- Reaction score
- 2,849
- Points
- 940
OK, my initial thought was to rant about what possible difficulty he could have with Khadr being designated an "unlawful enemy combatant."
- was he actually "lawful," ie - wearing the military uniform of a legal state IAW Geneva Accords?
- was he not an "enemy," ie - was he actually cheering for the anti-AQ coalition forces?
- was he not a "combatant," ie - chucking a grenade that kills a medic during a firefight somehow isn't combat?
...leading me to tar military legal types with the same stereotype brushes as scumbags like OJ's Johnnie Cochran et al.
I can only believe that the judge made his decision so that a higher form of tribunal must hear the case, pre-empting a conviction loss at the hands of those aforementioned loophole lawyers who would eventually appeal the original court's jurisdiction.
Forgive me, however, if my cynicism precludes me holding out much hope against Khadr walking (and the Toronto family cult subsequently suing us taxpayers on some trumped-up grounds)
- was he actually "lawful," ie - wearing the military uniform of a legal state IAW Geneva Accords?
- was he not an "enemy," ie - was he actually cheering for the anti-AQ coalition forces?
- was he not a "combatant," ie - chucking a grenade that kills a medic during a firefight somehow isn't combat?
...leading me to tar military legal types with the same stereotype brushes as scumbags like OJ's Johnnie Cochran et al.
I can only believe that the judge made his decision so that a higher form of tribunal must hear the case, pre-empting a conviction loss at the hands of those aforementioned loophole lawyers who would eventually appeal the original court's jurisdiction.
Forgive me, however, if my cynicism precludes me holding out much hope against Khadr walking (and the Toronto family cult subsequently suing us taxpayers on some trumped-up grounds)