Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Bring Canadian Omar Khadr Home from Guatanamo?

Baraka_Guru · 02-02-2010, 09:07 PM

You're missing some facts.

...including such things as: evidence was extracted from Khadr while his rights were being violated and this (illegal) evidence could still be used against him in court. This means his rights are still being violated. You also failed to mention that in refusing to do anything, the Canadian government is essentially breaking the law and getting away with it.

You seem to be choosing only facts that are convenient to you, and some of them are debatable.

In answer to your question of extraditions to Canada from the U.S., I don't have this information readily available. But can you cite many examples where U.S. & Canadian authorities violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, whereby a top court unanimously ruled that such rights were violated and continue to be violated now and possibly in the future, and said court acknowledged that repatriation would be the logical thing to do? This is an unprecedented case, which is why there isn't an Internet rife with examples (i.e. it's not that a lack of examples proves anything).

Places such as Britain, Australia, and France have already done such a thing. They've all repatriated their nationals to their own justice systems, and they aren't the only ones to do it. (How is that for examples?) Why is it so difficult for you to accept this as a possibility? This is something the government should be doing if it respects the rule of law.

If the government decides to follow the rule of law (fancy that), they will need to do something to rectify the fact that they have violated the law. If, instead, they are willing to gamble that they won't lose too many votes by ignoring it, they can technically do just that. That is unless they are forced to by a court order. It's just that that hasn't happened here.

And your suggestion that Khadr isn't facing a kangaroo court is debatable, especially if the authorities decide to use illegally obtained evidence. If they use any evidence obtained while his rights were violated and/or they don't give him his full due process, it would pretty much be a kangaroo court indeed.

Repatriation of Khadr in the wake of this Supreme Court ruling would be a reasonable decision for the government to make.

02-02-2010, 09:07 PM	#60 (permalink)
Baraka_Guru warrior bodhisattva Super Moderator Location: East-central Canada	You're missing some facts. ...including such things as: evidence was extracted from Khadr while his rights were being violated and this (illegal) evidence could still be used against him in court. This means his rights are still being violated. You also failed to mention that in refusing to do anything, the Canadian government is essentially breaking the law and getting away with it. You seem to be choosing only facts that are convenient to you, and some of them are debatable. In answer to your question of extraditions to Canada from the U.S., I don't have this information readily available. But can you cite many examples where U.S. & Canadian authorities violated the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, whereby a top court unanimously ruled that such rights were violated and continue to be violated now and possibly in the future, and said court acknowledged that repatriation would be the logical thing to do? This is an unprecedented case, which is why there isn't an Internet rife with examples (i.e. it's not that a lack of examples proves anything). Places such as Britain, Australia, and France have already done such a thing. They've all repatriated their nationals to their own justice systems, and they aren't the only ones to do it. (How is that for examples?) Why is it so difficult for you to accept this as a possibility? This is something the government should be doing if it respects the rule of law. If the government decides to follow the rule of law (fancy that), they will need to do something to rectify the fact that they have violated the law. If, instead, they are willing to gamble that they won't lose too many votes by ignoring it, they can technically do just that. That is unless they are forced to by a court order. It's just that that hasn't happened here. And your suggestion that Khadr isn't facing a kangaroo court is debatable, especially if the authorities decide to use illegally obtained evidence. If they use any evidence obtained while his rights were violated and/or they don't give him his full due process, it would pretty much be a kangaroo court indeed. Repatriation of Khadr in the wake of this Supreme Court ruling would be a reasonable decision for the government to make. __________________ Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing? —Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön Humankind cannot bear very much reality. —From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot Last edited by Baraka_Guru; 02-02-2010 at 09:11 PM..