Conservative Government Attempts To Muzzle The Courts
- Thread starter Liberalman
- Start date
He is going to be tried under the rules of the Constitution - Just as any alleged criminal would be -
What about his Parents - Father dead was freed by Chretien appealing to a Foreign Govt that he was not a terrorist) and Grandparents complicity in his ending up as a child soldier.
Most are landed immigrants - should they not be deported?
Trial of 9/11 'mastermind' a crucial test for U.S. - The Globe and Mail
When Khalid Sheik Mohammed is brought into an open New York courtroom just a few blocks from where the twin towers fell, it will mark the beginning of a new but potentially risky strategy in Washington's counterterrorism strategy.
From evidentiary problems to security concerns to the selection of an impartial jury, Mr. Mohammed's civilian trial will pose a crucial legal test for the Obama administration just when it is seeking to repair America's credibility.
In announcing his decision Friday to hear the cases against Mr. Mohammed and four alleged co-conspirators in a New York court, U.S. Attorney-General Eric Holder said he “would not have authorized the prosecution of these cases unless I was confident that our outcome would be a successful one.”
Others raised doubts.
Republicans and some families of the Sept. 11 victims invoked the spectre of Mr. Mohammed being allowed to roam freely on the streets of New York if he were acquitted on a technicality.
Meanwhile, the alternative possibility of a conviction proved equally controversial.
While Mr. Holder has vowed to seek the death penalty for Mr. Mohammed and his four co-accused, should Mr. Mohammed be executed if he allegedly wants to die as a “martyr”?
Human rights and civil-liberties groups were nearly unanimous Friday in their support of the Justice Department decision to hold the trial in New York, because it marked a milestone in Washington's efforts to close the Guantanamo Bay prison.
Last edited by a moderator:
(sigh) I am busily protecting one of the major port installations on the east coast from terrorist attack......lol.
He commited no crime against the AMERICANS......and once he was taken into their custody and out of Afghanistan, he is entitled to the benefits of their legal protections, IMHO.
In AFGHANISTAN, he was subject to Afghan law........Pow Pow.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think whether he was guilty or innocent is a moot point now- the bastards tortured him for seven years, charges should be stayed and he should be discharged forthwith and paid $100,000 for every year in custody.
Please read the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution..........no he will not be tried according to the Constitution. (the Constitution specifically forbids trial by military commission UNLESS the accused was serving in the US military at the time of the offense)
As for the rest of his family....I would like them tried for treason in Canada.....and, if found guilty, hanged from lamp posts on Yonge St and left there to rot as an example.
What did he do against the Afgahans? What didn't he do against the Americans?
Last edited by a moderator:
See, you are no different than the filth who support bin laden.
Bull in sheeps clothing and wanna be cop.....lol!
Understood- If they are transferring the main man then I think Khadr will also be freed or transferred.
Funny how many forget that the Liberals under Martin did not give a rats ass about Khadr or that fellow that just came back from Sudan - Seems they only paint part of the picture.
The Govt is appealing a lower Courts Ruling - as is their right - as is your right if convicted of an offense -
Many persons convicted of a variety of offenses appeal and are not jailed until the final ruling is made - On the other hand many do serve time while appealing.
Excuse me????
I want them tried for treason....not showing their ankles.
You getting insulting just because you have no rational argument, or were you born obnoxious?????
You want them hung in the streets....they do that in the middle east, not in Canada.
If you like that sort of thing perhaps you should move to an islamist state.
Last edited by a moderator:
COLIN FREEZE
Globe and Mail Update Published on Sunday, Jul. 20, 2008 6:19PM EDT Last updated on Tuesday, Mar. 31, 2009 8:19PM EDT
Read what I wrote Oh Dumb One - When he was Prime Minister - I typed slowly for you - so if you want a pissing contest fine with me - If not that is also fine with me. Over to you.
I have little tolerance for those who would move here and then work to undermine our freedoms and turn us into an Islamist state........and I do not apologize for that.
If you came to Canada and got citizenship, but you want sharia law, the subjugation of women, the establishment of a world Islamic theocracy, and you not only support but aid terrorists, and take up arms against us and our allies......you are guilty of treason.
What part of that don't you understand????
But, OK, I'll even grant you your point, I don't think you can be executed in this country legally even for treason (sigh) oh well, life with no parole due to a dangerous offender designation suits me...........I'm able to compromise.
Last edited by a moderator:
“I think Bill Graham, who was foreign affairs minister at the time, said it the best. Which was, ‘If we had known then what we know now, then we would have taken strenuous steps to repatriate Mr. Khadr to Canada,'
He did jack because he didn't know, now we do.....big difference.
I don't see Harper saying not going into Iraq was the right thing to do.
Wonder why, knowing mistakes is knowing what they are.
So Khadr is guilty then? Make up your mind.
Canadians are more civilized.
Like I said, if you love the way Muzzies deal with crime move there.
Last edited by a moderator:
AvroI doubt that the Liberals did not know what was going on - Read about the atrocities committed by the Northern Alliance on the battle towards Kabul- Kandahar etc - and that was in 2001 It was public knowledge - written about in Newsweek - Time Mag and a number of other media sources - So Believe Bill or not - that is the question -The Liberals started about 2006 or 07 supporting Khadr - Why so long - My self I do not belive Bill but I do respect him.
Okay,..Khadr was a child....& you would see that I gave credence to the definition and treatment of him as a child soldier, and that he could not get a fair trial in the USA.
Now, let me lay it out for you...
Khadr was caught in AFGHANISTAN.......where he is under AFGHAN law, which now frowns on armed Islamic loolies from other nations running around shooting people, a crime for which they execute.......they do NOT recognize child soldiers, etc. Therefore Khadr WAS guilty of crimes under Afghan law.
Is that clear????
Now, the United States military took Khadr out of AFGHANISTAN, and to a US military base......at that point, he is subject to their law....and, IMHO, he did nothing to violate US law, and has been denied due process in a number of ways, including (but not limited to) being denied his civil rights under the fifth amendment to the US Constitution.
Still with me?
Now.....the Khadr family has engaged in nefarious activities ....supporting our enemies, bearing arms against our allies, in a futile attempt to bring forth a world-wide Islamist government, to the destruction of our own.
They are Canadian citizens. Therefore such actions are treasonous.......the adults should be charged.
Khadr in the USA was not an adult. He has broken no Canadian law. His familiy has.......
Is that clear now?
Last edited by a moderator:
If the Supreme Court of Canada is asked to give a legal opinion on whether Her Majesty’s Government for Canada has a duty to seek the repatriation of Mr. Khadr to Canada, then it is entirely within its jurisdiction to make such a determination. Mr. Pierre Poilievre M.P. (Nepean—Carleton), the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister, has a bad habit of attacking Canadian institutions. This makes it all the more concerning that The Right Honourable Stephen Harper P.C., M.P. (Calgary Southwest), the Prime Minister, has kept Mr. Poilievre on as a right-hand man for so long. It certainly speaks to the antagonistic and arrogant character of this Government.