|
|
|
|
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/6/2007 8:03:40 PM |
this is a rediculous conversation the man has killed a solder a person from whom was tasked to help, u guys are obviously not the military, have your best buddy die infront of you then talk to me bout justice, there is a reason why this man is n trial and justice should served
Well, bud, you would be wrong. I can't speak for the others but I am a US vet, served in the Canadian military too, and I don't see it that way at all.
I would see it differently if he had surrendered and dropped a grenade as he was being taken under control (then it would be a crime) but that is not what happened. As it is, I don't see where it is any more acceptable for him to be tried for a crime under the circumstances than it would be if the shoe were on the other foot.
As a prisoner he is entitled to the same treatment I would expect for my own (and whether the other side affords that same treatment or not is irrelevant, a fundamental principle of proper military conduct).
If the US felt he was a criminal rather than a prisoner then they should have proceeded that way from the beginning (they had all of the means to do that from the start), not hold him for 5 years and then try to fiddle and finagle later. | |
|
| Bully for Omar Khadr
Posted: 6/6/2007 8:24:15 PM | Mungojoe, I just feel there are other people more worthy than this
family. Nothing feels better than poking Bushco in the eye but
we aren't talking about real home-grown Canadians here...he's no Maher Arar. When we piss
on the neo-con-Americans it's different than when some ungrateful anti-western
family coming here killing off American soldiers - although not Canadian, I suspect
it wouldn't have made an iota of difference if they turned out to be Canadian boys.
I'm an ex-soldier too and it sickens me to imagine that I could have been out
in the field and this sick puppy carrying a Canadian passport would throw
a grenade at me - essentially throwing a grenade at CANADA. This could have
easily been dubbed a UN-sanctioned war but by fault of Bush it wasn't, but
it wouldn't have made a difference to this worthless piece of shit.
Don't waste your time.....it's a wasted effort. They came here.....spat on us yet
refuse to go back to their homeland; if they loved it there so much, why not
stay in that hell hole? At least over there they wouldn't be treasonous pigs.
You think this puppy will have your back if ever there was war involving
Canadians? Or would he stick it in? Go back and read the quotes that spewed
from Kadhars mother...oh my God! They HATE YOU. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/6/2007 8:39:08 PM |
Don't waste your time.....it's a wasted effort.
I'll make one (and only one) post on the Khadr family.
I may not believe in all the things they believe but I'd defend to the death their right to believe as they choose (not to be confused with actually acting on those beliefs in a criminal way here, though even then I would defend their right to due process).
There is a reason (that has nothing to do with political correctness) for why they are still allowed to be here and it's closely related (if not identical) to the reason why they are under an RCMP/CSIS microscope. I doubt that you should have to think too hard to figure out what it is. | |
|
kursk
|
Joined: 1/12/2006
Msg: 29 | |
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 12:28:26 AM | "I may not believe in all the things they believe but I'd defend to the death their right to believe as they choose (not to be confused with actually acting on those beliefs in a criminal way here, though even then I would defend their right to due process)."
How very altruistic of you.The problem , though, is that they are not just voicing their opinion that Canada and the west is bad.They are proactively acting out against our Nation when they elicit money, train with terrorists , send their children to battle as cannon fodder, and treat our country as a way station on the road to Jihad.Your right to free speach ends when you infringe on my ability to go about my life in safety without fear of attack, mayhem and murder.
I DO NOT support the notion that it is your inalienable right to say anything you like in open society. There are limits to what is acceptable in open discourse, and as you know, you can't yell fire in a crowded theatre, nor call for the destruction of the state without there being consequences
I served in the CAF also, and you know full well that this manchild should have been considered a non uniformed enemy combatant.In all fairness he was acting as a partisan.In this case, he could have been summirarily executed one minute after throwing that grenade.
Perhaps that is their lot now..no rehabilitation will take place with these dead-enders, and it has been shown that when released, some went right back to the killing fields of Afghanistan.Did they play us for fools? Yes.Is Khadr and company playing us for fools?
Yes, absolutely.It is time to stop the merrey-go-round.Deal with him, park him somewhere dark and deport the family.Deport all those who wish us harm .In thought , in deed, you must go.It's time we took a very good look at who and what we are dealing with, and we can't be soft. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 12:46:59 AM | "We believe dying by the hand of your enemy because you believe in… you're doing it in the way of Allah, that it's the best way to die. My father had always wished that he would be killed… he would be killed for the sake of Allah. I remember when we were very young he would say, if you guys love me, pray for me that I get jihaded, which is killed." -- Khadr's daughter Zaynab, on her father
Exactly, I hope his kids are listening....the best thing they could do
is to die in Guantanomo Bay at the hands of their enemy - those are
the fathers words............so, we are waiting. It's "for the sake of Allah" and I
whole heartedly agree they should get their wish. It's good for them, good for
us...and I'm damn sure it's good for "allah". Let's all wish them luck in attaining
their goals. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 1:11:06 AM | An appeal to emotion does not a logical argument make.
Try to think objectively for a second. Say the US is taken over by (a different) nutjob and they ask Iran to help "liberate" the country from "terrorist republicans". Some random Texan lobs a grenade at an Iranian soldier, it caught and taken to a secret camp in Iran in violation of Iran's on (dubious) laws.
Do you want that American tried for murder and executed or do you want him, per the rules of international conflict, held until the war is over and then released.
Serious question. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 1:19:37 AM | ^^^^^^Wrong comparison. First, it would be odd if that good ol' boy decided pack his shit and move to
Iran after lobbing that grenade, wouldn't it? That's the point you're missing, I believe.
You wouldn't move your family to Satan Jr's pad after that. The Texan would either
move to Iran or Iraq...somehow I don't see that happening. What was the MISSION
in killing that soldier? That incident occurred in AFGHANISTAN where the
Pakistani nationals and Taliban were HIJACKING Afghanistan....so the soldiers, both
Canadian and American, were answering a distress call by the Afghan people. The
little shit was supporting the hijacking...he betrayed his country in Afghanistan
(treason) and he also betrayed Canada (treason). I say strip the citizenship and
hand them back to Afghanistan authorities....its their problem NOT our business.
Our hands would be clean of this mess once and for all.
| |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 5:14:24 AM | He can only be a prisoner of war if he was part of his countrys (Canada's) armed forces ..........he wasn't so he is a terrorist .
DUAL CITIZENS
Now I know what that is ..lol....what I question is where people are saying that some Lebanese people have Canadian citzenship without having worked there,paid taxes there etc etc
CAN SOMEONE TAKE A MINUTE TO EXPLAIN THAT ? | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 5:16:09 AM |
First, it would be odd if that good ol' boy decided pack his shit and move to
Iran after lobbing that grenade, wouldn't it? That's the point you're missing, I believe.
You wouldn't move your family to Satan Jr's pad after that. The Texan would either
move to Iran or Iraq...somehow I don't see that happening. What was the MISSION
in killing that soldier? That incident occurred in AFGHANISTAN where the
Pakistani nationals and Taliban were HIJACKING Afghanistan....so the soldiers, both
Canadian and American, were answering a distress call by the Afghan people.
OK, now your just full of sh*t.
The Taliban was the government of Afghanistan at the time the family went there (from Canada). The Taliban had assumed gov't with immense majority support of the people of Afghanistan. It may have evolved into a gov't that many were not happy with but the Taliban's beliefs and agenda were an open book at the time they took power (with the support of most of the country).
There was no international cry by the people of Afghanistan to have the west come over and "save us from the Taliban". The coalition went to Afghanistan and overthrew the Taliban in the process of trying to eliminate al-Qaeda. That was not a necessary step as al-Qaeda could have been removed (with a lot less turmoil for Afghanistan) by a combination of spec ops forces and air/missile strikes without removing the Taliban (that was the job of the people of Afghanistan since they supported the Taliban in the first place).
To try and remake the events to show Khadr as a traitor is the height of disingenuousness. If the action against al-Qaeda had been taken without the additional agenda of going after a fundamentalist Muslim gov't at the same time the issue would not exist. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 8:16:10 AM | | If,If,If. If the Kadhr family hadn't packed up Canada and shuffled off to Afghanistan to become martyrs then this issue would not exist.This family were not hillbillies moving to Beverly Hills or Little Mosque on the Prairie type people. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 1:19:54 PM |
I would see it differently if he had surrendered and dropped a grenade as he was being taken under control
the US soldiers were too civilised for their own good; had they simply busted a cap into Khadr's head none of us would have known, and there'd be no problem, no discussion or argument.
the Leb/Cdn. dual citizens could have lived in canada for 3 yrs, then got citizenship (all you need) or been born to one parent who is Lebanese and one Cdn., or born of Leb. parents on Cdn. soil, then leave and go back to Lebanon..no need to pay any taxes, etc. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 1:40:36 PM |
If,If,If. If the Kadhr family hadn't packed up Canada and shuffled off to Afghanistan to become martyrs then this issue would not exist.This family were not hillbillies moving to Beverly Hills or Little Mosque on the Prairie type people.
Irrelevant.
They are (or were in the case of the dead ones) Muslim. They believed in Islam for Muslims in Muslim countries and they went to a Muslim country with a Muslim gov't that rose to power with the support of the majority of the population to fight for that belief. That does not make them criminals nor does fighting for that gov't in that country make Omar a criminal.
If they had taken that fight to a non-Muslim country with a non-Muslim majority that did not have a Muslim gov't which rose to power with the support of the majority of the population I would see it differently.
They have not done that nor have they vowed to, or advocated for, the overthrow of the Canadian gov't. Until they do that they are fully entitled to their belief.
As example, I am thoroughly opposed to the US/British action in Iraq but I do not consider the US/British who go to fight there in the belief that it is right are criminals (I think they are misguided and wrong in their belief but not criminals) nor do I believe that those who fight against the US/British forces in an effort to defend Iraq are criminal for fighting for their belief (that the US/British have no business being there). Even if I did agree with the action I would still not consider those that oppose it and engage the US/British forces in an effort to defend Iraq to be criminals
If the populace in a Muslim country with a vastly Muslim majority want a fundamentalist Muslim gov't and there is a sufficient majority to support the rise of such a gov't to power then that is their right, no matter what we think of about it. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 2:11:59 PM | 36
Thanks for that information re @dual citizen of Canada .............so if they have lived in Canada for 3 years .........do they need to have worked and paid taxes in Canada to get the passport ? During those 3 years ? And if they then decide to live in Lebanan or wherever...........whats the procedure for their contining to be counted as Canadian in case of intervention like someone pointed out. How can they just come back and access welfare or medical services ? Mind you..............if refugees can access services at least these are citizens .
Has it ever been known that some criminal or terrorist related persons such as these have had their citizenship overturned and themselves deported ? Or those who provide false papers or information to gain entry ...do they get deported ?
Thats what should happen to the Khadr family because they are so vocal in their support for the other side . | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 2:46:41 PM | He can only be a prisoner of war if he was part of his countrys (Canada's) armed forces ..........he wasn't so he is a terrorist .
Fortunately or unfortunately (depending on your perspective) that is not even close to true.
The classification is applicable to a range of individuals from uniformed military to "joe blow" in the countryside who takes up arms (and need not be uniformed for obvious reasons, like hasn't got 3+ months to get kitted out and go through training) to fight an invading force. Citizenship in the country invaded is not a requirement.
Has it ever been known that some criminal or terrorist related persons such as these have had their citizenship overturned and themselves deported ? Or those who provide false papers or information to gain entry ...do they get deported ?
It has happened many times, they'll even go back years to do so. People who have resided in Canada as citizens for decades have been stripped of citizenship and deported for some/all of those reasons.
This family has been under the scrutiny of the RCMP for years and thoroughly investigated. The fact that they are still citizens should be a hint (that there are no legal grounds sufficient to warrant removing citizenship/deportation).
Advocating doing so because of unpopular or unpalatable beliefs and opinions without sufficient proof of a criminal act smacks of "Bush-league" politics. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 2:54:28 PM | Sorry,how could anyone get it so wrong,the Taliban are not terrorists/criminals,they're misunderstood freedom fighters/holy warriors who
abide by the Geneva convention, wear uniforms , don't attack civilians,they don't chop the heads off their prisoners,they carry their arms openly,they don't torture prisoners,they don't have public executions,they havn't banned kite-flying television,music and the Internet,they treat women with respect by not allowing girls to attend school,work outside of home,leave home without a male upon penalty of death,chop their fingertips off for wearing nail polish.
This is the Kadhr and Taliban family creed and they would rather die and have died to maintain control over a traumatized afghani people.
It was Canada's fault for trusting the elder Kadhr's contention that he was in Afghanistan helping orphans. Had Canada been less naive and politically correct perhaps Omar wouldn't be in Guantanamo now.
" Khadr, who called himself a Canadian aid worker, was wanted for his
suspected ties to Osama Bin Laden.
In 1996, Khadr was arrested in Pakistan on suspicion of financing the
bombing of the Egyptian Embassy in Islamabad. His arrest, which
coincided with a "Team Canada" trade visit, was raised by former prime
minister Jean Chrétien with the Pakistani prime minister.
Khadr was released a short time later. "
It seems that there is a certain bleeding heart portion of the Canadian population who believe that the Afghani people accepted living under a criminal, murderous regime such as the Taliban because they are Muslim and the UN forces are the oppresors. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 11:04:30 PM | Shano it does go both ways, there were some Yankee cowboys popping off rounds too.
That's war, it sucks and people die. Okay you want that kid charged with murder then charge every allied soldier that has made a kill in combat aswell, and especially the pilots that can't hit their target but sure as shit can hit a school or church.
Omar is a creepy little guy and would rather not have him as a fellow countryman to be honest, but torturing 15 year old kids, held without charges for an indefinate period, then when charges are brought the defence is not allowed to even know what evidence will be used against the accused ..... Makes the US just as bad of a state as the old Taliban regime. And hypocritic to boot. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 11:32:34 PM |
Sorry,how could anyone get it so wrong,the Taliban are not terrorists/criminals,they're misunderstood freedom fighters/holy warriors who
abide by the Geneva convention, wear uniforms , don't attack civilians,they don't chop the heads off their prisoners,they carry their arms openly,they don't torture prisoners,they don't have public executions,they havn't banned kite-flying television,music and the Internet,they treat women with respect by not allowing girls to attend school,work outside of home,leave home without a male upon penalty of death,chop their fingertips off for wearing nail polish.
This is the Kadhr and Taliban family creed and they would rather die and have died to maintain control over a traumatized afghani people.
How nice of you to resort to your typical strawman argument.
I can't find anything, in any post, that says or suggests what you have said. However, to address some of your points.
At the time of the invasion the Taliban were not terrorist/criminals, they were the de-facto government of Afghanistan, a position which they obtained with the support of the majority of the population of Afghanistan. What they wore was, by default, the uniform (whether you and I think it looks like our idea of a military uniform is irrelevant. It is, in fact, no different from what the majority of the Northern Alliance (coalition allies) wore (I find it funny that it is a uniform when our allies wear basically whatever but not when the enemy wears it). They did carry their weapons openly and whether or not they treated any prisoners by the Geneva Convention is a moot point since they were never able to take enough prisoners for that to be determined.
Whether or not they execute criminals, how they do it or why is a matter for the laws of that land and not something they have to answer to us for. Let's not forget that, at the time of the invasion many US states had the death penalty for many crimes, many of them allowed for the execution of juveniles (thankfully since struck down by SCOTUS) and even the mentaly retarded. Is that realy any more moral?
As for the laws they had, how those laws considered women and what they banned, again a case of their country, their laws. At the time the Taliban came to power (with the support of the majority of the populace) their position on such things was no secret. They were absolutely open in their desire to enact and enforce extremely strict Sharia law. This was known and still they were supported. It is not for you or I to decide that another populace does not have the sovereign authority to establish such laws in their own land (isn't that the SAME argument we use against establishing Sharia law in Canada?).
How they behave in combat now is absolutely irrelevant to the situation 5 years ago and that is the time frame we are talking about. At that time the current government did not exist and the Taliban and those who fought alonside them were still at war with the coalition forces and a minority group of rebel elements allied to the coalition.
If the handgrenade thrown by Khadr had been thrown this year (last year, after the new constitution or popularly elected gov't) it might be an entirely different story but that is NOT what happened. Events of 5 years ago cannot be legitimately viewed through the lens of today. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/7/2007 11:57:10 PM | funny how the yanky soldiers were perfectly free to murder this young mans 4 friends and they go off scott free, but gawd help ou if u try to defend yourself against a bunch of maraurding invaders
so one yank soldier got kilt big bloody deal
what about the 4 guys they murdered
if they were justified in killing them then in thier own actions is their reward returned
they werent killed on us soil they were killed on foreign soil
soil they invaded
whether they felt justified in being there because their gov told em to b there or not they got what they deserved
i dont care if ur taliban or american its all the same thing in the end
violent pig headed stubborn greedy **stards all trying to push forth their own ideas and laws
the american people are the ones to blame in the end no matter how u look at the story, they elected this bush dictator ,
now he wants to start another war with russia or restart a cold war with his inept so called missile shield
btw who the hell is firing missiles anyways? in like 30 yrs has any nation sent an icbm at another nation?
what happened to the yankies last missile shield they stuck up in canada
oh yeah its still there leaking toxic waste into northern canada ,
maybe someone should tell bush that icbms and nukes arent efficient means in this day and age to attack another country
especially since itd b a hell of a lot easier to pack em in suitcases orassemblethem in the country and not leave any warning at all
besides in this day and age to destroy another nation u just have to attack their computers or destroy them thru the banking system
bombs are counter productive | |
|
| |
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/8/2007 9:30:31 AM | Mungo:
"At the time of the invasion the Taliban were not terrorist/criminals, they were the de-facto government of Afghanistan, a position which they obtained with the support of the majority of the population of Afghanistan"
Claiming a majority is a totally ridiculous statement,here's a history lesson:
Taliban
Encyclopedia Article
Article Outline
Introduction; Origins and Rise to Power; Taliban Regime; Collapse of the Taliban Regime
I Introduction
Taliban, Islamic fundamentalist movement in Afghanistan that controlled most of the country from September 1996 to November 2001. The Taliban movement was created in 1994 by a senior mullah (Islamic priest), Mohammed Omar, in the southern Afghanistan city of Kandahār. The name Taliban, meaning “student,” refers to the movement’s origins in Islamic religious schools, or madrasas, although most members knew war all their lives and attended the madrasas only for rudimentary religious training.
II Origins and Rise to Power
The Taliban movement emerged out of the chaos and uncertainty of the Afghan-Soviet War (1979-1989) and subsequent civil war in Afghanistan. During the 1980s Afghanistan was occupied by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) and ruled by a Soviet-backed government. Afghanistan’s long war with the USSR was largely fought by mujahideen (Islamic guerrilla) factions with assistance from the United States; Pakistan also provided places of refuge, military training, and other support. After the Soviets completed their withdrawal in 1989, civil war broke out between the mujahideen factions and the central government. Afghanistan’s central government had long been dominated by the country’s majority ethnic group, the Pashtuns, but after the Soviet withdrawal a coalition government that included Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras, and other minority groups came to power. The Taliban emerged as a faction of mujahideen soldiers who identified themselves as religious students. The Taliban consisted mostly of Pashtuns intent on once again dominating the central government in Kābul. They were trained and armed by the Frontier Constabulary, a quasi-military unit in Pakistan, which also has a significant Pashtun population. The Taliban actively recruited thousands of young men in the Afghan refugee camps and the madrasas in Pakistan. Many war orphans also joined the movement. The Taliban promoted itself as a new force for peace and unity, and many war-weary Afghan people, particularly Pashtuns, supported the Taliban in hopes of respite from years of war.
In late 1994 and early 1995 the Taliban moved through the south and west of Afghanistan, taking control of Kandahār and many other towns and cities dominated by fellow Pashtuns. Herāt and most of the other towns along the main southern and western highway soon followed. In February 1995 the Taliban reached the outskirts of Kābul but was ousted by government forces in March. Again it advanced to the capital in October. While continuing to assault Kābul with rockets and bombs, Taliban soldiers advanced and took control of eastern Afghanistan, as well as the country’s central area. The Taliban continued its siege of Kābul off and on throughout 1996 until it was able to advance and capture the city in September. Government troops and officials, including President Burhanuddin Rabbani and Prime Minister Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, fled to the northern part of the country. Shortly after the capital fell to the Taliban, the country’s last Soviet-backed president, Mohammad Najibullah, and his brother, security chief Shahpur Ahmadzai, were seized and publicly hanged.
III Taliban Regime
After taking over Kābul, Taliban leaders began to institute an uncompromising regime. Their basic premise was to enforce a purist way of life based on their fundamentalist interpretation of Islam. They immediately created the Ministry for Ordering What Is Right and Forbidding What Is Wrong to impose and enforce their rules of conduct. Mohammed Omar led the Taliban as Amir-ul-Momineen (Commander of the Faithful). He was the supreme leader in a strictly hierarchical system of rule. He was advised on various matters by members of special shuras (councils) composed of high-ranking Taliban leaders. Ultimately Omar was the only individual who could issue an official edict. Many of the Taliban edicts had little to do with pure Islam or the teachings of the Qur'an and were actually based in ancient tribal rules and customs. Most of the rules reflected a disenchantment with modern life. The Taliban continually issued new rules and used Radio Kābul and trucks equipped with loudspeakers to announce them. The rules of conduct eventually covered almost every aspect of social behavior by the population, even forbidding things such as clapping, kite flying, and squeaky shoes.
The Taliban banned music and dancing, shut down movie theaters and television stations, destroyed public works of art that depicted living beings, and forbade the consumption of alcoholic beverages. Men were ordered to grow full, untrimmed beards (in accordance with orthodox Islam) and were rounded up and beaten with sticks in an effort to force prayer in the mosques. The Taliban strongly enforced the ancient custom of purdah, the veiling and seclusion of women from men. Women were ordered to cover themselves from head to toe in burkas (long, tentlike veils). Girls’ schools were closed, and women were forbidden to work outside their homes. As a result, hospitals lost almost all their staffs and children in orphanages were abandoned. In a country where hundreds of thousands of men had been killed in warfare, widows found themselves unable to work to provide basic necessities for their families.
The Taliban religious police enforced the new rules and punished anyone found disobeying. They inflicted many of the punishments on the spot, usually ruthlessly, without offering the offender any sort of judicial hearing. The Taliban allowed public beatings and stonings, sometimes fatal, of women who violated the dress code or were escorted by men not related to them. Any person found not praying at the required times was imprisoned. The Taliban leaders also mandated specific punishments for other types of crimes. They made murder, adultery, and drug dealing punishable by death, and theft punishable by amputation of the hand. Many of the Taliban laws and punishments alarmed human-rights groups and provoked worldwide condemnation.
The Taliban takeover of Kābul in 1996 paved the way for additional territorial conquests, and Taliban soldiers advanced north toward the mountain strongholds of the Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Hazaras. By the late 1990s the Taliban had taken control of almost all of Afghanistan. Opposition forces, commonly known as the Northern Alliance, held a small portion of the country’s territory in the north. Most countries did not recognize the Taliban regime as the legitimate government of Afghanistan.
IV Collapse of the Taliban Regime
The Taliban regime provided safe harbor for Osama bin Laden, a militant Islamic leader who was identified by the United States as the mastermind of terrorist attacks against U.S. embassies in Africa in 1998 and U.S. landmarks in the United States on September 11, 2001. After the 2001 attacks, which killed thousands of people, the United States declared a war on terrorism. Taliban leaders refused U.S. demands to surrender bin Laden, and in October the United States began aerial bombings of terrorist training camps and Taliban military positions. Ground troops of the Northern Alliance, meanwhile, continued their front-line offensive against Taliban forces in northern Afghanistan. The Taliban lost its hold on power in November when the Northern Alliance, aided by U.S.-led bombardments, captured Kābul and other key cities. The Taliban surrendered its traditional stronghold of Kandahār in early December 2001.
Mungo:
"They did carry their weapons openly and whether or not they treated any prisoners by the Geneva Convention is a moot point since they were never able to take enough prisoners for that to be determined"
Roadside bombs are open weapons? Perhaps they didn't take enough prisoners for that to be determined is because captured prisoners had their heads chopped off?
Mungo:
"As for the laws they had, how those laws considered women and what they banned, again a case of their country, their laws. At the time the Taliban came to power (with the support of the majority of the populace) their position on such things was no secret. They were absolutely open in their desire to enact and enforce extremely strict Sharia law. This was known and still they were supported"
Yet again you state as fact that the majority of Afghans wanted their women's fingers cut off for using nail polish, they were absolutely open to having their fatherless children starving because their mothers would be murdered if they worked or ventured outside of their homes,they supported being buried up to their neck or being stoned in soccer stadiums by the tens of thousands for hiding family photographs or reading a book other than the Qur'an.
How do you know so much about the Afghan people and their desires?
Mungo:
"Events of 5 years ago cannot be legitimately viewed through the lens of today. "
George Santayana:
Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
The Kadhr family is proud of being Taliban terrorists,so much so that they are willing to be martyred.That's a proven fact.
I know it'll never happen, but just once I'd love to see a revisionist bleeding heart take personal responsibility(house,feed,clothe and pay legal bills) for someone like Omar and his family. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/8/2007 1:51:19 PM |
Claiming a majority is a totally ridiculous statement,here's a history lesson:
Well, how about this...
Taliban
Origins
The Taliban initially had enormous goodwill from Afghans weary of the corruption, brutality and incessant fighting of Mujahideen warlords. Two contrasting narratives of the beginnings of the Taliban are that the rape and murder of boys and girls from a family traveling to Kandahar or a similar outrage by Mujahideen bandits sparked Mullah Omar and his students to vow to rid Afghanistan of these criminals. The other is that the Pakistan-based lorry shipping mafia known as the "Afghanistan Transit Trade" and their allies in the Pakistan government, trained, armed and financed the Taliban to clear the southern road across Afghanistan to the Central Asian Republics of extortionate bandit gangs. In either or both cases, the Taliban were based in the Helmand, Kandahar and Uruzgan region, and were overwhelmingly ethnic Pashtuns and predominantly Durrani Pashtuns. They received training and arms from Pakistan although they retained some independence, often refusing the advice of the Pakistan government.
The first major military activity of the Taliban was in October-November 1994 when they marched from Maiwand in southern Afghanistan to capture Kandahar City and the surrounding provinces, losing only a few dozen men. Starting with the capture of a border crossing and a huge ammunition dump from warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a couple weeks later they freed "a convoy trying to open a trade route from Pakistan to Central Asia" from another group of warlords attempting to extort money. In the next three months this hitherto "unknown force" took control of twelve of Afghanistan's 34 provinces, with Mujahideen warlords often surrendering to them without a fight and the "heavily armed population" giving up their weapons. By September 1996 they captured Afghanistan's capital, Kabul.
That is just a short one, I can come up with many others. I will also point out the following parts of the article you posted...
The Taliban actively recruited thousands of young men in the Afghan refugee camps
Many war orphans also joined the movement
many war-weary Afghan people, particularly Pashtuns, supported the Taliban in hopes of respite from years of war
So, lets see, between the two...
enormous goodwill
thousands of recruits
warlords often surrenduring without a fight
population giving up their weapons willingly
hopes of respite from years of war
main support base in the Pashtuns (Afghanistan's majority population)
...Sounds an awful lot like majority support to me. But then I suppose you are privy to some "secret code" in the words that means the opposite.
Yet again you state as fact that the majority of Afghans wanted their women's fingers cut off for using nail polish, they were absolutely open to having their fatherless children starving because their mothers would be murdered if they worked or ventured outside of their homes,they supported being buried up to their neck or being stoned in soccer stadiums by the tens of thousands for hiding family photographs or reading a book other than the Qur'an.
How do you know so much about the Afghan people and their desires?
Again with your strawman arguments. I never said the majority supported the Taliban because they wanted those things. What I said was that the Taliban's beliefs were well known and, whether the majority wanted those things or not, the one thing they can't plead is a lack of "truth in advertising" although, if you look at the tribal codes of Afghanistan's majority population you will find much of those notions of honor and justice there. Your proof is found in the very article you posted.
were actually based in ancient tribal rules and customs
Next
Roadside bombs are open weapons?
Boobytraps and ambushes (both hidden and secretive by their very definition) are absolutely legitimate combat tactics. Every military in the world is trained to employ exactly those tactics (but again, I guess it's OK if we use those tactics when we deem it necessary but the enemy isn't allowed to).
Perhaps they didn't take enough prisoners for that to be determined is because captured prisoners had their heads chopped off?
Please, provide me with specific examples of this being used as a wide spread (or even frequent) practice in Afghanistan. I think you are confusing Afghanistan with Iraq.
George Santayana:
Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
And that has what to do with Omar Khadr's status (or even my statement you responded to with it)?
I know it'll never happen, but just once I'd love to see a revisionist bleeding heart take personal responsibility(house,feed,clothe and pay legal bills) for someone like Omar and his family.
Again, that has what to do with it?
Your constant use of illogical statements, rampant emotionalism and irrelevant arguments doesn't help you to make your case.
Not only have you failed to make a case for Omar Khadr's guilt (or even suspicion) of murder and war crimes, you have actually bolstered the case against it. | |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/8/2007 3:08:38 PM | Do you have sources that validate suicide bombers as being allowed by the Geneva Convention?Do you know how many Canadian soldiers and Afghani civilians have been killed by suicide bombers in Afghanistan?
Defend the Kadhr family and Taliban terrorists as brave freedom fighters all you please,the UN troops in Afghanistan are defending your right to do so.
| |
|
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/8/2007 4:07:10 PM |
Do you have sources that validate suicide bombers as being allowed by the Geneva Convention?Do you know how many Canadian soldiers and Afghani civilians have been killed by suicide bombers in Afghanistan?
???
Have you no ability to focus on relevant points?
What the h*ll does this have to do with Omar Khadr (who was not a suicide bomber nor were any members of the family) and the events of 5 years ago (when suicide bombing was not a tactic employed by the Taliban)?
Defend the Kadhr family and Taliban terrorists as brave freedom fighters all you please
Again with the strawman argument.
Where have I ever said the Khadr family or Taliban were "brave freedom fighters"?
Please, oh please, show me where I have said this (of course you can't because that interpretation exists only in your own mind).
the UN troops in Afghanistan are defending your right to do so
No they're not. Not Khadr, his family nor the Taliban have never presented a real, present or practicable threat to the collective rights of Canadians (or the west).
Again, you seem incapable of arguing your point without resorting to irrelevant, illogical or irrational points.
Is your attachment to your point realy so desperate?
How much longer until it reaches the point where it becomes "Oh yeah, well you're a poo-poo head"?
Your argument gets weaker and more desperate with each post.
None of this has anything to do with Omar Khadr and the events of 5 years ago that lead to his detention on charges which have failed before a US military court.
Don't you think that they, of all people, would be most likely consider it from the same point of view as you (and yet they don't) rather than insisting on due process and professional military conduct and values (which they do)?
Oh, wait, I am getting a vision...
Yes, it's coming to me now...
They are liberal, bleeding-heart, anti-American, activist military judges who don't support the troops. | |
|
| |
| Canada known around the World as soft-touch Suckers
Posted: 6/8/2007 6:21:52 PM |
I don't get it. I always thought of Canada as the cool chick that lives upstairs.
Yes ,,,, but Canada has a the Khadr Family .... who are an Al Qaeda family ...
Khadr's father moved his family to Afghanistan, where they lived in Osama bin Laden's compound, and played with bin Laden's children.[4] Khadr's father has been described as one of bin Laden's senior lieutenants.
Omar Ahmed Khadr born September 19, 1986 in Ottawa, is a Canadian who was captured by American forces in Afghanistan when he was 15 years of age. His case has drawn considerable attention as a child soldier, and he is among the youngest prisoners held in extrajudicial detention in the Guantánamo Bay detainment camps, in Cuba.
On June 4, 2007, a military court dismissed all charges against Khadr because of a procedural flaw - the court was authorized to try unlawful enemy combatants, but an earlier review had labeled Khadr as merely enemy combatant[1]. This may have wider ramifications on U.S. policy regarding other Guantanamo Bay detainees[2].
Khadr's Guantanamo detainee ID is 766.
Omar Khadr
[edit] Life in Canada
Omar Khadr, like all six children in the Khadr family, was born in Canada, and both parents were Canadian citizens. During most of the time the family was living in Scarborough, Ontario, the father Ahmed Said Khadr was working in Afghanistan.[3]
In 1992 Ahmed Said Khadr was wounded by a land-mine, and spent a year back in Canada recovering his health.
[edit] Life in bin Laden's compound
Khadr's father moved his family to Afghanistan, where they lived in Osama bin Laden's compound, and played with bin Laden's children.[4] Khadr's father has been described as one of bin Laden's senior lieutenants.
Omar's older brother Abdurahman Khadr described being sent to military training camps shortly after his arrival, when he was just eleven years old. All of the Khadr boys are believed to have military training while they were children.
[edit] Capture
On July 27, 2002, 15-year-old Khadr was in a compound near Khost that was surrounded by US special forces. According to the US version of events, the Americans called on those in the compound to surrender. When they refused, a firefight ensued. Sergeant Layne Morris was injured early in the skirmish. The Americans called in a bombardment.
Most press accounts of the skirmish say that Khadr killed a "medic", implying that he had attacked a noncombatant after giving his surrender, but although Sgt. Christopher Speer had been trained as a medic, he was actually leading the squad combing the compound after they believed all occupants had been killed.
Khadr leapt from hiding and threw a grenade, which injured Sgt. Speer and led to his death, and injured three other members of the squad.[3] Omar was shot three times, and left nearly blind in one eye. He was subsequently treated and his life was saved by U.S. medics.
[edit] Accusations against Khadr
The Americans claim to have found a video-tape in the ruins that shows Khadr planting mines. They say that while being interrogated at Bagram Air Base, Khadr confessed to entering a US occupied section of Afghanistan, to gather surveillance intelligence on the local airport.
[edit] Incarceration at Guantánamo Bay
There were other child detainees incarcerated at Guantánamo Bay. Three of them were kept in a smaller compound, Camp Iguana, where they were allegedly treated humanely. They were not required to wear the orange coveralls. They were provided with school teachers, and recreation. The BBC interviewed one 13-year-old child detainee upon his return to Afghanistan. He had learned to read at Camp Iguana. The two years he spent there were the only education he had ever had, and he reported being sorry to leave.
Elaine Chao the US Secretary of Labor has spoken about the responsibility to give child soldiers special treatment, to provide help for them to re-integrate into society.[5] She announced a $3 million program to help re-integrate child-soldiers in Afghanistan back into Afghan society.
However, Khadr was treated as an adult. Khadr has been reported to have been kept in solitary confinement, for long periods of time [1]; to have been denied adequate medical treatment; to have been subjected to "short shackling" [2], and left bound, in uncomfortable "stress positions" until he soiled himself [3]. In a press conference on January 16, 2005, Khadr's lawyers described how Khadr's captors took Khadr's still bound body and wiped his hair and clothes in his urine and feces.[citation needed]
Bryan Del Monte, the Department of Defense deputy director for political development and international issues in the Office of Detainee Affairs, gave a press conference following his return from testifying before the United Nations Committee against torture. [6] During this press conference he asserted that Khadr, and two other youths, were incarcerated separately from adults, and were provided with daily lessons:
"Del Monte said that those in charge of the Guantanamo detention camp provide the three youngsters with lessons every morning in Mathematics, English, Sciences, and other subjects for their mental and psychological needs in addition to teaching physical fitness and sports."
Del Monte's assertion stands in contrast to the other accounts of Khadr's incarceration, where he has been described as leading the prayer sessions of the other detainees in his cell block.
[edit] Khadr's Combatant Status Review
Khadr's case was reviewed by the Combatant Status Review Tribunal on September 8, 2004. The review released a one page summary of their conclusions on September 17, 2004. Khadr's lawyers had written him a letter, recommending that he refrain from cooperating with the tribunal, or any questioning conducted without adequate legal representation.[citation needed]
The tribunal concluded that Khadr was an "illegal combatant".
At the time of his hearing Khadr had not been allowed to meet with any lawyer and no consideration was given to the fact he was a child soldier at the time of the attack.
[edit] Access to lawyers and family
Omar Khadr's brother Abdurahman Khadr claimed in the documentary Son of al Qaeda that he talked with Omar over a fence in 2003. At the time, Abdurahman was a prisoner at Guantanamo as well, though he later claimed that he was there on a mission for the American Central Intelligence Agency. Omar reportedly told Abdurahman to stick to a previously agreed-upon story that the family had no connections to Al Qaeda, and that his health was fine.
A June 15, 2005 article in Newsday cited Muneer Ahmad's experience as an example of the difficulties the Pentagon presented to detainees' lawyers.[7] Ahmad also reported that Khadr had described extensive abusive treatment to him, but that when he arrived at the Virginia security centre, all twenty pages of his notes had been redacted.
Mr Ahmad's first meeting with Khadr was not until November 2004. Khadr has still not been permitted to speak with the Canadian lawyers who were his family's first choice. [CBCNews] reported that Khadr was finally permitted to speak with his mother by phone in March, 2007, after approximately five years of detainment.
[edit] Hunger Strikes
On September 1, 2005, the Globe and Mail reported that Dennis Edney, one of Khadr's Canadian lawyers reported that Khadr was participating in a second hunger strike.[8] Khadr participated in the 200-member hunger strike that occurred in late June and July. The Globe article reports that lawyers said Khadr's first hunger strike lasted 15 days, and that prison authorities administered intravenous fluid. Khadr reported collapsing as he left the hospital, and that his guards administered a brutal beating [4].
On September 11, 2005, The Independent published an extract from Guantánamo detainee Omar Deghayes. On July 20, 2005, he wrote about Khadr:[9]
Omar Khadr [the Canadian juvenile] is very sick in our block. He is throwing [up] blood. They gave him cyrum [serum] when they found him on the floor in his cell. Galib Fiyhani also.
[edit] Khadr Military Commission
On November 7, 2005, Khadr and nine other Guantanamo inmates were charged to be tried by "Military Commission", but the commission was struck down as unlawful by the US Supreme Court in 2006. After the MCA was signed in October 2006, new charges were sworn against Khadr on February 2, 2007. Khadr also petitioned the US Supreme Court to review the legality of the military commission and his detention, but this request was denied April, 2007.
[edit] First round of charges on November 7, 2005
Khadr was charged with murder for his actions against the squad inside the compound near Khost, Afghanistan. The charges against Mr. Khadr allege that his father, the late Ahmed Said Khadr, a Canadian Islamic extremist, was a close friend of Osama bin Laden and his Egyptian deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri, and that Omar Khadr also was acquainted with Mr. bin Laden, the Al Qaeda leader.[10]
On November 9, 2005, the Globe and Mail reported that the United States had informally indicated they would not seek the death penalty in Omar's trial. [11] On December 1, 2005 the officers were appointed to the Guantanamo military commission that would judge Khadr.[12]
[edit] The Speer/Morris lawsuit
Tabitha Speer, Sergeant Speer's widow, and Sergeant Layne Morris, launched a civil suit against the estate of Ahmed Said Khadr, Omar Khadr's father. They argue that as Khadr was a child, his parents were responsible for his actions, and that since his parents should have kept him from picking up a gun on the battlefield, they were responsible for any wounds he inflicted. Normally, under US law, one can't sue for damages that were caused by "acts of war". Speer and Morris argue that Khadr was engaged in an act of terrorism, not an act of war.
They have described the law-suit as "an attempt to attack terrorism in its bank account".
[edit] Gag order on his military Counsel
Sergeant Heather Cerveny, the paralegal for Colby Vokey, Khadr's military lawyer, issued an affidavit reporting that off-duty Guantanamo guards had bragged to her of abusing detainees. On October 14, 2006 Vokey's boss imposed a gag order on the two while the matter is investigated.[20] | |
|
|
| Page 2 of 5
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 |
|
Home
login 
