Yes, I understand you hate Khadr. I understand many of you can't tell one brown person from another. I get it that you have no respect for truth. I am familiar with how you invent things about people you don't like if the truth doesn't work for you.
But really...the photo you claim - actually are bold enough to state as fact - of a guy holding severed hands isn't Omar Khadr, and if you touch a live battery to your one brain cell for a moment, you will see that the severed hand photo was taken in 1998. Omar would have been 11 years old.
And quit saying the hands and feet are those of an American soldier. They are those of two men convicted of robbery.
He's not Benjamin Buttons, folks. He doesn't get younger in 4 years.
Oh...and don't you think if that was Omar Khadr showing off severed hands and feet the military kangaroo court would have been passing around poster sized copies to every journalist on the planet? You know, to try and justify sentencing a child soldier to 40 years?
6 comments:
Good for you for finding that out! I saw one of those photos linked to in Macleans' comments today.
so brazen the way they keep simply labeling it as Omar Khadr, without question.
I'll try that again: if you google
"http://yfrog.com/0womarkhadr1j" you get four hits including the Lilley article. So andycanuck first used that web address apparently, on Aug 9 or earlier.
I see by conversations at Macleans that this picture was apparently being talked about back in July, in the last comment, by Mac, here:
http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/07/12/khadr-turned-down-plea-bargain/
And a Nov 2009 post where the third comment links to the RAWA page, without thinking about the 1998 date, I guess:
http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/11/12/the-prime-minister-of-canada-v-omar-khadr/
There is some discussion of the photo there; I even commented, but I don't recall looking at the photo; either I didn't look at the link or I forgot the photo completely.
Post a Comment