US on Canada torture watch list

[lone wolf]

Thank you for the source. I put it on my link list.
But the Cambodia picture is not complete. When Pol Pot got trouble with his Chinese allies in Beijing about plans of enforcing a "big jump" in to communism, the CIA came to fuel him with large Dollar amounts, equalizing the value of naturalist support in weapons and rice deliveries, what he got from China. So he became the darling of the western world, who was about to demonstrate, how ugly communism is, what Vietnam is planning too and that the US agent orange and bomb carpets were just a minor evil. This souvereignty charade was kept up until 1990, the fall of the iron curtain. Without CIA support, Pol Pot could never have executed his culture revolution (genocide) against the will of his chinese allies.

Canada feels embarrassed for saying some truth and removed it:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7198435.stm

:smilebox:​

Mr Bernier said he regretted the embarrassment the manual caused​

You missed a rung in the ladder. US interests had a friendly General Lon Nol inserted into power while people-pleasing Prince Sianouk was out of town. In response, North Vietnam started pouring money into Khmer Rouge to undermine the new Khmer Republic (Cambobia). Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge, though Red Chinese endorsed, were not communist. They were gangsters - opium traders and pirates - and despised by Russian-backed Vietnamese communists. Nothing was simple in Southeast Asian politics. There's lots more.....

Woof!

 

[dancing-loon]

Back to little Omar Khadr: CTV 04/02/2008 8:14:07 AM

Khadr lawyers pushing for 'child soldier' status

"We have a number of motions before the judge," lawyer Dennis Edney told CTV's Canada AM on Monday.
"One, of course, is that Omar Khadr be designated a child soldier. The other is we're challenging the definition of terrorism, particularly Omar Khadr being detained as a terrorist on a tobacco field. Essentially, we're challenging all the various indictments against Mr. Khadr."
Edney said Monday's court proceedings in Cuba are an "extremely meaningful" part of the trial process, but he questioned whether the outcome would be favourable towards his client.
He said the Canadian government has let his client down, and must share in taking responsibility for his current plight.

"The Canadian government stands out amongst most other civilized countries throughout the world. It has not only failed to criticize Guantanamo Bay as a blight on the rule of law, it has not said a single word on behalf of Omar Khadr," Edney said.

http://tinyurl.com/38ejt2
------------------------------------------------------------
I wonder what is meant by "detained on a tobacco field"?

Should Omar ever get free, he better not come back to hostile Canada!! I wouldn't!!!
I'm so disappointed with our current government! They cannot show compassion for their own citizen, but only blind servitude to the US! Disgusting!!:angryfire:

If Harper and gang think they are fighting the terrorists, let me tell you... with this kind of behaviour they are making us a target of "terrorism"!!

Sadly, no compassion and no brains, either! :-(

 

[Praxius]

I wonder what is meant by "detained on a tobacco field"?

Good question.... since US reports claimed he was captured in a hut/house with a pile of other dead insurgents (Him being the only survivor.... go figure the chances of that.)

And I remember them blaming him as the one who chucked the grenade which killed/wounded some US troops.... but who is the eye witness to put the grenade in his hand?

Not to mention.... it was apparently in the middle of combat based on US sources, so if they were fighting gun to gun, grenade to grenade, RPG to TOW, etc... then how can that be considdered a terrorist? To me, that sounds like old fashion combat and he should be classified as a POW.

Then we also have to considder he was a minor by US/Canadian standards.... he's a Canadian Citizen, therefore by our own laws and logic, he was too young to make proper decisions for his actions at that time, and could be clearly influenced by older members of the said organization...... yet he's being charged and detained like he's an adult, fully knowing what his actions were when he made them, regardless if he did them or not.

I agree our government dropped the friggin ball on this one, and for some obvious reasons, I see why they did.... but they were still flawed reasons and should be held accountable.

 

[dancing-loon]

Omar Khadr was alone in bunker, U.S. soldier maintains

A U.S. soldier is standing by his story that Canadian Omar Khadr was the only fighter left alive after a skirmish in Afghanistan and the only fighter who could have lobbed the grenade that killed his military colleague, countering a witness account that casts doubt on the official version of events.

The military document, inadvertently released by a Pentagon official to reporters on Monday, quotes an unidentified soldier, who claims he killed a second al-Qaeda fighter before shooting Khadr twice in the back.
............................
Khadr's military lawyer Lt.-Cmdr. Bill Kuebler has suggested that the U.S. military may have been involved in a coverup after discovering they had a "15-year-old Canadian on its hands with two gaping bullet holes in his back." He hopes the unidentified soldier's account brings enough reasonable doubt that the charges against Khadr will be dismissed.
...................
Morris says on one hand he'd like to see the case go to trial so the Speer family can see some type of closure, but doesn't mind if the trial is not immediate as long as Khadr is behind bars.
"I'm fine with this dragging on for another five years before there's a trial as long as they stay locked up."

Please, read the whole article to get the full story:
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/02/06/khadr-morris.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------
So, the argument is, did Khadr throw the grenade that killed an US soldier, or did another al Qaida fighter, who was killed by the unidentified US soldier, throw the grenade?

You know, folks, I can not believe this is what the Americans argue over!!! They are in a war, get killed by the enemy and this enemy, when captured, gets accused for throwing a grenade at them!!! This child-enemy-soldier has to now, after 5 1/2 years, defend himself for throwing a particular grenade!! Omar's Lawyer should demand to see the murder weapon and prove it was really Omar, with his fingerprints all over it!!

I know this charade was done with the German soldiers as well, if not all one by one, so at least as a whole, the German Wehrmacht!! War crimes galore!! Germany's enemies? They only had angels in their armies!!... they didn't kill a single German!!! They won the war with prayers!!!

Why isn't our Peter McKay down there in Guantanamo and say, "you are all insane!! Hand me the boy... he's coming home with me!! End of story!!!"

 

[CDNBear]

OK, for the last time for those that can't seem to get off the short bus...

It is a basic principle of IHL that persons fighting in armed conflict must, at all times, distinguish between civilians and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives. The "principle of distinction", as this rule is known, is the cornerstone of IHL. Derived from it are many specific IHL rules aimed at protecting civilians, such as the prohibition of deliberate or direct attacks against civilians and civilian objects, the prohibition of indiscriminate attacks or the use of "human shields". IHL also prohibits hostage taking

It is a basic principle of IHL that persons fighting in armed conflict must, at all times, distinguish between civilians and combatants...

Civilians detained for security reasons must be accorded the protections provided for in the Fourth Geneva Convention. Combatants who do not fulfil the requisite criteria for POW status (who, for example, do not carry arms openly) or civilians who have taken a direct part in hostilities in an international armed conflict (so-called "unprivileged" or "unlawful" belligerents) are protected by the Fourth Geneva Convention provided they are enemy nationals.
Contrary to POWs such persons may, however, be tried under the domestic law of the detaining state for taking up arms, as well as for any criminal acts they may have committed. They may be imprisoned until any sentence imposed has been served.

If the POW status of a prisoner is in doubt the Third Geneva Convention stipulates that a competent tribunal should be established to rule on the issue...

ICRC

1) Most if not all of the insurgents are ununiformed and conceal their weapons.
2) The bulk of the insurgents captured to date are 'foriegn' nationals. Thus creating the issue of 'how to bring them to justice' as there is no clear law on how to try these people.

True the vagueness of these laws and the grey areas created by contemporary warfare some 60 years after there inception, is open to interpretation. But to be oblivious to them as is rampantly exampled by some of the bleeding hearts here, is absurd.

I realise that reality is not some peoples strong suit, but to try and apply civilian law and mentality to combat situations and justice being applied to ununiformed combatants, is as absurd as trying to hammer a railway spike with a marshmellow.

 

[MikeyDB]

Soldiers whether Canadian or American wouldn't be being killed in Afghanistan if they weren't there! The decision to prosecute the American petroleum war in Afghanistan (it's been agreed that the decision to become militarily involved in Afghanistan pre-dated the events of 9/11) is the price Canadians and Americans are apparently willing to pay to continue disenfranchisement of everyone unwilling to feed the greed machine of North America. As far as "uniforms" serving to distinguish between "legal combatants" and "illegal combatants", the United States has never adopted that distinction when bombing civilian targets or executing military actions in Nicaragua or anywhere else in the world for that matter. It's bunk....just plain bunk that provides the excuse-givers an opportunity to attempt to legitimize a conditional application of "law" to suit their particular agendas.

Like any "mob mentality", the young are vulnerable to conscription, and like the "mob mentality" the individual no longer exercises the judgment of reason and considers the consequences of the actions undertaken. It's always been the weak-minded and those easily led who are the first to join the "mob" whether that mob wears a uniform or not.

 

[CDNBear]

Like any "mob mentality", the young are vulnerable to conscription, and like the "mob mentality" the individual no longer exercises the judgment of reason and considers the consequences of the actions undertaken. It's always been the weak-minded and those easily led who are the first to join the "mob" whether that mob wears a uniform or not.

Admitting that you have this problem, is the first step in healing Mikey, good for you.

So where do you go from here?

Here?

 

[MikeyDB]

Easy Bear!

Continue to "try" this child combatant in Gitmo so long as those responsible for creating the war in Afghanistan face similar consequences for their actions.

 

[CDNBear]

Easy Bear!

Continue to "try" this child combatant in Gitmo so long as those responsible for creating the war in Afghanistan face similar consequences for their actions.

Have I condoned their actions?

Actually Mikey, I think I started a thread around these parts addressing the present leaders of the US attempts to Congressionally remove their guilt and how dispicable that is.

And Mikey...I don't care how old someone is, if you pick up a gun and I see you point it at me on the battlefield...it's dead. If by some miracle it doesn't end up dead, it's still an enemy combatant. True, it should be handled differently then an adult, but not to the point where its crimes are obsolved.

But that really isn't what is being addressed in this thread, it's been touched on, but the bulk of the blathering is about this law and that, all while people who have as much knowledge of combat and military law, as I do about what it's like to have a vagina.

 

[MikeyDB]

If you invaded my home and attempted to tell me what I could or couldn't do with my fields my oil my towns and villiages, how I should subscribe to your moral theses and how I should accept your judgment of my people and my religious temperament, I'd blow your head off Bear. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

 

[CDNBear]

If you invaded my home and attempted to tell me what I could or couldn't do with my fields my oil my towns and villiages, how I should subscribe to your moral theses and how I should accept your judgment of my people and my religious temperament, I'd blow your head off Bear. Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

As it does to I.

But if I already know you beat your wife and then you go and burn down my garage, I'll likely take that first shot at you from some distance. Then should you be wounded but not killed and hiding in the closet, and your wife should invite me to stay until you are terminated. All the while I'm there, I replace the antiquated plumbing, electrical and drapes. And also water your pot plants...so what if I start stealing your cable. I'm going to get some benefit out of my time spent.

 

[MikeyDB]

Who's dodging the facts now Bear?

The war in Afghanistan was over petroleum and the American administration supplied arms and instigated the creation of the Taliban and Al Queada! Where was this great concern with freedoms and oppression before the Russians attempted to build a pipeline through Afghanistan? Where was this "important" expansion of human rights and "law" when the United States has backed Iraq in its war with Iran. Where was this compulsion to act on the welfare of the few when it came to Haiti or Nicaragua or Viet Nam or anywhere else Bear?

It's a lie Bear and you buy it hook line and sinker...

It gives your bloodlust a "legitimacy" when you can ignore the antecedents and simply rally to the angry blood of fallen comrades without examining and applying critical thinking to the reasons why these events are taking place.

Welcome to the mob!

 

[I think not]

MikeyDB,

Are you talking about the gas pipeline? You keep saying oil and you have me a bit confused.

 

[MikeyDB]

Hi ITN!
Yes initially it was proposed as a gas pipeline but if the example of Russian expansionism in other areas can be applied as lesson in this example, how long would it be before commodities other than natural gas were being funnelled through this corridor? We have the myth of the weapons of mass destruction perpetrated by the American administration as example of how prepared any nation can be to wage war (both economic and military) on the basis of a lie an exageration or even as an element of "national interest/security", would it be more or less reasonable to expect that the Russians would use this opportunity in much the same way...?

 

[CDNBear]

Who's dodging the facts now Bear?

That would still be you and your ilk.

The fact is there is no set in stone provision to deal with enemy foriegn nationals, yet you all seem to think we must apply the same laws that run our city streets in a combat zone.

The war in Afghanistan was over petroleum and the American administration supplied arms and instigated the creation of the Taliban and Al Queada! Where was this great concern with freedoms and oppression before the Russians attempted to build a pipeline through Afghanistan?

I have no idea. But I wasn't blinded by anything when I wrote this...

The hunt for oil or Manifest Destiny in the new millenium?

Which I know you've read, I've fed it to ya so manytimes as you have been saying the exact samething to me over and over and over.

Where was this "important" expansion of human rights and "law" when the United States has backed Iraq in its war with Iran. Where was this compulsion to act on the welfare of the few when it came to Haiti or Nicaragua or Viet Nam or anywhere else Bear?

Again, I've addressed these issues as well.

It's a lie Bear and you buy it hook line and sinker...

BS and I've proved you wrong on this so many times.

It gives your bloodlust a "legitimacy" when you can ignore the antecedents and simply rally to the angry blood of fallen comrades without examining and applying critical thinking to the reasons why these events are taking place.

Now it's my 'bloodlust' is it.

Not at all. I see the wrongs, but the right at the end of the tunnel seems better to me then the status quo.

We differ in opinion Mikey. We look at it from different angles Mikey.

I think my ablity to not only see but speak up on the bulk of the issues in this mess, speaks volumes about my critical thought process. You just want to pigeon hole me with the rest of your detractors, so you can belittle and dismiss me easier. So Mikey, I won't make your task easy.

Welcome to the mob!

So who's the top dog in your mob, you, gopher or the beave?

I just wanna know who to take out first, so I can take over the position and rewrite the mandate.

 

[MikeyDB]

The difficulty I have with the entire issue of Afghanistan is that while Russia was prosecuting a war in similar in every respect to the U.S. in Nicaragua, Haiti, lots of different places around the planet, the U.S. was and is entirely complicit with its "ally" Pakistan in promulgating war and terrorism. How should the people of the world regard the United States as any different than the Soviet Union when it comes to arming the Sandanistas or the Cubans or various regimes in Africa? It's the same thing and while the United States hides behind these myths of "exporting democracy" and practices establishing and maintaining regimes like Suharto and Pinochet, giving aid to Pakistan and Israel ..even knowing that insurgents and terrorists are being supplied through this "support", that this is somehow more "acceptable" than the very same behavior by the Soviet Union several years ago.

There is no difference ITN. When your stated foreign policy is "walk softly and carry a big stick"...when American "Manifest Destiny" proves itself to be in any way different than the Communist Manifesto, I'll start to pay greater attention. But from where I'm sitting there's little difference.

 

[MikeyDB]

I wish I could say it's been nice attempting to have a discussion with you Bear but I'll have to return to where I was earlier...

Imagine for a moment that I or a great many people really care what you have to say about nearly anything...then go find those folk and rage on at them with your belicose close-mindedness...

I'm no longer interested in entertaining your bigotry and willing ignorance.

 

[CDNBear]

I wish I could say it's been nice attempting to have a discussion with you Bear but I'll have to return to where I was earlier...

Imagine for a moment that I or a great many people really care what you have to say about nearly anything...then go find those folk and rage on at them with your belicose close-mindedness...

I'm no longer interested in entertaining your bigotry and willing ignorance.

I love it...You're predictable disgusted egres when you are confronted with your own errors and then the claim that I'm 'belicose', 'closed minded' and a 'bigot'...

Beautiful Mikey, simply beautiful. I've always loved how you just make shyte up about me as you go along.

I submit that you are infact what you just accused me of and this is nothing more then you projecting some self realisation, so as you can keep your dellusions steadfast and inaccuate for future weaponising. You just don't know how to respond to someone that actually does see the whole picture and has addressed the bulk of the issue and this is how you deal with it. Accuse, run and regroup.

Thanx for the laugh Mikey, as usual you are a hoot.

I'ld ask you to supply some form of evidence to back up your claims, but every single request for such in the past has gone unanswered, I have no hopes of ever seeing you back up anything you claim of me.

 

[I think not]

Hi ITN!
Yes initially it was proposed as a gas pipeline but if the example of Russian expansionism in other areas can be applied as lesson in this example, how long would it be before commodities other than natural gas were being funnelled through this corridor? We have the myth of the weapons of mass destruction perpetrated by the American administration as example of how prepared any nation can be to wage war (both economic and military) on the basis of a lie an exageration or even as an element of "national interest/security", would it be more or less reasonable to expect that the Russians would use this opportunity in much the same way...?

Yes, it is reasonable to expect it.

I'm still a little confused though or perhaps I don't have all the info.

Who is allegedly building this pipeline? I was under the impression it was an Asian Bank.

 

[DurkaDurka]

Should Omar ever get free, he better not come back to hostile Canada!! I wouldn't!!!
I'm so disappointed with our current government! They cannot show compassion for their own citizen, but only blind servitude to the US! Disgusting!!:angryfire:

If Khadr somehow ends up back in this country, don't think for a second that he will be finished with the judicial system, as more likely then not he will be facing treason charges