What did you expect? Your position is basically that this dude isn’t entitled to a fair trial or any other civil liberties because he’s a Bad Man. The problem is that you don’t know that he’s a Bad Man because he hasn’t actually had a trial. He claims that he agreed to plead guilty just to get out of Gitmo, which is hardly an unreasonable supposition.
Where did I say he isn’t entitled to a fair trial? I’m saying he should be charged with the crime of treason and defending that position.
Mines don’t deliberately try to kill you. Nor am I asking for reverence. I got out of the military because of the drunken clots who were in there with me, but I still respected them for what they may have been called upon to do. The one thing they do deserve is the support of their government to keep guys like Omar off the streets that they were fighting to protect.
A fair trial starts with the Crown’s duty of fairness: the Crown should only proceed to trial if there is a reasonable likelihood of conviction. If that standard is not met, the accused is not getting a fair trial.
You have repeatedly stated that you think Khadr should be charged, even if there is no likelihood if conviction, because you think charges would show support for the military.
No person should be charged with a meritless charge for a political reason. That is not a fair trial.
[QUOTE=Uzi]
The one thing they do deserve is the support of their government to keep guys like Omar off the streets that they were fighting to protect.
[/QUOTE]
Again, you are arguing that a person should be charged and put in jail for a political reason, not because the person has been proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
No, I have argued that I believe he can be convicted. Your argument than he wouldn’t be convicted is your opinion. I’d prefer to let the courts decide as he meets the spirit of what the law was drafted for.
Again, it is your opinion that he wouldn’t be convicted.
I am arguing that the government should attempt to get a conviction using this law. If they can’t, then they should change the law to allow for guys like this to be charged in the future.
Guys like this? How many 15-year-old Canadians with parents in leadership roles in terrorist organizations do you think there are out there?
Canadians who would aid our enemies against us. Or shouldn’t that be a crime?
If it’s a free adult, sure. If it’s a kid indoctrinated by his parents, not sure at all.
A problem I see in cases like this is that its basically impossible for the Prosecution to do due diligance because 1)They dont have access to crime scenes and witnesses 2)these arent crimes committed in local jurisdictions. The very act of going to a foreign country and taking up arms is tacit proof that they have gone beyond posturing to actual criminal intent to kill and should be evidence enough to convict on conspiracy to commit murder. A 15 year old isnt a child.
Of course he is indoctrinated. Everyone of them is. That is the nature of religion. ALL religions. Muslims, unfortunately, are subject to a special brand of crazy at the moment. You’re just focused on his age.
It’s a mad world
Omar suing Canada for $20M because of what the Americans did to him. Wife of slain soldier suing Omar for $45M and has already won a judgement for $102M against the father. The Canadian government supports her efforts.
His age is kind of a thing, you know.
Remember that when they’re filling sandbags to prevent your house from floating away in Winnipeg, shivering on what’s left of your doorstep in Katmandu, or hell, stranded in your house in Toronto because the city can’t plow the latest snow storm. The military does a fuck of a lot more than go traipsing through the desert looking for Al Quaeda operatives. So in short, you’re utterly wrong in every conceivable way.
Not so much. Depending on the nature of his crime, he can be tried as an adult. In close to 30 Euro countries the age of consent is 15 or lower. He had the capacity to understand what he was doing.
No, he can’t. He’s Canadian, and we are discussing a hypothetical Canadian prosecution. See post 65.
Lol. You’re seriously bringing up the Toronto thing? Look, I didn’t say they were useless. But they are just guys doing a job as far as I’m concerned. You are free to call them heroes if you like. I don’t. And this isn’t the thread for this discussion anyways.
Yes, he can. He can certainly be charged at 15.
“Tried” and “charged” are two entirely different things.
What’s your point?
Hey, I’m retired career military and I think it’s ridiculous to call everyone in the military “hero”. If the individual does something heroic–like pulling someone out of a deep well–then, yes, he or she is a hero. Just belonging to the a particular organization does not make one a hero AFAIC.