Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 14 of 14

Thread: Omar Khadr war crime convictions questioned after U.S. court decision

  1. #11
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,087

    Re: Omar Khadr war crime convictions questioned after U.S. court decision

    Quote Originally Posted by JANFU View Post
    It goes to the authority of the Military tribunals. What they were permitted and what they were not.
    From what we have seen, they could not organize a cluster****.
    Look man, I don't have a problem with getting Khadr out of Gbay or whatever prison he was at. His case was a sham and people on this forum got a lot of **** for pointing that out. However, if the courts have come to the conclusion that there is no crime in conspiring to commit terrorist activity (and that's what it seems like, I'm not entirely clear and I'm probably wrong on this) that's not something I can support. As I said, if somebody who speaks legalese can clear this up, I'll change my opinion but as I understand it, it feels a lot like the courts are saying there is no crime in conspiring to commit terrorist acts....
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  2. #12
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: Omar Khadr war crime convictions questioned after U.S. court decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Fletch View Post
    Its hard to imagine that conspiring to commit a war crime isn't a war crime, but that does seem to be what they are saying
    It wasn't "conspiring to commit a war crime," though, the charge was conspiracy. Best I can read it, anyway. IANAL.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  3. #13
    Living in Gods country


    JANFU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    17,930

    Re: Omar Khadr war crime convictions questioned after U.S. court decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    Look man, I don't have a problem with getting Khadr out of Gbay or whatever prison he was at. His case was a sham and people on this forum got a lot of **** for pointing that out. However, if the courts have come to the conclusion that there is no crime in conspiring to commit terrorist activity (and that's what it seems like, I'm not entirely clear and I'm probably wrong on this) that's not something I can support. As I said, if somebody who speaks legalese can clear this up, I'll change my opinion but as I understand it, it feels a lot like the courts are saying there is no crime in conspiring to commit terrorist acts....
    I did not intend to cause offence, my apologies.
    From what I understand, the tribunals exceeded their specific areas of authority to judge the case is the best I can come up with.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Hillary is the only defense I or anyone else needs.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Not once have I showed my dick to a woman and she thought it was creepy. In fact, in 100% of the cases, they were pretty excited about it. I don't know who you're showing your **** too.

  4. #14
    Living in Gods country


    JANFU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    17,930

    Re: Omar Khadr war crime convictions questioned after U.S. court decision

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    It wasn't "conspiring to commit a war crime," though, the charge was conspiracy. Best I can read it, anyway. IANAL.
    Interesting link.
    U.S. Appeals Court Overturns Conviction Of Guantanamo Detainee : NPR

    U.S. court overturns conviction of Australian once held at Guantanamo | Reuters
    A U.S. military appeals court on Wednesday threw out the conviction of Australian David Hicks on a terrorism-related charge, saying the activity for which he was convicted did not become a crime until years after he was captured in Afghanistan.

    Hicks, 39, pleaded guilty in 2007 to providing material support to terrorism after acknowledging he had trained at an al Qaeda camp in Afghanistan and met al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden.

    Court Overturns Conviction Of Bin Laden Driver : NPR
    The ruling from a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that Hamdan's conviction by a military commission for providing material support for terrorism had to be overturned because under the international law of war of the time, his actions — driving bin Laden around — were not defined as a war crime. Hamdan was bin Laden's driver from 1996-2001.

    Material support didn't become a war crime until 2006, when Congress passed the Military Commission Act.
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
    Hillary is the only defense I or anyone else needs.
    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Not once have I showed my dick to a woman and she thought it was creepy. In fact, in 100% of the cases, they were pretty excited about it. I don't know who you're showing your **** too.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •