07-15-2008, 08:40 PM
|
#3
|
Franchise Player
|
I remember reading a great MacLeans article on the Khadr family...what a bunch of dirtbag terrorists. I hope they all get what is coming to them.
|
|
|
07-15-2008, 08:41 PM
|
#4
|
#1 Goaltender
|
The whole family are terrorist sympathiser's if not actual terrorists. The mother should be charged with child neglect and providing aid to a terrorist organization. If the US is using methods of intel extraction against international law, they should voice concern about that, but they should not try to intervene in khadrs case.
|
|
|
07-15-2008, 09:11 PM
|
#5
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Van City - Main St.
|
The thing I find hypocritical is that if a 16 year old Canadian kills someone on the streets here, the government protects them a juvenile.
If Khadr killed someone as a 16 year Canadian, why should he be any different?
By labeling him as terrorist, every normal Canadian law seems to get thrown out the window.
|
|
|
07-15-2008, 10:00 PM
|
#6
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
Give him his due process in the states.
|
|
|
07-15-2008, 10:08 PM
|
#7
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Calgary
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winsor_Pilates
The thing I find hypocritical is that if a 16 year old Canadian kills someone on the streets here, the government protects them a juvenile.
If Khadr killed someone as a 16 year Canadian, why should he be any different?
By labeling him as terrorist, every normal Canadian law seems to get thrown out the window.
|
But his "crimes" weren't commited in Canada were they? He's just trying to hide from them here.
|
|
|
07-15-2008, 10:32 PM
|
#8
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta
|
I think that if the case is iron-clad against all of those held in Gitmo than they should try them in public and let everyone see the evidence.
I've always been confused by the Khadr case though. He is charged with throwing a grenade during a fire-fight, right? How can he be put on trial for this....isn't it an expectation of war that this is going to happen? How can they really try a guy in this situation? (just wondering, honestly. Not defending Khadr or his family).
|
|
|
07-15-2008, 10:37 PM
|
#9
|
First Line Centre
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Toronto
|
Personally, I'm a little torn on what I think. On one hand, he comes from a known terrorist sympathizing family and he was taking part in a battle when he was captured. He now stands accused of throwing a hand grenade that killed a US medic.
However, the kid was born here, and was born into that kind of family. Did he ever have a chance to not believe that the West is the great Satan, and that he was defending the Holy land? He’s a kid, and apparently been manipulated his whole life. It’s a war on Terror, and he was in a middle of a battle. There is a whole legal quagmire set now because the US refuses to classify the Taliban fighters as soldiers (in which they have all the rights to the Geneva Convention and can’t be charged for murder and such for taking part in a battle). Instead, they are deemed “Enemy Combatants” and thus, they can be tried and they really don’t have any rights.
My issue is that he has been held for the last 5 years with out due course, he was a kid at the time of the incident, and in any other case, this would be a prisoner of war/child soldier that was defending the land of his origins against foreign invaders. We’re the only Allied country left to have anyone in Guantanamo. In my opinion, he is still a Canadian born into the wrong family, and even though we hate his family, our Countries ideals should have him treated fairly. I rather have followed Australia’s and Britain example and pulled him out and put into our system where he’ll be treated to due process. At 16, he was still salvageable; to maybe make something of himself. As Canadians, we’re better than that and we often like to hold ourselves to a higher standard. Instead, we’re abandoning him to a US military tribunal where I don’t believe he’s going to get a fair hearing.
I’m not saying to pull him out and set him free, but we shouldn’t do nothing either. No matter what, there won’t be any winners. The family of the dead Medic won’t get there son back. Khadr will never have a normal life. But we could hang on to the beliefs and ideals of a person’s rights and justice that we all have as Canadians.
__________________
|
|
|
07-15-2008, 10:43 PM
|
#10
|
n00b!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
I think that if the case is iron-clad against all of those held in Gitmo than they should try them in public and let everyone see the evidence.
I've always been confused by the Khadr case though. He is charged with throwing a grenade during a fire-fight, right? How can he be put on trial for this....isn't it an expectation of war that this is going to happen? How can they really try a guy in this situation? (just wondering, honestly. Not defending Khadr or his family).
|
Because he's Canadian.
|
|
|
07-15-2008, 11:42 PM
|
#11
|
Norm!
|
I'm all for bringing him home, then packing up his whole family, putting them on a plan to Pakistan and letting the Pakistan authorities deal with them.
If they want to openly support Islamic terrorists and extremists, send money to them, and speak for them, then they should go be with them, and hopefully die with them.
I have no sympathy for that family or for Kadr himself.
Good for Harper for not getting involved.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Last edited by CaptainCrunch; 07-15-2008 at 11:45 PM.
|
|
|
07-15-2008, 11:58 PM
|
#12
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Calgary
|
So the guy is in Afghanistan, his family has ties to Osama and he was supposedly trained at an Al Qaeda terrorist camp.
Then one day, he's just hanging out with his friends, supposedly chucks a grenade at an American medic who he kills, then is shot himself. He's shipped off to Cuba and is not seen crying his eyes out in prison... I'm supposed to feel sorry for him?
This guy deserves a trial, and a fair one. No doubt. But it's hard to feel sorry for a guy who was involved in an ambush on US forces and got caught.
Last edited by Jayems; 07-16-2008 at 12:01 AM.
|
|
|
07-16-2008, 08:36 AM
|
#13
|
Lifetime Suspension
|
Video released of Omar's interogation.
During the 10-minute video of his questioning in Guantanamo a year later, he can be seen crying, his face buried in his hands, and pulling at his hair. He can be heard repeatedly chanting: "Help me." At one point he lifts his orange shirt to show the foreign ministry official and agents from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) wounds on his back and stomach which he says he sustained in Afghanistan.
"I'm not a doctor, but I think you're getting good medical care," one of the officials responds.
Mr Khadr says: "No I'm not. You're not here... I lost my eyes. I lost my feet. Everything!" in reference to how his vision and physical health were affected.
"No, you still have your eyes and your feet are still at the end of your legs, you know," a man says.
Sobbing uncontrollably, Mr Khadr tells the officials several times: "You don't care about me."
BBC
More detail here at CBC
|
|
|
07-16-2008, 09:44 AM
|
#14
|
Crash and Bang Winger
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
I'm all for bringing him home, then packing up his whole family, putting them on a plane to Pakistan and letting the Pakistan authorities deal with them.
If they want to openly support Islamic terrorists and extremists, send money to them, and speak for them, then they should go be with them, and hopefully die with them.
I have no sympathy for that family or for Kadr himself.
Good for Harper for not getting involved.
|
so. if you want them to hopefully die with them, sending them to pakistan may be the least effective method. have you seen the state of the pakistani court system?
we'd basically be paying for their flight to freedom. the khadr family would likely be thrilled to go back to pakistan, especially if they didn't have to pay for it. if they really want to go back, fine, they can be out of our hair; but not on our dime.
|
|
|
07-16-2008, 09:58 AM
|
#15
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Calgary
|
I'm all for putting is family and him into a missile and sending it into the sun.
|
|
|
07-16-2008, 10:05 AM
|
#16
|
Norm!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by mariners_fever
so. if you want them to hopefully die with them, sending them to pakistan may be the least effective method. have you seen the state of the pakistani court system?
we'd basically be paying for their flight to freedom. the khadr family would likely be thrilled to go back to pakistan, especially if they didn't have to pay for it. if they really want to go back, fine, they can be out of our hair; but not on our dime.
|
Ever wonder how much money the Kadr's have leached out of the system in terms of health care costs for the one paralyzed brother?
I don't care what Pakistan does with them, but I'd rather have that pack of crazy suicide bomber dreaming hate mongers off of our soil.
They want to go fight for freedom of become martyr's, then go do it elsewhere.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
|
|
|
07-16-2008, 10:14 AM
|
#17
|
Referee
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Over the hill
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
I think that if the case is iron-clad against all of those held in Gitmo than they should try them in public and let everyone see the evidence.
I've always been confused by the Khadr case though. He is charged with throwing a grenade during a fire-fight, right? How can he be put on trial for this....isn't it an expectation of war that this is going to happen? How can they really try a guy in this situation? (just wondering, honestly. Not defending Khadr or his family).
|
It's part of the legal argument of the Bush administration, where they feel they get to have it both ways: that is, they can participate in a war on foreign soil, and then combatants in that war captured on the battlefield are not "prisoners of war" but illegal combatants. Gradually, the U.S. courts are stepping in and saying that this logic is specious, and requiring the U.S. to at least offer some kind of due process to these guys.
But it's a complicated problem. This guy is a Canadian national, and pretty clearly meets the definition of "radicalized." Clearly, just letting him go is a terrible option. On the other hand, is there a strong case against him in a real court of law? The Bush administration, to their credit, recognized early that trying these detainees in open court was very risky--they risked first of all that important classified information would become public (or at least compromised) because defendants in a court of law have a right to access the evidence being used against them, and secondly that they stood a good chance of losing many of these cases, undermining their credibility abroad and perhaps being forced to release people they know to be dangerous. (Some of the detainees are probably genuinely innocent--but for argument's sake, let's assume we're talking about real, bona fide bad guys here)
I guess in the end, due process is one of those Western Values worth making sacrifices for. If we truly believe that radical Islam "hates us for our freedom," then that freedom should be the cardinal principle that we never compromise, including things like a just legal system with a presumption of innocence and so forth. But there's no point pretending that there isn't a potential cost here--some of these guys are very, very dangerous people. Khadr may well be one of them.
|
|
|
07-16-2008, 10:39 AM
|
#18
|
Norm!
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by lchoy
. It’s a war on Terror, and he was in a middle of a battle. There is a whole legal quagmire set now because the US refuses to classify the Taliban fighters as soldiers (in which they have all the rights to the Geneva Convention and can’t be charged for murder and such for taking part in a battle). Instead, they are deemed “Enemy Combatants” and thus, they can be tried and they really don’t have any rights.
My issue is that he has been held for the last 5 years with out due course, he was a kid at the time of the incident, and in any other case, this would be a prisoner of war/child soldier that was defending the land of his origins against foreign invaders. .
|
I'm more then curious about how the Geneva convention applies in any way shape or form in this instance. First and foremost, the Taliban which is not a legal government is not a signatory to any of the articles of the convention.
Secondly, the Geneva convention is extremely specific about people fighting that are not in uniform, or who murder civilians while not in uniform. none of these guys are wearing any kind of uniform and disguise themselves as civilians, therefore they are not protected under the convention and there is no due process. In fact you can basically march these people in front of a fire squad.
In the same way, Kadr is not considered a child soldier because he was not a member of any armed forces structure and did not wear a uniform, in fact he is part of a insurgancy which is Al-Queda which means that he is not afforded protection under the Convention or under the UCMJ or any nation state.
I guess I'm confused about the whole application of any kind of international law or application of the Geneva Convention in this case.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
|
|
|
07-16-2008, 12:20 PM
|
#19
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: not lurking
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
I'm more then curious about how the Geneva convention applies in any way shape or form in this instance. First and foremost, the Taliban which is not a legal government is not a signatory to any of the articles of the convention.
Secondly, the Geneva convention is extremely specific about people fighting that are not in uniform, or who murder civilians while not in uniform. none of these guys are wearing any kind of uniform and disguise themselves as civilians, therefore they are not protected under the convention and there is no due process. In fact you can basically march these people in front of a fire squad.
In the same way, Kadr is not considered a child soldier because he was not a member of any armed forces structure and did not wear a uniform, in fact he is part of a insurgancy which is Al-Queda which means that he is not afforded protection under the Convention or under the UCMJ or any nation state.
I guess I'm confused about the whole application of any kind of international law or application of the Geneva Convention in this case.
|
Yeah, you're completely right regarding the uniform thing. I think the Taliban and other militant movements in Afghanistan constitute guerrilla forces and would be eligible for POW status if they wore uniforms and carried their weapons openly. But as it stands now, they don't.
I remember reading something about child soldiers in Africa: one of the problems with them is that they panic and get scared far more easily, and become easily confused, and situations often escalate out of hand where cooler heads may have prevailed amongst adults. And they're often indoctrinated to believe that everything is life-and-death, kill-or-be-killed. Khadr's actions here (assuming he did actually throw the grenade, which is still a major point of contention) fit almost perfectly with that pattern.
|
|
|
07-16-2008, 03:55 PM
|
#20
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Van City - Main St.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan02
But his "crimes" weren't commited in Canada were they? He's just trying to hide from them here.
|
So, how would a 16 year old Canadian be treated if they were in say...Australia and killed someone?
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:32 PM.
|
|