May 28, 2015

CBC's Omar Khadr "documentary" puts your tax dollars to work for the Taliban

Ezra LevantRebel Commander
 

Just as I predicted, the Canadian media is turning convicted terrorist Omar Khadr into a celebrity.

Canada's largest newspaper, the Toronto Star, teamed up with CBC, the state-run broadcaster, to put out a documentary about Khadr that airs tonight.

Except it's more like propaganda than a documentary.

And couldn't be more pro-Khadr if it had been produced by the Taliban.

In a long promotional article that ran in the Star this morning, the word "terrorist" is only used sarcastically, mocking the idea that Khadr should be referred to as one.

The Star calls Khadr merely a "translator," but he was really a bomb maker, as we've seen in video evidence.

Believe it or not, the Star actually refer to Khadr's father -- a fundraiser and recruiter for radical Islam -- as "a humanitarian worker"!

If you really want to learn the truth about Omar Khadr, visit our KhadrFacts.com website for court documents and other evidence the Canadian media doesn't want you to see.

(photo: Toronto Star)



READ The Enemy Within: Terror, Lies, and the Whitewashing of Omar Khadr, Ezra Levant's new book about domestic terrorism and radicalization.

Who are Canada's radical Muslim leaders?
FIND OUT and fight back at CanadianJihad.ca

JOIN TheRebel.media for more fearless news and commentary you won’t find anywhere else.

 

Comments
You must be logged in to comment. Click here to log in.
commented 2015-05-30 23:44:39 -0400
CBC ..so sad for any good person in uniform to witness our national media outlet playing judge and jury..
CBC, please let the courts decide..stick to your job and report the news and leave the junk to the tabloids….don’t waste tax dollars.
commented 2015-05-30 19:37:09 -0400
The Leftists turning this guy into a hero is sickening.
commented 2015-05-30 06:29:54 -0400
Apologies for baiting the troll once again… Garry Wood, Arar got a sweetheart deal from taxpayers, as you put it, because Harper chose to apologize and over-compensate for alleged mistakes made under Chretien’s Liberals. That, and the ever-increasing burden of political correctness in Canada explains Arar’s out-of-court settlement with the Canadian government for over $10 million. But it’s really not fair to discuss the Canadian government’s cowardly, PC-motivated response, without at least acknowledging that Arar’s lawsuit against the U.S. government officials directly responsible for his detention and rendition to Syria was dismissed.
Joan, your mentioning the wrongful convictions of Canadian citizens like Morin, Truscott and Milgaard is an excellent point. David Milgaard lost 23 years of his life being wrongfully imprisoned for a crime he did not commit. He was only 17 when he was convicted. Truscott was convicted and sentenced to death for the rape and murder of a female classmate when he was only 14 (commuted to a life sentence). He ultimately received $6.5 million in compensation from the Ontario government. Maher Arar spent a year imprisoned in Syria, his country of origin, and claims he was subjected to torture during that time.
Of the 80+ witnesses that testified in the O’Connor Commission, Maher Arar was not even among them, and none of his claims of torture were ever given under oath. I’m not calling Arar a terrorist or a liar, I’m just saying that in my view, he received a bit of a windfall compared to the level of compensation awarded to other Canadians like Truscott and Milgaard who experienced much worse for far longer. Whether Arar deserved compensation at all is a question I can’t answer, but I do feel that Canadian taxpayers should not have been held financially responsible for Arar’s rendition to Syria, his birth country, by U.S. officials.
Maher Arar is not Omar Khadr, and I am tired of people like Garry Wood making such ignorant comparisons. For one, Arar was cleared of having any links to terrorism, whereas Khadr pled guilty and admitted his direct involvement and culpability in terrorism-related war crimes, including murder. Omar Khadr was not a “child soldier”. He was almost 16-years-old when he took part in a firefight in Afghanistan alongside the Taliban against U.S. soldiers. Even the United Nations seems to forget that its own Convention on the Rights of the Child is limited to “children” who haven’t attained the age of 15, which Khadr had. What’s more, the UN Convention is specifically worded so as not to preclude the possibility of such “children” volunteering. And I have yet to see any evidence that Omar Khadr was in any way coerced to do the things he did, or that he is even sorry for his actions.
commented 2015-05-29 17:16:06 -0400
KEITH BARNES-ask harper how arar got a sweetheart deal from taxpayers!
commented 2015-05-29 16:58:55 -0400
Wake up Canada! Our own media, pulp and electronic, are selling us out. Let all the Department Heads and CEO’s of these offending Comic Books and Left Wing TV stations be sent to Europe, let them take their children also. Send all the children out onto the streets, in two’s and three’s, at school closing time. Any City in Europe will do. Let these same DH’s and CEO’s see what happens to these Kids. Next at around Eleven pm, Let the same DH’s and CEO’s all go for a walk around the City, let them enter the ‘No Go Zones’. Let them see what happens. Some of them may not come back. Wishful thinking on my behalf. Wake up Canada. The only answer is, as stated by Geert Wilders, "Mass Deportation and recinded Citizenship. Just when we need to encourage larger families and population growth, what do we get, Idiot Wynne teaching kids about Fisting.
commented 2015-05-29 14:15:14 -0400
GREIG MCKINNON-are you sayn arar wasnt a terrorist?
commented 2015-05-29 14:12:38 -0400
Don’t forget it was Jean Chretien who gave the parents of CBC favorite terrorist “emergency Canadian passports” which started the ball rolling. Was next for the little Terrorist? I suspect a open arm invite from Trudeau, into running for the Liberal party in an Edmonton riding.
commented 2015-05-29 14:03:46 -0400
Deborah Graupner, I couldn’t agree more. The socialist elites will fight tooth and nail to keep their precious CBC alive and even a referendum would not stop them from attacking Harper. Heck, they attack simply because he breaths air. But one thing is for sure, Canada certainly could use the billion/year and maybe if the assets were sold off, that would help bolster the Ottawa coffers.
commented 2015-05-29 13:05:15 -0400
While testifying at the Guantanamo military commission for alleged child soldier Omar Khadr, FBI agent Robert Fuller testified that Khadr had identified Maher Arar as among the al-Qaeda militants he met while in Afghanistan. On October 7, 2002, Fuller went to Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan and showed Canadian teenager Omar Khadr a black-and-white photograph of Arar obtained from the FBI office in Massachusetts, and demanded to know if he recognised him. Khadr initially stated that he did not recognise Arar. Upon cross-examination, Fuller clarified his testimony saying that at first Khadr could not identify Arar. Then after giving him a couple minutes Khadr “stated he felt he had seen” Maher Arar19 at a Kabul safehouse run by Abu Musab al-Suri or Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The validity of Omar Khadr’s possible sighting has been seriously questioned due to the time frame of the alleged sighting which was sometime during September or October 2001. Arar was known to be in North America during this time frame and under surveillance by the RCMP.20 Khadr’s lawyer told Canadian media that Khadr, claiming to be under torture at Bagram Theater Internment Facility, simply told his captors whatever he thought they wanted to hear. Lawyers and advocates familiar with the case immediately dismissed the allegations.Information gathered from the United States’ interrogation of Omar Khadr conflicts with the information gathered previously from the RCMP. Michael Edelson stated in public testimony given during the Arar Inquiry that RCMP officials from Project AO Canada had shown pictures of Arar to Khadr in either July or August 2002 and that Khadr denied ever seeing Maher Arar.Within an affidavit, Khadr stated he was visited by three individuals claiming to be Canadians at Guantanamo Bay in March 2003. During their three-day visit, he was shown “approximately 20 pictures of various people” and asked about several people “such as my father and Arar”. At which time he told them “what [he] knew”.Arrested in 2002, Arward Al-Bousha gave up the name of Arar as a possible militant, after he himself had been fingered in a confession given by Abdullah Almalki allegedly to stop his own torture.
commented 2015-05-29 10:50:48 -0400
I read the three-volume RCMP report of the Arar investigation. It reports that Arar repeatedly denied being tortured until he got back to Canada and lawyers and media got hold of him.

Arar showed no physical or psychological symptoms of having been tortured.

When Canada picked him up upon his release from prison in Syria and asked if he’d been tortured, Arar joked the worst torture he endured was “being forced to wear ugly shoes”. Instead of wanting to go straight to the airport to get away from Syria, he insisted Canada first take him shopping in Syria so he could purchase a pair of Rockport shoes. I don’t know about you but if I’ve been tortured, I don’t want to hang around just in case. But Arar was perfectly comfortable shopping in Syria where, he later claimed, he’d just been tortured.

On the flight back to Canada, Arar denied ever being tortured. He said a couple of times, a guard struck his hand with a ruler like teachers used to sometimes do to students.

Thr RCMP report that the court found Arar suffered electrical torture. But listen to this. The court found that not because electricity was used to torture Arar but because he feared it might be. Apparently he was put into a room with some electrical wires but was never tortured with them.

I have no doubt the RCMP jumped the gun in the Arar case. They ought to have held off until they had the evidence they needed. But Arar was not tortured just like Khadr was not tortured.

Arar was never convicted of anything, so sure, maybe what happened to him is worth some compensation. But $10 million? No. That award was made for false allegations he was tortured.

Guy Paul Morin, Steven Truscott, David Milgaard, all falsely accused who suffered far more than Arar ever did got far less in compensation.

It is a crime to falsely claim damages for torture that never happened.

Stop awarding criminals tax-payer money, Canada!!
commented 2015-05-29 10:30:13 -0400
Garry Wood, aka Grumpy Cat – crusade? You making a slur on Jesus Christ, PBUH?

Why don’t you post here using your real name?
commented 2015-05-29 10:27:49 -0400
An ad for the documentary came in my email inbox with a photo that depicted Khadr in a high-school graduation photo pose, leaning on his fist and smiling. I gagged and based on that alone, I boycotted the documentary. I don’t need that sort of poison in my brain.

I can think for myself. I wish media would just let Khadr fade away. Don’t make him a celebrity.

But since that won’t happen, how about Ezra gets an interview with Khadr and/or with his family? Or if Edney won’t allow it, isn’t there some independent journalist out there who would do it and sell it to therebel.media?
commented 2015-05-29 09:46:20 -0400
I’m all for a referendum on dumping the CBC. Harper would still be attacked from all angles, just for having a referendum, but the public would at least finally have it’s say. The socialists will die a thousand deaths, at the thought of allowing us peasants a say in the demise of their propaganda machine! That makes me happy just thinking about these vultures crying foul!
commented 2015-05-29 09:37:20 -0400
Erin; thank you for your superb “cut and paste” job.
Garry Wood; take note. See how it’s done properly, and that includes making reference to, and giving credit to, the source.
commented 2015-05-29 08:43:08 -0400
Gary…It was not on Harper’s watch that Arar was detained….it was under Chretien the Liberal. Arar tried the same lawsuit in the USA and tripped over his tongue when the US government’s lawyer said….Mr Arar…you would have us believe that the Syrian authorities tortured you just because they could and perhaps they were really bored and had nothing better to do…..what was it exactly that they were asking you during this interrogation ? Guess what….no straight answer not lawsuit awarded.
commented 2015-05-29 08:38:34 -0400
Donald, I understand your frustration about the government not wanting to take on the CBC. If Harper did, it would be a career ender just as there are a few other issues that would be the same if tackled.

However, I think referendums on the controversial subjects could bolster the support necessary to carry a motion like cutting the CBC funding. It is something we do not do in this country . . . that I can remember.
commented 2015-05-29 06:56:40 -0400
Harper was given a clear majority and he and his government obviously lacked the courage to take on the CBC by taking away their taxpayer funding. The alternative would have been to start funding philisophically conservative networks like the now defunct Sun News Network. Democracy has to now be spelled with a small “d” because we no longer live in true democracies when we are exposed to the propoganda spewed by the likes of the CBC and Toronto Star.
commented 2015-05-29 02:57:35 -0400
If Garry Wood could put together a coherent sentence, conversation and a free exchange of ideas might be possible. Who knows? He may even have a legitimate argument. But as it is, I have absolute no idea what the hell he’s talking about. Maybe he had a stroke! I’ve heard of people who have had strokes and lost the ability to speak coherently.
commented 2015-05-29 02:49:14 -0400
Yeah Garry, sure. I got 100K. So did everyone else who thinks you’re an idiot.
commented 2015-05-29 02:45:27 -0400
I happened to catch this program, and it only confirmed what I already thought — the CBC and The Toronto Star are entirely devoid of journalistic principles such that they no longer even bother pretending.
This fluff piece was so offensive, that I’m still sorting through my initial anger and can’t even prepare a logical response. I am still reeling over an Alberta Justice granting Khadr judicial interim release, pending his utterly frivolous appeal of the U.S. military court conviction premised upon his pleading guilty to war crimes. So, à la Gary Wood, I thought I’d do a little cutting and pasting of my own. The following is my comment to the May 7, 2015 Macleans article by John Geddes about Khadr’s judicial release:

“Bail isn’t mentioned anywhere in the [Canadian] International Transfer of Offenders Act or the Treaty Between Canada and the United States of America on the Execution of Penal Sentences. Article 4 of the Treaty provides that the “Receiving State shall have no jurisdiction over any proceedings, regardless of their form, intended to challenge, set aside, or otherwise modify convictions or sentences handed down in the Sending State.” The ITOA states that a transfer may not have the effect “of invalidating a guilty verdict rendered, or a sentence imposed, by a foreign entity. The verdict and the sentence, if any, are not subject to any appeal or other form of review in Canada.”
There is no constitutionally enshrined right to bail, only the right to a reasonable opportunity to seek bail pending appeal as an aspect of fundamental justice. Once convicted, however, there is no longer any presumption of innocence and the onus is on the offender to show cause for why he or she should be released.
With respect, Justices Ross and Bielby got it wrong. Their interpretation of both the Treaty and ITOA leads to illogical results inconsistent with the clear purposes behind their enactment and the intentions of the legislating bodies.
First, the U.S.-Canada agreement over Khadr’s transfer to Canada to serve out his criminal sentence was conditional upon there being no prospect of appeal, and on the mutual understanding that Canada has no jurisdiction over any proceedings intended to challenge, modify or in any way review his sentence. Yet the Justices’ consideration and evaluation of the competing factors in Khadr’s bail hearing necessarily involved a review of the original conviction expressly prohibited by the governing statute, especially on the third branch of the test for bail pending appeal.
An appeal does not deprive the original conviction and sentence of its legal effect. Simply determining that an appeal is not frivolous (the first branch, not a particularly onerous standard) does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the appeal is more likely than not to succeed. This is the standard of proof an offender must meet in order to satisfy the third branch of the test, whether judicial interim release would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. Where the crimes are serious, for example involving murder, as in this case, the threshold is much higher.
As Justice Wakeling notes [in R v Jensen, 2014 ABCA 435, para 42]:
“Section 515(10) of the Criminal Code, the provision governing judicial interim release before trial, directs the court to consider the “apparent strength of the prosecutor’s case”. I see no reason why Parliament would consider this an important consideration only in a pre-trial bail application and not in a post-conviction bail application42. No logical explanation for such disparate treatment is apparent to me. Given that the applicant no longer enjoys the benefit of the presumption of innocence and is presumed to be guilty, the merits of the appeal should be a consideration of greater significance post-conviction.”
In my view, judicial consideration of the “strength of the prosecutor’s case” and evaluation of the likelihood of success of the appeal is equivalent to a “review” of the conviction itself, which is itself expressly barred by clear and unambiguous provisions of the ITOA. Further, where, as in this case, the offender has pled guilty to the offences, even entertaining such a review brings the administration of justice into disrepute and undermines the fundamental principle of comity that informs the Canada-U.S. Treaty governing transfer of Canadian offenders.
The U.S. criminal justice system, and especially military courts, have essentially the same requirements for acceptance of guilty pleas as under section 606 of the Criminal Code of Canada. It’s called a “providency inquiry”. Khadr knew what he was doing when he pled guilty, but it obviously serves his interests (and the furthering of his $20,000,000 civil claim against the Canadian government) to now claim that he only did so under duress.
Finally, this is not a case where the governing law is antiquated and/or pre-dates the Charter-era, and the primary presumption of statutory interpretation is that the government does not make unconstitutional legislation. That ought to have been the starting point in this case.”

I urge people to actually read the law before weighing in with uninformed opinions. Having to keeping hearing the same kind of ignorant crap spewed by the pro-Khadr crowd, and knowing my own tax dollars have helped fund this latest insult to my intelligence, is even worse than listening to anti Bill C-51 “journalists” who likely haven’t even bothered to read the Bill before denouncing it.
Incidentally, for those who haven’t read it, Bill C-51 attempts to correct some of the problems with how sensitive information is shared between branches and divisions of the Canadian government and police organizations, as well as internationally, as a result of the Canadian inquiry into Maher Arar’s detention and rendition to Syria by the U.S. government.
commented 2015-05-29 02:03:00 -0400
Sorry Glenn, I just couldn’t help myself.
commented 2015-05-29 02:02:25 -0400
Garry Wood, stick to copying and pasting, as you’re obviously incapable of forming a single coherent phrase on your own.
commented 2015-05-29 01:59:48 -0400
Troll Alert ** Maurice Potvin, please do not feed our little troll, just simply ignore him…
commented 2015-05-29 01:44:09 -0400
MAURICE POTVIN-got 100k why not go thewre instead bashing-hating on muslims!i wonder how much norm c got
commented 2015-05-29 01:38:56 -0400
Boy, this Garry Wood guy sure is long-winded, isn’t he!
commented 2015-05-29 01:10:32 -0400
why thiscalled rebel meadia if ezra so rebel why doesnt go interview omar or mahar since did bring in 100k!
commented 2015-05-29 00:35:19 -0400
look what ive posted jay!
commented 2015-05-29 00:33:40 -0400
Garry – I did not know Maher Arar supported Khadr until you mentioned it.