The Khadr Thread

[brihard]

I don't follow your logic:  his confession is no good... but he is guilty of treason...so we won't execute him...we can hang him?

"his confession is no good... " Check
"but he is guilty of treason..." Wrong. There is sufficient evidence (in my mind) to indict him on treason and to bring him to trial.
"so we won't execute him..." Check
"we can hang him?" Wrong. I'm against the death penalty on procedural grounds. It tickles me to imagine what a youth court might make of a treason case, though.

Guilty, I was reading posts over at rabble.ca. I was banned there years ago but now and then I like seeing what those far left retards are spewing- it helps me right before I go to the gym.

LOL, fair enough. I avoid that place. Too far left for me. I sit pretty center.

 

[Fusaki]

This is irrelevant. An argument's cogency has nothing to do with the person espousing it.

Bull it doesnt. How does someone who is so far removed from the actual sacrifice required for the "moral high ground" provide an argument that has any "cogency"? Their word that its the right thing to do is supposed to hold water?

It's called <a href=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem>argumentum ad hominem.</a>  If an argument truly makes sense, than it does so regardless the person putting it forth.  An attempt to show the invalidity of a premise by discrediting the speaker rather than the idea is a logical fallacy.

 

[Container]

The issue is that it doesnt actually make "sense". It only does in the mind of the individual saying it.

Its not an attempt to discredit anyone, it isnt an attack on any individual. Its an attack on the idea of flippantly suggesting sacrifice on others when you have no reasonable expectation of having to share the consequences.

I find little solace in philosophy telling the man with the bloody nose to keep getting punched so he can claim the highground.

 

[brihard]

The issue is that it doesnt actually make "sense". It only does in the mind of the individual saying it.

Its not an attempt to discredit anyone, it isnt an attack on any individual. Its an attack on the idea of flippantly suggesting sacrifice on others when you have no reasonable expectation of having to share the consequences.

I find little solace in philosophy telling the man with the bloody nose to keep getting punched so he can claim the highground.

And yet every one of us who's signed the doted line and signed up has accepted exactly that. We don't have to join the military, but we choose to so that other Canadians will never have to. At the same time it's not at all unreasonable for Canadians to expect their military - which represents them - to abide by the values and principles they hold and, importantly, that our laws dictate must be upheld. Just because we have chosen to serve does not mean we get to tell those concerned about how we're used to go pound sand.

 

[Container]

So to you there is nothing offensive about bringing a murderer into your home to let him go free because of a procedural error?

You are a better man than I.

I do what I do for Canada because myself and my family are free here. And for the most part safe. I welcome anyone to Canada who agrees that we dont have to agree but we have to respect each other. I do not welcome those who dont think I shouldnt exist.

I didnt join the military when I did so others didnt have to. I did it because I believe our way of life, while not perfect, is a work in progress but the best option. I am willing to fight and die to keep my family safe and free. I accept rules of engagement as being the most, for lack of a better word, civil way of doing an "uncivil" thing. And I fight because my enemies demand it.

I have been around enough predators to know that they dont respect the highground. So Im willing to sacrifice my ideals, which includes not killing people, to keep us around so that we can afford to have high ideals.

I dont lose sleep at night because a man who killed someone in the act of trying to save lives had a long trial in a crappy jail. He's an afghan citizen too- and by his actions he loves it there. He can be sent back. At least the next time he wages his personal war we'll have a chance to shoot back. Unlike in Canada where at best he'll poison minds of youths with his crap, and at worst where he'll bring the fight home.

What good is whats "right" if ensures that whats "wrong" is protected?

 

[Fusaki]

What good is whats "right" if ensures that whats "wrong" is protected?

What's the point of fighting for anything if we become the "wrong" that we struggle against?

 

[Gunner98]

"his confession is no good... " Check
"but he is guilty of treason..." Wrong. There is sufficient evidence (in my mind) to indict him on treason and to bring him to trial.
"so we won't execute him..." Check
"we can hang him?" Wrong. I'm against the death penalty on procedural grounds. It tickles me to imagine what a youth court might make of a treason case, though.

LOL, fair enough. I avoid that place. Too far left for me. I sit pretty center.

Is the sky blue in your world or rose colored like your glasses?  And the combination of youth court and treason tickles you?  Hmmm - I give up!

 

[brihard]

Is the sky blue in your world or rose colored like your glasses?  And the combination of youth court and treason tickles you?  Hmmm - I give up!

That's nice. Want a cookie?

It's a shit situation all around. I think it's more shit if we toss away our own principles and rule of law simply because a case is deemed suitably 'offensive' or 'bad'.

Container asked if I consider nothing to be offensive about this. Of course I do. Khadr's ideology and purported actions offended me to a great deal. But I am *more* offended that the nation I serve, in pursuing the conflict I have deployed on, would willingly shelf its own principles and rule of law, and sacrifice the critical rights and legal protections we hold dear just because a case is deemed wrong or disgusting enough. That's crap.

Is my world rose coloured? Far from it. But I will fight tooth and nail to ensure that we as a society adhere to the principles that make us worth defending. I'll not stand silent while our country is party to blatant violations of the rule of law, due process, and basic human rights and dignities. If, from the start, the U.S. had treated Khadr as either a criminal suspect or a prisoner of war, with all the attendent requirements and protections due to whichever they chose, I'd have been fine with that. I will not accept my nation giving a wink and a nod to pure expedient legal fictions that make torture and show trials acceptable.

As I said, better had Khadr simply died. But he didn't, and part of being a responsible free state is that we deal with our problems in the manner accepted and prescribed by law. It also means that sometimes we have to choose an end state we don't like much, because to do otherwise would be even more wrong. That's the case here.

 

[Jarnhamar]

All the more reason to revoke citizenship of criminals.

Container asked if I consider nothing to be offensive about this. Of course I do. Khadr's ideology and purported actions offended me to a great deal. But I am *more* offended that the nation I serve, in pursuing the conflict I have deployed on, would willingly shelf its own principles and rule of law, and sacrifice the critical rights and legal protections we hold dear just because a case is deemed wrong or disgusting enough. That's crap.

Our legal system is fucked up and murders and monsters make a mockery of our system. You should be *more* offended that the nation you serve in doesn't unanimously rise up and lay waste to anyone who shares Khadr's ideology 

People like this should seriously loose their "right" to be called a Canadian- and all the protection that comes with it.
I'll admit that his crime isn't that severe compared to pricks like Paul B and friends but seriously, what a waste of time effort and resources.

 

[Brutus]

All the more reason to revoke citizenship of criminals.
Our legal system is ****ed up and murders and monsters make a mockery of our system. You should be *more* offended that the nation you serve in doesn't unanimously rise up and lay waste to anyone who shares Khadr's ideology 

People like this should seriously loose their "right" to be called a Canadian- and all the protection that comes with it.
I'll admit that his crime isn't that severe compared to pricks like Paul B and friends but seriously, what a waste of time effort and resources.

As much as I'd like to discard 'Canadians' like Paul B and Khadr, they were born here and have no status anywhere else. Even if we revoked their citizenship, where would we send them?

And not to pull out the legaleze, but it's illegal to create a 'stateless person'.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Maybe just take away their right to vote, eligibility for welfare, if they shit the bed and commit a crime in another country then they can keep them.

I'll figure out a plan and get back to you.

 

[Brutus]

Maybe just take away their right to vote, eligibility for welfare, if they crap the bed and commit a crime in another country then they can keep them.

I'll figure out a plan and get back to you.

Again, not trying to tear you apart when we're on the same side here, but the Charter unequivecoly protects the first point, welfare is the responsibility of the Province (and the Feds have no jurisdiction), and most countries will try, convict, incaricirate and THEN deport back to Canada and bar a Canadian who commits a crime there.

 

[HavokFour]

We can always just relocate him to Alert, and forbid him from leaving.

Just saying...

 

[Jarnhamar]

Again, not trying to tear you apart when we're on the same side here

All good brother  ;D

but the Charter

is not set in stone, we can always hammer out a new one.

unequivecoly protects the first point, welfare is the responsibility of the Province (and the Feds have no jurisdiction),

Like I said, remove someone from full citizen status and allow them "limited coverage" under their temporary loss of citizenship.
For example.

I'm a "Canadian Citizen" who also belongs to a radical religion and I'm caught trying to plant a bomb somewhere in an obvious terrorist act.

I'm found guilty, the following restrictions are placed on me during my incarceration and for a determined number of years after.

Section 3: the right to vote and to be eligible to serve as member of a legislature.
Loose my right to vote.
Section 8: freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.
I've already proved I am a threat to Canada. The police can enter my home without a warrant anytime they want. Search my car. Search my computer
Section 9: freedom from arbitrary detainment or imprisonment.
Since I'm under suspicion, if I J walk then blammo I get the book thrown at me.
Section 11: rights in criminal and penal matters such as the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty.
Denied. Since I tried to turn a bus into a blazing inferno of religious hatred should I come under suspicion for anything during my limited citizenship I will be considered guilty until proved innocent.
Section 12: right not to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment.
Not a lot of sympathy for someone who murders/rapes/tortures someone then tries to hide behind the justice system.
Section 13: rights against self-incrimination
This seems kind of stupid in any situation IMO.

Section 6, mobility. Ground me like a mouthy teenager. I can't fart without CSIS collecting an air sample.

If someone wasn't born Canadian and was given citizenship, have the option of stripping them of it and sending them home.

When you get a case like Karla.H where she makes a deal then laughs after the truth comes out I say take the piece of paper with the plea deal and rip it up in front of their face.  It's time we stop ***** footing around and get tough on this crap before we have to wake up at 430am to go to the market and avoid prime boom boom time in crowded areas.

 

[Rafterman1]

I sent an email to my MP regarding my thoughts on Omar Khadr on 1 Nov.  Thought I would share her reply which I received today. 



Thank you very much for contacting me regarding Omar Khadr.  As you know, Mr. Khadr pleaded guilty to the charges against him.  It is important to note that the Government of Canada played no role in the plea negotiations that took place between him and the U.S. government.  Our government has always believed that Mr. Khadr had to face the serious charges against him in the United States, arguing against his repatriation all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada.  At this point we face a legal wall on this issue and, in spite of Mr. Khadr’s admission that he committed these horrible crimes, our ability to legally block his repatriation does have limits.



Thank you once again for contacting me.



Sincerely,



Cathy McLeod, M.P.

Kamloops-Thompson-Cariboo

 

[captloadie]

All good brother  ;D

is not set in stone, we can always hammer out a new one.


Like I said, remove someone from full citizen status and allow them "limited coverage" under their temporary loss of citizenship.
For example.

I'm a "Canadian Citizen" who also belongs to a radical religion and I'm caught trying to plant a bomb somewhere in an obvious terrorist act.

I'm found guilty, the following restrictions are placed on me during my incarceration and for a determined number of years after.

Section 3: the right to vote and to be eligible to serve as member of a legislature.
Loose my right to vote.
Section 8: freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.
I've already proved I am a threat to Canada. The police can enter my home without a warrant anytime they want. Search my car. Search my computer
Section 9: freedom from arbitrary detainment or imprisonment.
Since I'm under suspicion, if I J walk then blammo I get the book thrown at me.
Section 11: rights in criminal and penal matters such as the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty.
Denied. Since I tried to turn a bus into a blazing inferno of religious hatred should I come under suspicion for anything during my limited citizenship I will be considered guilty until proved innocent.
Section 12: right not to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment.
Not a lot of sympathy for someone who murders/rapes/tortures someone then tries to hide behind the justice system.
Section 13: rights against self-incrimination
This seems kind of stupid in any situation IMO.

Section 6, mobility. Ground me like a mouthy teenager. I can't fart without CSIS collecting an air sample.

If someone wasn't born Canadian and was given citizenship, have the option of stripping them of it and sending them home.

When you get a case like Karla.H where she makes a deal then laughs after the truth comes out I say take the piece of paper with the plea deal and rip it up in front of their face.  It's time we stop ***** footing around and get tough on this crap before we have to wake up at 430am to go to the market and avoid prime boom boom time in crowded areas.

We can't do this because it is a can of worms on a slippery slope. Once you make these amendments, it sets a precedence to further erode the Charter. It may start out as applying to "terrorist groups" but then it would expand to any Canadian not born here who commits any crime, and then to Canadians born here but forming criminal groups, and then Canadians born here who commit despicable crimes, then to Canadians born here who commit petty crimes, and then anybody living here who the police or politicians in power don't like. And then guess what, we live in a nation no different than the one we're fighting in to change.

And as far as Khadr is concerned, I'm not defending what he did, but if he were a teeneager in some hellhole in Africa, we'd have called him a child soldier and said he was too immature to understand his actions. IMHO, he is being punished for what his family was and did, not solely for his actions (as I can't bring myself to call them a crimes). Look at the majority of the other prisoners who were in Guantanamo and then sent back to "home". The majority of them are free men, and absurd as it may be, some are even being compensated for the hardships they endured in American captivity.

 

[The Bread Guy]

.... according to the Canadian Press:

Convicted Canadian war criminal Omar Khadr will be seeking clemency in hopes of an early release from his prison cell in Guantanamo Bay and a quicker return to Canada, The Canadian Press has learned.

An application which could seek remedies ranging from an outright acquittal to a commuting of his eight-year sentence is set to go before the head of the military commissions within a few weeks.

Speaking from Memphis, Tenn., Khadr's Pentagon-appointed lawyer Lt. Col. Jon Jackson confirmed that Khadr's defence team was finalizing the application to the convening authority.

"We haven't made any final decision on what we're going to request," Jackson said Wednesday.

"We're (also) currently in the process of determining what specific areas of law we're going to address."

The clemency application is expected to be submitted in about two weeks, and a decision could come shortly after ....

More on link

 

[The Bread Guy]

..... shared with the usual caveats.

The federal government is asking Canada's top court to take up the extradition case of Abdullah Khadr.

It says the Supreme Court should hear the case because it raises issues of national importance.

The Ottawa-born Khadr is wanted in the U.S. on terrorism related charges.

However, two courts in Ontario stayed the extradition on the basis the Americans had behaved shockingly in Khadr's detention and abuse in custody in Pakistan.

Khadr's lawyers argued self-incriminating statements he made were the product of torture in Pakistan in which the Americans had been complicit.

In May, Ontario's Court of Appeal upheld the extradition stay, siding with a lower court judge who said the fight against terrorism should not trump the rule of law.

Source:  The Canadian Press, 29 Jul 11

 

[GAP]

He might not find it as easy going as he envisions......there's still a huge resentment quotient out there about what he is and has done......

Omar Khadr makes bid for return to Canada
CBC News Posted: Oct 7, 2011
Article Link

Omar Khadr has started the process to come back to Canada.

Lawyers for Khadr, who is serving eight years in a U.S. prison for killing a U.S. soldier when he was 15, have filed the paperwork required to start the repatriation process.

Corrections officials have received the request for transfer and now have to determine if Khadr is eligible to return to Canada to finish out his sentence.

Once Canadian officials determine that, they send an official request to American officials. If U.S. officials agree, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews has the final say. He has the option of refusing the transfer if he decides Khadr is a risk to public safety.

The process is expected to take about 18 months.

A spokesman for Toews said he doesn't comment on individual cases.
'Inclined to favourably consider'

The Canadian Embassy said in a memo dated Oct. 23, 2010, the Canadian government "is inclined to favourably consider" a request for a transfer to Canada for Khadr to serve the rest of his sentence after another year at Guantanamo.

Khadr is not allowed to fly into U.S. airspace, according to the plea deal, CBC's Laurie Graham reported last fall from Khadr's trial.

Once in Canada, he'll be subject to normal Canadian laws and will be able to apply for parole after serving one-third of his sentence.

Khadr will not be able to profit from his story.

"If he writes a book, any profit, any money made, will go back to the Canadian government," Graham said.

U.S. military prosecutors had called Khadr a radical jihadist, but U.S. Navy Capt. John Murphy softened his tone when he was asked whether Khadr will pose a threat when he's eventually set free in Canada.

"By returning him to his own country within a year, that presents the best prospects for his rehabilitation," he said.

Dennis Edney, Khadr's Canadian lawyer at the time of the trial, said that when he is released Khadr will not live with his Toronto family members, who have openly supported al-Qaeda.

"He's not a radical jihadist," he said. "He's a victim. He's a victim of his family, his father, adults, and he's a victim of this system."

Khadr pleaded guilty to five charges brought by the U.S. military, including killing Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Speer in Afghanistan in July 2002. He has been in custody since then.
end

 

[Franko]

He may not have been a radical prior to him being caught, but after this long in jail around other radicals festering in lock down, one has to wonder.

How long will it be before he does something after he's paroled? Don't say he won't see the light of day either...he'll be out soon enough due to a sympathetic public.

Regards