Canadian Government Guilty of Violating Khadr's Rights

[ToadBrother]

No, I'd say its basically been pretending that the blow back from the Cold War is a justification for making new deals with new and improved bastards. It's basically been dumping the same old shit in a different bucket is all. The best the west seems capable of doing is holding it's nose and mouthing the words sorry but we have no choice.

Latin America was a basket case before the Americans ever came along. Iran, well, that was a horrific blunder.

But in general, I like the fact the Soviets lost.

Not like that child-monster Omar Khadr however who did have a choice.

Is this non-sequitur week or something?

[eyeball]

Is this non-sequitur week or something?

Say what?

I wonder how you would feel if there was a gun pointed at you. As Winston Churchill famously said, "If Hitler invaded Hell I would make at least a favorable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons."

In struggles for survival, moral considerations take a distant second seat. If an endangered Siberian tiger, for instance, were trying to gnaw your head off, and you were holding a rifle, would your first thought be "Oh my, I'm going to have to kill this endangered animal"?

[Gabriel]

Hey there Peter F,

I was looking forward to your reply. Let me be very clear by saying that I am not criticizing AI for calling on Hamas to comply with certain standards regarding the treatment of Gilad Shalit. Of course in a humane environment Gilad Shalit would have some form of contact with his family and access to reasonable things. I do not criticize AI for calling on Hamas to allow Gilad Shalit to be visited by the ICRC.

What I'm calling into question are the discrepancies between how these stories are treated by AI. AI doesn't call on Hamas to provide Gilad Shalit with due process, as they called on the USA to do so with Omar Khadr - of course Omar Khadr has for many years had a legal team representing him. I'm sure you and I agree that with few exceptions, Omar Khadr is having access to due process. Some mistakes have been made, for example him not having a lawyer present when being interviewed by CSIS folks regarding potentially incriminating information as well as the long delay in getting him to trial. But certainly Shalit's deprivation of due process is a hundred times worse than Khadr's... but you wouldn't get that impression by reading AI's articles about him.

My point is clear, that AI has clear and specific criticisms of the USA and of Canada with respect to Omar Khadr that it doesn't make towards Hamas regarding its treatment (and kidnapping) of Gilad Shalit on largely similar grounds. AI seemingly justifies Khadr's abduction by attaching him the label of "POW".

One thing I didn't mention earlier was that AI largely ignored the circumstances surrounding Shalit's abduction. Hamas engaged in a operation with the SPECIFIC INTENT of seizing a hostage. Hamas' sole purpose during this partially successful operation near a southern border crossing between Israel and Gaza was to kidnap soldiers or citizens. Hamas doesn't deny this, either, as Shalit's capture is advertised by Hamas as a propaganda victory. AI doesn't acknowledge this, and if anything obfuscates this by describing Shalit as a POW - implying that he was captured during some sort of legitimate conflict.

Do you see my point, now? I'm not trying to smear AI, I'm just saying some politicization is apparent over their which impacts how the organization goes about conducting its business.

From what I've seen, HRW seems much more objective. Although I haven't seen too much to be confident, yet.

Edited February 12, 2010 by Gabriel

[Gabriel]

Here is what i do know from statements provided, there was in fact 3 wpns found in the ally way that Omar was found in, a pistol found by Omar. one rifle recently fired, found next to dead guy , also a rifle recently fired found a couple of feet from Omar....DO we have proof that will stand up in a court of law...Nope....But it's kind of like finding a pile of crap on your kichen floor, and turning and seeing someone with the pants down to their knees and toilet paper still stuck to his ass....I can't prove it but i'm pretty sure he did...

I think there's quite a bit more information than just that. What disappoints me is that some people seem to think that the same standards can be expected in a warzone with respect to investigation of a crime. Investigating crimes in a warzone isn't like investigating a crime in a civilian peacetime area. We can't expect a video tape to be provided from the local 7/11 parking lot in the case of Omar Khadr's crimes in an Afghan warzone. As far as reasonable persons are concerned, he's guilty of much more than what he's being accused of. He needs to be brought to justice.

eyeball - I saw a comment of yours which seemed to sarcastically describe Omar Khadr as a child monster. Is it that surprising to you that a young person can indeed be a monster? It's always hard for us to accept but it's reality. There have been many disturbing crimes committed by many children over many years. I don't think Khadr's crimes have nearly as much to do with intrinsic flaws as much as with a flawed upbringing, but he still needs to be held accountable for his. It will be interesting to see if he makes any statements of regret or denunciations of extremist violent ideology. I'm guessing he won't do it, and will deny everything and act as a victim of an aggressive legal system. It may not be politically palatable, but some kids are fundamentally broken people without a reasonable possibility of being rehabilitated.

Anyone ever read Dr. Robert Hare's (Canadian academic!) books on psychopathy? They're easily digestible and accessible to laypersons. He talks about how psychopathy often manifests itself in very early years. I know this is a significant derailing as I don't think Khadr is a psychopath, but it's one of many illustrations that support the reality that there is great predictive power in analyzing a child's conduct towards what type of person they will become.

Edited February 12, 2010 by Gabriel

[capricorn]

The Canadian government could be on the hook for a multimillion-dollar payout to Omar Khadr, after the Supreme Court of Canada appears to have strengthened his hand in a long-standing civil lawsuit by declaring his charter rights were violated.

The Guantanamo Bay detainee, in a damages suit launched six years ago, has recently bumped up his claim to $10-million from $100,000, court documents show.

---

"The thing they should do is (give him) a whole chunk of money, much as they had to (with) Maher Arar, because there is nobody who believes Omar Khadr has any chance of being acquitted in a military tribunal and he will probably be sentenced to a lengthy period of time in prison in the U.S.," he said.

---

"There is certainly potential . . . but it is hard to imagine how money is going to make it better while he's still there at Guantanamo," said Milne, executive director of the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights at University of Toronto.

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=2529004

Poor Omar. All dressed up with nowhere to go. Not so for Mama Khadr and Omar's siblings. A cool ten million could go a long way getting justice for baby Omar via Pakistan and Afghanistan.

[eyeball]

I don't think Khadr's crimes have nearly as much to do with intrinsic flaws as much as with a flawed upbringing, but he still needs to be held accountable for his.

He is being held and what accounts for his actions is his flawed upbringing. How anyone can realize this while effectively also saying...f^*k the little bastard...is beyond me. It's utterly depraved.

[Guest American Woman]

He is being held and what accounts for his actions is his flawed upbringing. How anyone can realize this while effectively also saying...f^*k the little bastard...is beyond me. It's utterly depraved.

Saying "he should be held accountable for his actions" and saying "f**k the little bastard" are two very different things. If everyone who had a flawed upbringing was excused for their actions because of it, if people who had flawed upbringings didn't have to be held accountable for their actions, a whole lot more innocent people would be paying the price.

[bush_cheney2004]

He is being held and what accounts for his actions is his flawed upbringing. How anyone can realize this while effectively also saying...f^*k the little bastard...is beyond me. It's utterly depraved.

LOL! What a bleeding heart....I wonder if Bernardo tried this defense. Milk him for all the Al Qaeda-terrorist-perp intel possible, then "f^*k" the little bastard.

[ToadBrother]

Saying "he should be held accountable for his actions" and saying "f**k the little bastard" are two very different things. If everyone who had a flawed upbringing was excused for their actions because of it, if people who had flawed upbringings didn't have to be held accountable for their actions, a whole lot more innocent people would be paying the price.

Indeed, the defense is pretty much the bottom of the barrel for your one-note public defender. I mean, we're supposed to excuse some 15 year old kid who goes off to a foreign land to kill people because he was brought up wrong.

The basic rule stands. Whatever rights you may enjoy on your native soil do not extend one millionth of an inch past the border.

Maybe they should teach that one in school.

[eyeball]

Saying "he should be held accountable for his actions" and saying "f**k the little bastard" are two very different things.

1. He is being held because of his alleged actions.

2. What accounts for his alleged actions is his shitty upbringing.

What you and others are basically saying is f**k that account, ergo f**k him to.

Is this the new standard by which kids are to be treated by our justice system then I fail to see what it is that differentiates us from the enemy.

[capricorn]

Is this the new standard by which kids are to be treated by our justice system then I fail to see what it is that differentiates us from the enemy.

What differentiates us from the enemy is that we don't strap bombs to the bodies of juveniles with a promise of 40 virgins in heaven and $25,000 payments to the surviving parents.

[ToadBrother]

1. He is being held because of his alleged actions.

2. What accounts for his alleged actions is his shitty upbringing.

What you and others are basically saying is f**k that account, ergo f**k him to.

Is this the new standard by which kids are to be treated by our justice system then I fail to see what it is that differentiates us from the enemy.

And just how much weight do you think "I was raised wrong" should influence any court? To be sure, it can go towards mitigating factors, and often does, but you guys are basically using it as an excuse. I think this stupid kid is a good object lesson for any other young Islamists living in Canada. Maybe they and their parents won't be so swift to send them off. Or maybe they will, I don't know. Once you leave our soil, you're playing by someone else's rules.

Khadr went to far off lands to kill Western soldiers. It might be a bit of a stretch to call it treason (though if he had killed Canadian soldiers it most certainly would have been). To my mind, the stupid kid is lucky to be alive.

Maybe he got a bit of a bum steer. Happens to people heading to foreign lands sometimes. They'll get on the 6 o'clock news from the Mexican or Indonesian prison cell imploring their government, insisting they're innocent and so on and so forth. We'll get petitions to "Save the Canadian/Australian/American/whatever", and whether it's some Islamist deviant or some stupid moron trying to smuggle heroin, it all boils down to the same thing. If you plan on breaking the laws where you're going, do not expect that your native government can or will do anything for you.

Edited February 6, 2010 by ToadBrother

[eyeball]

Indeed, the defense is pretty much the bottom of the barrel for your one-note public defender. I mean, we're supposed to excuse some 15 year old kid who goes off to a foreign land to kill people because he was brought up wrong.

The basic rule stands. Whatever rights you may enjoy on your native soil do not extend one millionth of an inch past the border.

Maybe they should teach that one in school.

Are we supposed to believe that 15 year old Canadians can choose ALL ON THEIR OWN to just fly off to a place like Afghanistan or Pakistan without a single official at the airport saying..."say what"?

There is just no end to the holes in the reasoning behind the arguments you people are using.

[eyeball]

Khadr went to far off lands to kill Western soldiers.

To repeat, again, Khadr was taken to far off lands to kill Western soldiers.

[ToadBrother]

Are we supposed to believe that 15 year old Canadians can choose ALL ON THEIR OWN to just fly off to a place like Afghanistan or Pakistan without a single official at the airport saying..."say what"?

This whole "15 is the new 5" defense has me really wondering. I mean, were you functionally retarded when you were 15? The way you guys talk, Khadr was still crapping his diapers when he went to Afghanistan.

There is just no end to the holes in the reasoning behind the arguments you people are using.

The fact remains, once you cross that border, whether brainwashed or in full possession of your faculties, you simply cannot expect the kind of treatment you'd get back on Canadian soil. Whether the Americans are being fair to him or not, there is precious little the Canadian government can do. Believe me, even the Brits, who have been a lot tighter with the Yanks, have had little ability to get to their citizens being held in Guantanamo Bay.

Edited February 6, 2010 by ToadBrother

[eyeball]

What differentiates us from the enemy is that we don't strap bombs to the bodies of juveniles with a promise of 40 virgins in heaven and $25,000 payments to the surviving parents.

Apparently our juveniles are no less disposable.

[capricorn]

Sure. That's why we have a Young Offenders Act.

[ToadBrother]

Sure. That's why we have a Young Offenders Act.

Funny thing about that. Apparently it doesn't apply in Afghanistan or Guantanamo Bay. Go figure, huh?

[eyeball]

The way you guys talk, Khadr was still crapping his diapers when he went to Afghanistan.

What we're talking about is the fact he was still crippled by the head full of crap his parents started putting there - long before he was 15.

[ToadBrother]

What we're talking about is the fact he was still crippled by the head full of crap his parents started putting there - long before he was 15.

I'm sure that would apply to a fairly good chunk of all the criminals out there. That they were poisoned by their parents does not mitigate guilt.

[eyeball]

Funny thing about that. Apparently it doesn't apply in Afghanistan or Guantanamo Bay. Go figure, huh?

What's really funny is how we couldn't be bothered to even try to promote our principles and values in places like Afghanistan or Guantanamo Bay.

Nope, we just go with the flow and do like the locals do.

[eyeball]

I'm sure that would apply to a fairly good chunk of all the criminals out there. That they were poisoned by their parents does not mitigate guilt.

Maybe not when they commit crimes as an adult, but there's the rub...

The new 18 is now...whatever works.

Edited February 6, 2010 by eyeball

[capricorn]

What's really funny is how we couldn't be bothered to even try to promote our principles and values in places like Afghanistan or Guantanamo Bay.

You keep harping we shouldn't intervene in the affairs of another country. Now you want us to intervene and dictate foreign governments on what their values should be. You can't have it both ways eyeball.

[eyeball]

You keep harping we shouldn't intervene in the affairs of another country. Now you want us to intervene and dictate foreign governments on what their values should be. You can't have it both ways eyeball.

You keep conflating our simply setting a better example with intervening in the affairs of another country and dictating what their values should be. I'm not having any of your duplicitous bullshit today thanks.

[capricorn]

You said "promote our principles and values". That sounds like pro-active action to me not restricted to showing an example. Don't get mad at me for pointing out that you talk out of both sides of your mouth to suit your purpose.