Canada to pay a Jihadi murderer $10M

[KeepTalking]

As more information comes out, the worse it looks for Trudeau Jr. Far from settling to avoid costly litigation, it is now obvious that he rushed the payment (there are reports that the terrorist has already been paid) in order to avoid the widow and the surviving victim to get an injunction before the payment is made.Trudeau wanted Khadr to become rich on Canadian taxpayer costs.
Government has already paid Omar Khadr $10.5M: source

Speaking strictly on condition of anonymity, a source familiar with the situation said the Liberal government wanted to get ahead of an attempt by two Americans to enforce a massive U.S. court award against Khadr in Canadian court.
“The money has been paid,” the source said.
Word of the quiet money transfer came on the eve of a hearing in which a lawyer planned to ask Ontario Superior Court to block the payout to Khadr, who lives in Edmonton on bail.
The Toronto lawyer, David Winer, is acting for the widow of an American special forces soldier, Chris Speer, who Khadr is alleged to have killed after a fierce firefight and bombardment by U.S. troops at a compound in Afghanistan in July 2002, and another U.S. soldier, Layne Morris, who was blinded in one eye in the same battle.

If the Liberal Party had any integrity, they would vote to remove Trudeau as leader and PM over this!

While I entered this thread providing a defense for why Canada might have wanted to settle the lawsuit, I agree with Derec on the above point. Trudeau moving to make sure the payout was made before it could be diverted to pay for the judgement in favor of victims in the lawsuit against Khadr looks extremely bad. I expected to hear that the award from his lawsuit against Canada would go to pay for the lawsuit he lost in the US, but this development makes no sense to me at all.

 

[Derec]

I read the article.

I know you have problems with reading comprehension, but do try reading it a bit more carefully next time.

Sorry, but a ruling by a military judge that there is no credible evidence of wrong doing by the military that is based on a military investigation into what the military allegedly did is not convincing.

The article is not just stating the ruling by the military judge as some sort of argument from authority. That's what the pro-Omar side is doing with the Canadian SC ruling. Weeky Standard article atcually outlines what evidence there is and isn't.

Repetition of your opinions does not make them any more convincing or tethered to reality.

I am not just repeating, I have explained them in some detail. And they are quite tethered to reality. Unlike terrorism apologetics of the Left.

For some unexplained reason, you believe you know more about Canadian law than the Canadian Supreme court

As far as Canadian law is concerned, I have posted the relevant section of law on treason. What have you posted to defend the settlement and freeing of Khadr? You only have the argument from authority, even though Canadian SC did not mandate any monetary payment.

and that you know more about Canadian law, juries and attitudes the Canadian government even though you have presented no factual evidence to support your claim.

I have posted factual evidence. Certainly more than you.
Here is some more. The settlement is very unpopular among Canadian public.
Majority of Canadians oppose Omar Khadr settlement, poll suggests

 

[laughing dog]

The article is not just stating the ruling by the military judge as some sort of argument from authority. That's what the pro-Omar side is doing with the Canadian SC ruling. Weeky Standard article atcually outlines what evidence there is and isn't.

All of the evidence is from the military and it is being cited by the military judge. There is no independent investigation to check the facts (not that the Weekly Standard would exhibit basic journalistic standards and integrity). Hardly a disinterested source.

I am not just repeating, I have explained them in some detail. And they are quite tethered to reality.

I realize you believe in your delusions. But that does not make them true. The variants of the screed "Waah, some brown person I don't like gets money" are not explanations.

As far as Canadian law is concerned, I have posted the relevant section of law on treason. What have you posted to defend the settlement and freeing of Khadr? You only have the argument from authority, even though Canadian SC did not mandate any monetary payment.

Whether you or I like it or not, the Canadian Supreme Court made a ruling. The Canadian government has a duty to abide by that ruling - regardless of your or my "opinion" of the ruling. Treason has nothing to do with the ruling on his violation of his civil rights. I have made a number of posts explaining the possible rationale for the settlement. Obviously, you have not read/understood them. Perhaps you should hone some reading comprehension skills.

You have provided no evidence that the Trudeau's gov't settlement is out of line with other awards for the state's simllar violation of civil rights. Perhaps it is. I don't know and more importantly - neither do you.

 

[Derec]

All of the evidence is from the military and it is being cited by the military judge.

That's where the case was heard. Do you have any evidence that Khadr was actually tortured, other than his claims?

There is no independent investigation to check the facts (not that the Weekly Standard would exhibit basic journalistic standards and integrity). Hardly a disinterested source.

Again, where is the evidence for his claims?

I realize you believe in your delusions. But that does not make them true.

You are the deluded one.

The variants of the screed "Waah, some brown person I don't like gets money" are not explanations.

It is you and other leftists who are obsessed with certain people being "brown", not I.

Whether you or I like it or not, the Canadian Supreme Court made a ruling.

I do noty like it, but even that ruling did not mandate any monetary compensation.

The Canadian government has a duty to abide by that ruling - regardless of your or my "opinion" of the ruling.

Again, Canadian SC did not rule that the Canadian government must pay Khadr any money. The decision of Trudeau to make Khadr a millionaire was a voluntary decison on his part. It is not following any court rulings.
I know it is difficult for you to keep up, but please try if you want to participate in the discussion.

Treason has nothing to do with the ruling on his violation of his civil rights.

That may be the case, but Khadr objectively violated the law on treason. Therefore, Canada should prosecute him. Trudeau's decision to give this guy 10 million (and rush it) as well as not to prosecute him for treason are linked.

I have made a number of posts explaining the possible rationale for the settlement.

And I have explained why they do not hold water.

Obviously, you have not read/understood them. Perhaps you should hone some reading comprehension skills.

LMAO! That's rich coming from you!

You have provided no evidence that the Trudeau's gov't settlement is out of line with other awards for the state's simllar violation of civil rights. Perhaps it is. I don't know and more importantly - neither do you.

Even if Canadian government had rewarded terrorists in the similar fashion in the past, that does not justify persisting in doing the wrong thing.

P.S.: Trudeau is quite an ismamophile. Just look at his socks.

 

[laughing dog]

That's where the case was heard. Do you have any evidence that Khadr was actually tortured, other than his claims?

There is no independent investigation to check the facts (not that the Weekly Standard would exhibit basic journalistic standards and integrity). Hardly a disinterested source.

Again, where is the evidence for his claims?

As usual, you are shifting the goal posts - the military is not a disinterested assessor when it comes to its own actions.

It is you and other leftists who are obsessed with certain people being "brown", not I.

Your OP and posting record rebut your ridiculous claims. I seriously doubt you are even fooling yourself with that twaddle.

I do noty like it, but even that ruling did not mandate any monetary compensation.

You keep repeating that as if it would be convincing. Once there is a ruling by the Canadian Supreme Courtthat his Canadian civil rights were violated by the Canadian government, the question becomes what will be the size of the award/settlement.

Again, Canadian SC did not rule that the Canadian government must pay Khadr any money. The decision of Trudeau to make Khadr a millionaire was a voluntary decison on his part. It is not following any court rulings.
I know it is difficult for you to keep up, but please try if you want to participate in the discussion.


That may be the case, but Khadr objectively violated the law on treason. Therefore, Canada should prosecute him. Trudeau's decision to give this guy 10 million (and rush it) as well as not to prosecute him for treason are linked.

Please stop confusing your bigoted inferences with reality.

And I have explained why they do not hold water.

Your belief is mistaken: your emotional burps only offer an explanation about your repulsive world view.

Even if Canadian government had rewarded terrorists in the similar fashion in the past, that does not justify persisting in doing the wrong thing.

Sigh, the award is based on the violation of his civil rights. I realize that to alt-SJWers like Steve Bannon and yourself that some people do not deserve to have their civil rights respected, but everyone has civil rights.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Ya, this is really all about civil rights. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects all Canadians and the Canadian government has an obligation to ensure that its citizens are protected under these standards and that applies to the worst of us as much as it does to the best of us. They failed in that duty here and need to pay up as a result.

We don't need to follow the American example and abandon what we claim are our morals and beliefs when we find them to be somewhat inconvenient. This has nothing to do with who Khadr is or what he's done. It's about the rest of us and about whether our rules of law and values actually matter to us.

 

[fromderinside]

Minister. Minister. I have problems with your comments. Would you repeat why you said that?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Here is some more. The settlement is very unpopular among Canadian public.
Majority of Canadians oppose Omar Khadr settlement, poll suggests

Civil rights don't care about popularity.

Unlike terrorism apologetics of the Left.

Listen up, Mr. Social Justice Warrior: despised suspected terrorists inasmuch as they are citizens of country X, have just as much civil rights as do despised suspected pedophiles and despised suspected rapists whom you love to defend and are also citizens of country X.

See above: "Civil rights don't care about popularity."

 

[laughing dog]

Ya, this is really all about civil rights. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects all Canadians and the Canadian government has an obligation to ensure that its citizens are protected under these standards and that applies to the worst of us as much as it does to the best of us. They failed in that duty here and need to pay up as a result.

We don't need to follow the American example and abandon what we claim are our morals and beliefs when we find them to be somewhat inconvenient. This has nothing to do with who Khadr is or what he's done. It's about the rest of us and about whether our rules of law and values actually matter to us.

Well said. It is a real shame that there are so many people who appear incapable of getting that basic idea.

 

[Derec]

As usual, you are shifting the goal posts - the military is not a disinterested assessor when it comes to its own actions.

That doesn't mean the evidence provided should be dismissed out of hand.
Especially since what Omar says about his experience are even less disinterested.

Your OP and posting record rebut your ridiculous claims. I seriously doubt you are even fooling yourself with that twaddle.

Your obsession with "fooling" is getting old fast.
And the only ones with ridiculous claims are you and your fellow Khadr apologists.

You keep repeating that as if it would be convincing. Once there is a ruling by the Canadian Supreme Courtthat his Canadian civil rights were violated by the Canadian government, the question becomes what will be the size of the award/settlement.

It is convincing. Again, SC did not mandate a monetary award. It certainly did not mandate a multimillion dollar award. Nor did it mandate the award be hush-hush while the PM is travelling abroad.
These are political decisions, and Trudeau government should not get to hide behind the SC decision.

Please stop confusing your bigoted inferences with reality.

Do you even know what bigoted means? or inference? Probably not.
I posted the law on treason. Omar Khadr objectively violated this law. The instance of him killing the US soldier and maiming another by throwing the hand grenade is not even necessary for that. The fact that he built IEDs used against Canadian soldiers (which were part of the coalition, remember?) is enough to make him guilty of high treason. Therefore, he should be stripped of his citizenship and imprisoned, not set free and made rich.

Your belief is mistaken: your emotional burps only offer an explanation about your repulsive world view.

The only one whose participation in this thread is akin to burping is you.

Sigh, the award is based on the violation of his civil rights.

Where in the charter of rights does it say terrorists get millions if any of their rights are violated?

I realize that to alt-SJWers like Steve Bannon and yourself that some people do not deserve to have their civil rights respected, but everyone has civil rights.

I think everybody has civil rights. I do not think interrogating terrorism suspects, even aggressively, violates any rights. I furthermore do not think terrorists and traitors deserve to be paid millions by the country against which they fought as unlawful combatant.

 

[Derec]

Ya, this is really all about civil rights.

Is it? Where does the charter mandate millions be paid because Canadian officials interrogated a terrorism suspect who built IEDs and fought with Al Quada terrorists, killing Canadian allies?
This was a political decision by Trudeau, as is the decision to change the law allowing taking Canadian citizenship from terrorists.
Trudeau citizenship law is win for Toronto 18 terrorist and loss for Canada

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects all Canadians and the Canadian government has an obligation to ensure that its citizens are protected under these standards and that applies to the worst of us as much as it does to the best of us. They failed in that duty here and need to pay up as a result.

The Khadrs have always been nothing but Canadians of convenience, spending most of their time in Aghanistan and Pakistan waging jihad while taking advantage of overly permissive Canadian laws to get free healthcare of get the government to go to bat for them - like when Ahmed Khadr was arrested in Pakistan for terrorism and PM Chretien (or should that be Cretin) intervened to free him.
The Khadr family should give Canadians a lot to think about regarding who should and should not be a Canadian. Unfortunately the Trudeau government is making it even easier to become a citizen of convenience.

But even if you assume that Khadr was a bona fine Canadian, he still committed treason by fighting against Canada and its allies in Afghanistan. He was still building IEDs for Al Qaeda. He still killed a US solider and maimed another. He was still a family friend of Osama bin Laden. I do not see how aggressive interrogation by Canadian intelligence violates his rights here, or why he deserves 10 million dollars award rather than life in prison for treason.

We don't need to follow the American example and abandon what we claim are our morals and beliefs when we find them to be somewhat inconvenient. This has nothing to do with who Khadr is or what he's done. It's about the rest of us and about whether our rules of law and values actually matter to us.

The whole case is about what Khadr is and what he has done. That's why he was held in Guantanamo. That's why he was interrogated by Canadian intelligence. And that's why the left-wing Justin "Islamic Socks" Trudeau gave him 10 million dollars. If he never had been a jihadi, a terrorist and a traitor, this chain of events would never have been set it motion. But set in motion it was, and this decision by Trudeau means that terrorism and treason are now being rewarded. As long as you are a Muslim of course.

By the way, this is the real Omar Khadr. Not the sanitized version his lawyers have been pushing for the last 15 years.

 

[Derec]

Civil rights don't care about popularity.

The decision was a political one, however.
Furthermore, had the case gone to trial, a jury of regular Canadians would have to decide it. How likely do you think members of the Canadian public would have been to award millions to this terrorist?
It's not just about finding that some of rights were violated, but it is also about finding that monetary damages are warranted and how much.
And note, only Canadian actions would apply here - not US. His injuries in battle, while extensive, do not constitute violation of his rights under any law. And as far as Canadian law and possible liability of the Canadian governent is concerned, only his interrogation by the Canadian intelligence would be actionable. Does anybody really think that interrogation caused him anywhere close to 10 million in damages? Let's be real!

See above: "Civil rights don't care about popularity."

But politicians should. And this was an ideological, political decision by the Canadian government. As was the decision to change the law to remove terrorism as a reason to revoke citizenship.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Ya, this is really all about civil rights.

Is it?

Yes, it is. It is in a way which makes all the rest irrelevant.

The Canadian government failed a Canadian citizen and needed to pay compensation for its failure as a result - both because of the violation to this individual and as a precedent to be put in place for the next time they find themselves faced with a similar situation.

Who he is and what he did are not things which should factor into this decision. Who we are as a country and what we did as a country are the things that should.

I get that you Americans are a bunch of snowflakes who need to hide in your safe space and toss out whatever deeply held moral principles you find inconvenient every time that you hear the boogeyman rustling around under your bed. That's who you are as a people and maybe you'll get around to dealing with that one day ... unless it turns out to be moderately difficult or time consuming or something. You're not an example to the real world, though, and we have standards to hold ourselves to - we don't have standards to only hold ourselves to except when we kind of don't want to that day.

 

[laughing dog]

The decision was a political one, however.
Furthermore, had the case gone to trial, a jury of regular Canadians would have to decide it. How likely do you think members of the Canadian public would have been to award millions to this terrorist?

Maybe they would have awarded him more. Not everyone shares your irrational and amoral views. For some obscure reason, you feel you know better than Canadians about how Canadians think or how they would act.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

But set in motion it was, and this decision by Trudeau means that terrorism and treason are now being rewarded. As long as you are a Muslim of course.

There is no general rule where now Canadians are seeking out Muslim terrorists to reward them. Do you realize how snowflakey and dumb that claim is?

The award of money did not happen because he's a terrorist but instead because he's a person who was mistreated illegally. If a despised suspected rapist gets sent to jail because he cannot come up with bail money and the prison guards rape him, the government can also get sued or an award could also be given through a court judgment. [Suspected] rapists, [suspected] pedophiles, and [suspected] terrorists all have rights recognized by the Canadian government and when those rights are violated, it is possible money could be awarded as compensation or in a civil suit. I know you've been told this multiple times and I don't expect you will stop posting pictures of radical Islamist terrorists because that's your thing.

 

[Derec]

Yes, it is. It is in a way which makes all the rest irrelevant.

All the rest is never irrelevant. All the rest is why this whole thing happened. Has Omar Khadr not been a little terrorist twerp, none of it would have happened.

The Canadian government failed a Canadian citizen

Canadian citizen in name only.
He was somebody who took arms to fight against Canadian forces and their allies in Afghanistan. That makes him guilty of high treason.

and needed to pay compensation for its failure as a result

If ordered so by a court. Which they were not.
And how did Canada mistreat Khadr? By interrogating him? Why should interrogation of terrorists be considered a violation of his rights? By not seeking repatriation sooner? Why should Canada have to seek to repatriate a traitor? And how do any of these things translate to $10M in damages? He is being enriched beyond his wildest dreams, he is not compensated for damages.

- both because of the violation to this individual and as a precedent to be put in place for the next time they find themselves faced with a similar situation.

This ridiculously high payment is indeed setting a dangerous precedent.

Who he is and what he did are not things which should factor into this decision.

Of course they should. What about those who were killed or maimed by his IEDs, possibly Canadian soldiers among them? What about Chris Speer, whom he killed, and Layne Morris, whom he seriously wounded. By the way, Speer's widow and Morris won a judgment against Khadr in the US and Trudeau (or PM Islam Socks) rushed the payment to insure Khadr would receive it before Khadr's victims could seek to enforce the judgment in Canada.
How is that defensible?

Who we are as a country and what we did as a country are the things that should.

But what did Canada really do that was so wrong?
They interrogated a terrorist. What's wrong with that? They shared intelligence they gathered with US. What's wrong with that?
They did not seek to repatriate Khadr immediately. What's wrong with that? Especially given the fact that he has been released years before he should have been shows the danger of sending terrorists to Canada to serve out their sentence. Omar Khadr's brother Abdullah ("slave of Allah") is being sought by US on terrorism charges. Canada refuses to extradite him. That also shows that Canada is currently not a reliable partner against terrorism.

I get that you Americans are a bunch of snowflakes who need to hide in your safe space and toss out whatever deeply held moral principles you find inconvenient every time that you hear the boogeyman rustling around under your bed.

Why is it so hard for some people to learn to use words correctly? That word does not mean what you think it means. It does not mean somebody holding an opinion different from yours and seeking to discuss it.

That's who you are as a people and maybe you'll get around to dealing with that one day ... unless it turns out to be moderately difficult or time consuming or something. You're not an example to the real world, though, and we have standards to hold ourselves to - we don't have standards to only hold ourselves to except when we kind of don't want to that day.

But what about Omar Khadr's victims? Why does he deserve to be a millionaire even though he is a traitor to Canada and even though he killed an American solider while an unlawful combatant?
And again, what are his actual damages? Should not any monetary compensation be based on damage he suffered because of mistreatment by Canada? It should not just be pulled out of PM Islam Socks' ass.

 

[Derec]

Maybe they would have awarded him more.

Very, very unlikely. For one, he didn't suffer that much (if anything) in actual damages based on being interrogated by Canadian intelligence. Second, he is not a very sympathetic plaintiff and that plays a role with juries.

Not everyone shares your irrational and amoral views.

Most Canadians do.
Majority of Canadians oppose Omar Khadr settlement, poll suggests

For some obscure reason, you feel you know better than Canadians about how Canadians think or how they would act.

Obscure reason being the poll I posted above. And why do you think you have your finger on the pulse of Canadian public opinion more than Canadian pollsters?

 

[Derec]

There is no general rule where now Canadians are seeking out Muslim terrorists to reward them.

It is a bit of a pattern for the current Canadian government to help terrorists out. Just months ago, Trudeau amended the citizenship law to block terrorists from being stripped of citizenship. Th
Toronto 18 terrorist will regain Canadian citizenship under new legislation introduced by Liberals

Do you realize how snowflakey and dumb that claim is?

In addition to being wholly unoriginal (Tom Sawyer did it too), neither of you are using the word correctly. "Snowflake" does not mean somebody who disagrees with you in a debate. It denotes people who want to shut down the debate because somebody disagrees with their opinions which they elevate to the only permissible opinion.

The award of money did not happen because he's a terrorist

BS. It is the first and most important link in the casual chain. No fighting with Al Qaeda, no making IEDs and killing of US solider, no Guantanamo, no Canadian interrogation, no lawsuit, no Trudeau payout of $10M.

but instead because he's a person who was mistreated illegally.

I do not think interrogating terrorists is mistreatment.
And even if you conclude he was mistreated by the Canadian government, show me how that damaged him to the tune of $10M.

If a despised suspected rapist gets sent to jail because he cannot come up with bail money and the prison guards rape him, the government can also get sued or an award could also be given through a court judgment.

Yes, somebody in that situation should get compensation. But Omar wasn't raped. And he certainly wasn't raped by Canadian officials. Interrogation is not the same as rape.

And your analogy is not a bad one. Let's say a suspected rapist gets raped in prison. He is entitled to damages. But let's say he is also guilty of the rape, and not innocent. Should not his victims get to sue him and when they win their judgment collect from the money he received in compensation? Omar Khadr has a large judgment won by Speer's widow and Morris. They should be able to collect from the $10M Trudeau gave Khadr. But Trudeau rushed the payment to make sure Kahdr receives the cash before Khadr's victims could make their claim. That is absolutely wrong, no matter what you think about the rest of the case.

Another word on the magnitude of the award. David Milgaard is a Canadian who spent 23 years for rape and murder he did not commit. He received $10M. But he was innocent. Omar Khadr is guilty, and he spent far less time incarcerated than Milgaard. And most of the time he was held by US, not Canada, so why should Canada be liable to the tune of $10M to Khadr?
Giving $10M to a terrorist is perverse.
Ok, you say he was only 15 (as if a 15 year old cannot tell what terrorism is), and that he does not hold extremist views today.
Well, if he was really disavowing his terrorist past and feeling bad about what he did, why doesn't he donate even a portion of his ill-gotten riches to his victims instead of fighting them in the courts?

[Suspected] rapists, [suspected] pedophiles, and [suspected] terrorists all have rights recognized by the Canadian government and when those rights are violated, it is possible money could be awarded as compensation or in a civil suit.

Now show me how what Canadian interrorgators did to warrant $10M in damages? How was he harmed, to the tune of $10M, by being interrogated? A suspected rapist (to use your analogy from above) may not be raped in prison, be he surely may be interrogated. And if you rape somebody in a foreign country, US State Department is under no obligation to demand you be returned to the US.

I know you've been told this multiple times and I don't expect you will stop posting pictures of radical Islamist terrorists because that's your thing.

Posting pictures of radical Islamic terrorists is perfectly on topic in a thread about radical Islamist terrorists.
In particular, it is perfectly on topic to post photos of Omar Khadr in a thread about Omkar Khadr.
Photos of goats, not so much.
But since you mention photos, here are my favorite photos of Omar Khadr.

 

[laughing dog]

Very, very unlikely. For one, he didn't suffer that much (if anything) in actual damages based on being interrogated by Canadian intelligence. Second, he is not a very sympathetic plaintiff and that plays a role with juries.

You have no clue. And if you had actually bothered to read the Canadian Supreme Court ruling, the facts that Kadr was 15 years old at the time of his capture and the fact he was denied legal representation are 2 major violations of his civil rights. And, in fact, the poll you cite suggests that most Canadians agree with that to a certain degree:

But while Canadians do not agree with the government's move, they widely believe the affair should have been avoided. According to the ARI poll, 74 per cent of Canadians agree that when Khadr was captured by U.S. forces as a 15-year-old, he was a child soldier and should have been handled like one in the first place.

Most Canadians do.
Majority of Canadians oppose Omar Khadr settlement, poll suggests

For some obscure reason, you feel you know better than Canadians about how Canadians think or how they would act.

Obscure reason being the poll I posted above. And why do you think you have your finger on the pulse of Canadian public opinion more than Canadian pollsters?

I don't. But they are most likely reacting out of ignorance. I wonder what the poll results would be if all the facts were known.

 

[untermensche]

We see what these haters are.

Sick individuals consumed with death and killing and bloodshed.

Were they so consumed when the US deliberately attack the people of Iraq and began killing and torturing at will?

I bet a few hands were lost by children.