Omar F*****G Khadr is getting $10.5 milion

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

Again, I see you angle here but I disagree on how you are trying to draw parallels between a kid having sex underage and a kid making bombs to kill soldiers of his own country. Both are reprehensible, one is deliberately targeting the state upon which he holds citizenship.

But don't you see how an adult can persuade those children in both of those situations to do something that is not in their best interest? A 14-year old is likely more susceptible to being convinced by a 50-year old to have sex with them, or build bombs, than a 19-year old.

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by jammies

This has to be in the running for stupidest controversy of the 21st century. Just listen to yourselves: "Let's try a 13 year old boy for treason."

Do you want fascists? 'Cause that's how you end up with fascists. It all seems like great fun until you realize the rule of law that protected and succored those you despise, also protected and succored you.

No one would care if it ended with Omar Khadr came back to Canada. That happened 5 years ago and it was quickly forgotten. What pisses people off is that he got paid over 10 million when he was a bloody terrorist. Child terrorist or not, rights violated or not, he was a terrorist committing terrorist acts against western soldiers. The kid won the lottery coming back to Canada and getting a fresh start.

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

both are reprehensible and in both cases, the minor ought to be afforded the same protections under the law.

Serious question: do you even know the details of the actual event where Speer was killed?

No I don't know all the details of Sgt Speer and neither do you

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

No I don't know all the details of Sgt Speer and neither do you

they are a matter of the public record, since the military had to testify in the case against Khadr...

this includes members of Speer's team and details of the engagement leading up to it.

While no one truly knows what happened except the people that were there, the best one can do is read what is available as part of the public record that were party of the proceedings.

it provides more context... or you can continue to argue without having any of the facts

[Wormius]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

No I don't know all the details of Sgt Speer and neither do you

Well, he wasn't hanging out at a coffee shop when he was just randomly attacked by a terrorist.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

No one would care if it ended with Omar Khadr came back to Canada. That happened 5 years ago and it was quickly forgotten. What pisses people off is that he got paid over 10 million when he was a bloody terrorist. Child terrorist or not, rights violated or not, he was a terrorist committing terrorist acts against western soldiers. The kid won the lottery coming back to Canada and getting a fresh start.

But you don't have any concept of why he won the lottery coming back to Canada. Do you think it's because we live in nice houses here? Or because we have some pretty wicked junior hockey teams?

He won the lottery because we protect human rights. We could write this one off, tell him to pound sand, refuse to even hear his case. But then we'd be just like other crappy countries that are decidedly not the grand prize in any lottery.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Makarov

How are Mr. Khadr's actions in any way comparable to Adolf Hitler's? How can they be characterized as "evil"? He was a 15 year old boy who threw a grenade at a soldier (a member of an occupying military force which had, moments earlier, killed every member of his group of militants (but himself and one other). Obviously, the loss of the soldier's life was sad and regrettable. And perhaps it was even "criminal" (although I have my doubts). However, I don't see how it could be called "evil".

]I'm pretty sure of I'm 15 and some one is shooting at me I'm doing what I can to protect myself.

I've seen hundreds of documentarys of the war overseas. Even the good guys shot at civilians and kill them for as little as just being on the street, walking down the street, beimg in a building or driving a car .

No body on either side of the conflicts take any sort of a chance over there. Hard to fault a kid in his circumstance.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

No one would care if it ended with Omar Khadr came back to Canada. That happened 5 years ago and it was quickly forgotten. What pisses people off is that he got paid over 10 million when he was a bloody terrorist. Child terrorist or not, rights violated or not, he was a terrorist committing terrorist acts against western soldiers. The kid won the lottery coming back to Canada and getting a fresh start.

Do you not have any human empathy? Violated right or not ? Against western soldiers ?

I can't even begin to get into what is wrong with your rhetoric. I can't because it is infuriating and is the attitude that caused the destabilization in the region in the first place.

You use terrorist over and over but we are the terrorists in their country.

He was a child forced to do terrible things. They brainwash children the most because it is the easiest thing to do. What he did is awful but he didnt choose that life.

It is not right what happened but under the circumstances it is understandable of the out come.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!

But you don't have any concept of why he won the lottery coming back to Canada. Do you think it's because we live in nice houses here? Or because we have some pretty wicked junior hockey teams?

He won the lottery because we protect human rights. We could write this one off, tell him to pound sand, refuse to even hear his case. But then we'd be just like other crappy countries that are decidedly not the grand prize in any lottery.

Extactly. He " won" 10million dollars because we are a country that prides themselves on being better than the countries that hold less value on human rights.

He didn't so much "win" but more of Canada lost. We didn't uphold our integrity of being better than the evil out there. Our government sunk to the same low you would expect out of a rebel terrorist group. He didn't win anuthong we as a coumtry reconized our fault.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Zarley

I'd like to see the money go to the Speer family, I doubt it will happen though.

I'd like to see every dime go towards organizations that combat child solders, rehabilitate child soldiers and combat radicalization.

I feel bad for the speer family but we need to combat the problems at the root.

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

No one would care if it ended with Omar Khadr came back to Canada. That happened 5 years ago and it was quickly forgotten. What pisses people off is that he got paid over 10 million when he was a bloody terrorist. Child terrorist or not, rights violated or not, he was a terrorist committing terrorist acts against western soldiers. The kid won the lottery coming back to Canada and getting a fresh start.

Let's say that Khadr was in a car accident today. He was injured, and it was the other car's fault. He sues the other driver and settles on a $50,000 settlement.

Should Khadr be denied this settlement because he was a terrorist and committed terrorist acts against western soldiers?

The point being, the fact his rights were violated and he was tortured is a separate issue to the alleged grenade throwing that killed SFC Speer.

[Baron von Kriterium]

Originally Posted by blankall

It is against the laws of war to target a medic.

Yes. However, SOF medics are operators and carry weapons. They do not wear an easily recognizable red cross and they do not carry Geneva Convention cards. But I really do not believe Al-Qaeda, ISIS and other non-state actors really care about those particulars anyway. Furthermore, the SOF team was not in uniform; they were dressed like the locals which, if you think about it, violates one of the conditions of a lawful combatant: namely, a lawful combatant shall wear distinctive emblems easily recognizable at a distance (eg, a uniform).

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Baron von Kriterium

Yes. However, SOF medics are operators and carry weapons. They do not wear an easily recognizable red cross and they do not carry Geneva Convention cards. But I really do not believe Al-Qaeda, ISIS and other non-state actors really care about those particulars anyway. Furthermore, the SOF team was not in uniform; they were dressed like the locals which, if you think about it, violates one of the conditions of a lawful combatant: namely, a lawful combatant shall wear distinctive emblems easily recognizable at a distance (eg, a uniform).

Now now, let's not go confusing things with details. The good guys are soldiers at war, subject to the protection of the Geneva conventions. The bad guys are illegal enemy combatants.

[Northendzone]

are legal settlements like this subject to any taxation or did he get a cheque/wire transfer for the full $10,500,000 (or whatever the settlement was)?

or would he just be taxed on any interest gains from investments etc.

[Zarley]

It's interesting to see how negatively the public is viewing this settlement. There's strong opposition to it across all sectors.

The poll suggested 71 per cent of Canadians are of the opinion the Trudeau government should have fought Khadr’s lawsuit and left it to the courts to decide whether he deserved compensation and an apology.

Not surprisingly, 91 per cent of past Conservative supporters disagree with the decision.

More worrying for the Trudeau government is that 61 per cent of past Liberal voters also think the government did the wrong thing (along with 64 per cent of 2015 NDP supporters).

Link

The money is key: There’s a recoil at the $10.5-million settlement. A big chunk of those opposed to the settlement, 25 per cent of those surveyed, said they’d have offered Mr. Khadr an apology but no money. The payout may even have affected the way people view Mr. Khadr: Two years ago, when he was released from prison, 55 per cent said they thought he was a “potential radicalized threat now living in Canada.” Now, more people, 64 per cent, see him that way. “This settlement is affecting how Canadians view Omar Khadr,” said Shachi Kurl, executive director of the Angus Reid Institute.

Link

[Maritime Q-Scout]

Interesting article from Esprit de Corps a magazine dedicated to Canadian military issues.

It's short, and I do want to give you a warning; the banner picture is very graphic:

http://espritdecorps.ca/on-target-4/...ot-a-terrorist

[Baron von Kriterium]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

Now now, let's not go confusing things with details. The good guys are soldiers at war, subject to the protection of the Geneva conventions. The bad guys are illegal enemy combatants.

The Law of Armed Conflict and the Geneva Convention are unsuitable for modern war in the sense that, these days, modern warfare involves at least one non-state combatant. These laws were developed with western-style state vs state conflict in mind, not the kind of population-centric armed social work we carry out in contemporary counter-insurgency or the kind of "global counter-insurgency" we carry out in the course of modern counter-terrorism. Attempting to apply these antiquated laws in a war against the globalized influence of non-state actors such as Al Qaeda has limited our ability to carry out this war effectively.

What are Canadian soldiers supposed to do in a war where every detainee we take is an unlawful combatant? Are they all war criminals? Of course not! Most of them are just grunts without uniforms. It's unethical to treat them any less humanely than we would a uniformed enemy combatant. But, that’s my opinion.

Anyway, Khadr can feck right off as far as I am concerned, but I also understand why the SSC ruled the way they did. The issue is not about what Khadr did or did not do before capture; the issue is what happened to him after capture. The unfortunate truth is that Canadian and US governments fecked up and created this $h!t sandwich.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

are legal settlements like this subject to any taxation or did he get a cheque/wire transfer for the full $10,500,000 (or whatever the settlement was)?

No, legal settlements are non-taxable IIRC.

[OMG!WTF!]

Originally Posted by Parallex

No, legal settlements are non-taxable IIRC.

I was wondering about that. I thought some judgments were taxable, like if they have to do with loss of income. I think damages and injury awards are free and clear. Some have tax accounted for in the judgment. I'm sure this one is likely tax free.

[Coys1882]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

What pisses people off is that he got paid over 10 million when he was a bloody terrorist.

Soldier. Not terrorist. Just like my buddy's granddad who moved to Canada in the early 50s after fighting for Germany in WW2. Lived the rest of his life in the Kelowna area.