

Seems pretty clear to me.   Under the criminal code of Canada, an individual fighting for "any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities" wether in or out of Canada, is guilty of Treason, and upon convinction will be sentenced to at MINIMUM life imprisonment.

Now how likely is it to be enforced?   Well, maybe if we voted the liberals out of office...

 

[Infanteer]

Geez PBI, you should have got the guys name and number - perhaps he could have been indicted?

 

[Brad Sallows]

Does it make a difference if the Canadian forces are operating under command of the UN?

 

[48Highlander]

well, the relevant section is:

assists an enemy at war with Canada, or any armed forces against whom Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities, whether or not a state of war exists between Canada and the country whose forces they are.

So, unless my command of the english language is much worse than I thought, it doesn't matter who the CF troops are reporting to.

 

[Infanteer]

I would imagine that Brad was getting at the idea that someone could claim that they were engaging UN Forces wearing Blue Hats and thus were not targeting the CF specifically.

Technicalities, they suck but they tend to bite us in the ass. 

 

[pbi]

I would imagine that Brad was getting at the idea that someone could claim that they were engaging UN Forces wearing Blue Hats and thus were not targeting the CF specifically.

A "technicality" like that wouldn't cut much ice because we do not put our troops under UN command-at most the UN gets a form of OPCON-and we never cease being Canadian soldiers under Canadian command. Firing on us would be firing on Canadian soldiers.

Hey, Infanteer: I like your Napoleon Dynamite avatar. Cool movie. I wish I was just like him.  Oh--wait... I am. Gosh!

Cheers

 

[Sandbag]

I don't want to be too emotional about the whole "research paper" this gentleman has written, but IMHO it is politically motivated as most such diatribes are.  It is filled with a political agenda and many inaccuracies, but it is his opinion I guess, as well as his interpretation of events.

Just a couple of comments, one about the WO who won the medal of bravery and was shot at by the Croatian side.  He went in with a couple of other Patricias, at night, in the rain, prodding with a bayonet through a minefield directly in front of Croation positions.  Oh by the way, they had a UN flag with a flashlight shining on it, clearly identifying them as UN, and still shots were fired at them.  The WO, who was advanced pioneers, was in the coy as pnr platoon was not on the orbat,(nor will it ever be again for that matter).  The french soldiers had wandered into the minefield, and their minestrike  was one of a couple the attached french units suffered during that time period.

Second, the "inexperienced soldiers" had been in theatre for almost six months and had conducted many operations, as well as being fired at and shelled "accidently" by opposing forces prior to Medak.  In Sector West these same "pro-serb" soldiers had conducted patrols and cordon and searches including weapons seizures predominantly on the Serb side, up until July when the order to conduct such operations was rescinded by Sector HQ.  Then we moved down to Sector South and occupied the Serb side in the Frebat AOR.

Finally, in 2001 I had the opportunity to go back to the area while serving in Bosnia, and for an operation that did not happen, the trenchlines are still there, the fighting and vehicle runup positions are still there, the minefields are still there, the buildings are still destroyed and overgrown, and there are no people/or few living anywhere in the area.  Oh by the way, between the two front trenchlines, the Croatians have placed an old armoured vehicle with a Croatian flagpole and memorial celebrating their victory in the area during 1993.

Just my ramblings on an event that didn't happen.

 

[medicineman]

Hard to say they were only engaging "UN" forces with those big (beep)ing Canadian Flags on our shoulders.

MM

 

[Danjanou]

Just to toss a little more gas on the fire. Here's the â Å“discussionâ ? on this 'reportâ ? over at milphotos.net. Those of you were there may find the comments by the Croats on that board interesting. It Appears that it never happened and you made it all up as a â Å“medal grabâ ? to help cover up Somalia.  :

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=44019&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Oh yeah someone tell Tess that according to one of these Euro wussie nintendosnipers at that site it seems he and his buddy got tanked up New Years Eve and shot their own Iltis full of holes.

Excuse me know while I grab my helmet and hunker down.

 

[larry Strong]

I think if you were to probe it deep enough, "Hostilities" would mean engaged in a declared war, which we were not.

 

[48Highlander]

Geeze, what part of "whether or not a state of war exists" don't you undertand?

 

[Infanteer]

Wow, checking at that link reminds of why I come to Army.ca - next time I hear a complaint about moderators I'm going to link them to militaryphotos.

 

[the 48th regulator]

Just to toss a little more gas on the fire. Hereâ ™s the "discussionâ Â? on this â ˜reportâ Â? over at milphotos.net. Those of you were there may find the comments by the Croats on that board interesting. It Appears that it never happened and you made it all up as a "medal grabâ Â? to help cover up Somalia.   :

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=44019&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Oh yeah someone tell Tess that according to one of these Euro wussie nintendosnipers at that site it seems he and his buddy got tanked up New Years Eve and shot their own Iltis full of holes.

Excuse me know while I grab my helmet and hunker down.

Hahahaha what a freaking hillarious site!!  Makes me very very happy about being here (army.ca) at home...

but woot woot, they talked about me!  I was tempted to wade in and clarify, but why taint my fingertips with that punch up..I am tempted though...

dileas

tess

 

[pbi]

I am afraid to go to that site because at my age I might have a blood pressure episode. I used to get into it over on the Military section of History Channel with some of these insane Croat nationalist mouth-foamers(a number of whom seem to live in North America...), but I gave it up as a waste of time. Anybody who questions them is a "Serb lover". They tend to have an almost totally distorted view of what happened, and they rest smug in the knowledge that the Croat govt, ably assisted by the Croat communities in North America, waged a successful Info Ops campaign to spin the Croat ops that involved nasty things, like Medak, or the summer 1995 offensive ops in Sector North and Sector South. Just go onto Main St. North America and ask Joe Sixpack who the "bad guys" were in Yugoslavia (but don't distinguish what part of Yugoslavia-that will just confuse him because the media never realy explained that to him...). He will, I bet, answer "the Serbs". Croats win. Serbs lose.

Cheers.

 

[Blakey]

Thats exactly it Pbi, when I was over ther in '93, it was who ever needed the help they got it (serb, croat) those people do not understand that the Canadian contingent was probably the most impartial "unit" that was there, at least when i was there. As well every side took there "pot shots" at us, so trying to deny it after all these years just pisses me off. I wont go on a rant at this time.....

 

[Infanteer]

I remember reading a good synopsis in "Dangerous Places", probably the best "travel guide" out there:

The Serbs: Officially "the Baddies" of the war, much to their own outrage...The Serbs just feel that no one sees their point of view; but as this involves paranoid rhetoric about a global "Muslim Plot," this is not very surprising.

The Muslims: Officially "The Victims" of the Bosnian War.  Probably debatable.

The Croats:  The guys who seem to have got away with it all.

 

[medicineman]

Holy Aerobics Batman - Blakey, what's with your SpiderDude?  ;D

MM

 

[Acorn]

I actually scanned three pages of that before the red mist behind my eyes started to rise. Lucky I was able to close it before I burst a blood vessle.

Sometimes I think the worst "nationalists" are the expatriates. The difference between us and them is that while they fabricate "proofs" that certain events didn't take place, we don't deny the actions of Clayton Matchee.

Acorn

 

[oyaguy]

What I don't understand in the paper is the rationale that Medak was hyped  because the Canadian Government wanted to distract the public from Somalia. Most of what I know about Medak has come out in the last few years much less 12 years ago.

 

[medicineman]

And trying to get that information out of the government publicly was like trying ot pull hen's teeth.  They didn't want the public to know that you can get into combat on "blue" ops.

MM