Gabriel

Why speculate? He's going to be charged in the USA and the PMO has made it clear that they will not seek to repatriate Khadr. If he WAS returned to Canada, hypothetically of course, he should be charged with everything we can think of. From illegally fighting as part of some non-uninformed terrorist organization (a war crime) to providing material support to a terrorist organization to treason. Lay on as many charges as possible and relentlessly pursue them to give him the most lengthy sentence possible.

What the hell is that supposed to mean?

But how can Khadr be permitted to do so as a Canadian? He's not an Afghan national. Furthermore, our enemies in Afghanistan fight unlawfully. SO each and every one of them is a war criminal - not that I care much for the rules of war. It's kind of silly to put rules on how you can kill each other, especially when the rules are only adhered to by one side of the conflict - us and our allies. I also understand that it is silly to expect the enemy to abide by the conventional rules of war, as they would be annihilated. How can one put a law before his or her own life or success in a war? I don't expect the Taliban to rule out certain strategies of theirs because it might contravene some UN convention. Still, he is guilty of something along the lines of treason, as he is providing material support to terrorists as they murder us and our allies.

I agree 100%. While purporting to be defending "all of our rights", many defense lawyers, "human rights" advocates, etc, are simply hurting us. I understand and respect the importance of human rights, freedoms, the rule of law, and due process. But as a human being, how can you expect me not to be frustrated when so many of those on the left are crying for the enemy while claiming they're in defense of freedom? It's angering to see people whine about Khadr being "tortured" because he was sleep deprived. Watch the interview, read the memos, his life was saved by an American medic for god's sake! On the whole, I'm certain he's been very well taken of. The Hitler example is golden.

That simply isn't true. According to that logic, arresting someone and putting them in a cell is also a form of torture. It's not a fundamental right of your to be permitted to sleep for ten hours every 24 hour cycle. There is obviously a point where sleep deprivation would constitute torture, and this is CLEARLY a subjective question, and one that is obviously in the hands of authorities (legal system, security agencies, etc). There is definitely no legal foundation for your claim that sleep deprivation is necessarily torture. There's definitely no reasonable foundation for it, either. You can't honestly tell me that you believe sleep deprivation for a couple of days constitutes torture, and then put physical abuse in the same category, regardless of "degree". Lastly, I'm definitely not some Bush fanboy.

American Woman - you made a post a few pages back linking some opinion pieces indicating that it is unlikely that Khadr would be convicted if returned to Canada. I think there's probably quite a bit of truth to this. At the very least, Khadr could expect a significantly lighter sentence in Canada. I ask folks out there who would dispute this, why do you think Khadr has been trying for years to come back to Canada? It's because he is aware of the leniency of the Canadian justice system. Although America, like Canada, is extremely lenient with many of its criminals, the odds are he'll get a tougher sentence down there. Khadr and his lawyers know that, and it's why they're tried for so long to come to Canada. Harper is also aware of this, and it's good that he has refused to try to return this piece of garbage back to Canada.

So what? Given the subjective nature of what defines torture and what the Bush administration perceived was at stake with respect to national security, it's hardly as outrageous of a decision as extreme lefties would lead us to believe. They're not pulling out fingernails and quartering people, you know?

Although I agree that the GC should not apply to terrorists like Khadr, the SCOTUS disagrees with us, and has ruled that detainees at Gitmo are entitled to the protections of the third common article of the GC. That doesn't mean that Khadr's GC protections were violated, however, simply that Khadr is protected by that portion of the GC.

Here's a link to a Huffington Post article which links to the released Bush Administration enhanced interrogation technique memos. I'm not trying to derail this thread, but I thought it'd be interesting to see various opinions (legal, political, and other) from official sources regarding various interrogation techniques - specifically sleep deprivation, as it is directly connected to the Khadr case. If you go to Part 1 of the report from the US DoJ, about halfway down there's a section 12, which discusses sleep deprivation. According to the report, at the time of its writing only a dozen detainees were subjected to sleep deprivation beyond 48 hours, only three were subjected to sleep deprivation beyond 96 hours, and only one was subjected to the maximum allowable by the CIA - 180 hours. Since these memos were dated May 10, 2005, they cover the time under which Khadr was undergoing interrogation. At least according to this timeline. According to the timeline, Khadr was being interrogated by CSIS folks around February of 2003. The video I linked earlier was one except of these interviews during February 2003, a video I'm sure we'd all agree reflect much more of a coddling than an interrogation. The claims that Omar Khadr was deprived of sleep for three weeks are unfounded as far as I can see, and at the very least are completely devoid of context. In other words, without knowing specifically what volume of sleep deprivation Khadr was subjected to and the specific methods used (shackles, waking him up, etc), it is simply incorrect to automatically label these methods as torture from either a legal or non-legal reasonable perspective. Broadly speaking, I am strongly inclined to believe that Khadr has been very well-treated in Gitmo, considering the circumstances. In other words, he is a detained illegal enemy combatant, we cannot expect him to have a luxury accommodation. If you read or even skim through the torture memos, you'll see that it's indicated that detainees are regularly monitored by medical and psychological professionals. Add to that the reality that the USA is the beacon of civil liberties worldwide, and probably has the strongest culture of any country towards upholding civil liberties, it is hard for me to fathom that American folks involved with Khadr would be unduly cruel and utilizing torture against a young terrorist. Consider the degree of care which was extended by CIA folks in obtaining legal permissions from the DoJ to carry out their intended interrogation techniques, and the elaborate manner in which the DoJ analyzed the requests made of it with respect to the legalities of domestic and international law. Is there any doubt in anyone's mind that the Bush Administration took great care in approaching this subject, even if it did come to conclusions about what does and doesn't constitute torture that many folks disagree with? Just as and aside, I read in an AP article a few moments ago that Obama is still permitting sleep deprivation (despite the silly claims in here that this necessarily constitutes torture, and that "torture is torture"), albeit much reduced - a detainee is permitted to sleep for four hours after 28 hours of being subjected to sleep deprivation. Lastly, is it any surprise that former detainees (and current detainees) will whine about their conditions? Of course they're going to be claiming that they're being tortured, which they may or may not honestly believe. Who cares? I know I certainly take claims from these terrorists with a grain of salt. My apologies for slightly derailing this thread into a broader discussion of torture.

Hopefully the prosecution will be successful in convicting Khadr of his crimes. Statements from various eyewitnesses which vary on some details (as we agree is understandable given the extreme stress of the situation) doesn't absolve him from his guilt. I doubt a jury will see slight disparities between eyewitness accounts as sowing the seeds of reasonable doubt.

CANADIEN, this'll be my last reply to you in this thread. In case you hadn't noticed, we're not in a court of law... we're in an online discussion forum. If you don't want to be a serious poster and insist on being childishly contentious and obtuse, then I won't waste any more of my time.

As a courtesy to those interested, I'll be back later with some information regarding legal definitions of torture with respect to sleep deprivation. I'm sure I'm not the only one interested in finding out what the real legalities are in this situation, despite CANADIEN's unfounded insistence that sleep deprivation is always torture and statements inplying that Khadr was kept awake for three weeks.

I'll say it again, agreements and treaties between various nations is hardly the same as the merging of states into one. Of course as time goes on we'll see increased cohesiveness between various states on various big issues like security or free trade in various circumstances. It's called globalization and I'm sure many of us here were learning about it before you memorized your multiplication tables. This is hardly synonymous with your conspiracy theory Alex Jones-eque New World Order garbage. I'm gonna guess that you're a 19-year-old arts student who suddenly has the world all figured out.

What I want is for Khadr and his family to be put to death. Of course reality isn't that easy. I acknowledge that fundamentals of justice require a fair trial, but I don't have to like it. Khadr will get his day court, nobody is saying he shouldn't.

Thanks for the link, I've since seen where the claim of "contradictory" eyewitness accounts from Khadr's defense is coming from. As I've already said to CANADIEN, isn't that completely expected from individuals' recollections of events in a situation of extreme stress - combat? These soldiers were in some of the most stressful circumstances imaginable, of course there will be some discrepancies between their various testimonies. This is basic psychology and hardly damaging to the case against Khadr. Again, any sensible person knows Khadr is most likely guilty of countless crimes that we'll never know about.

I don't know if you're intentionally trying to be obtuse or if it just comes naturally to you. Of course the freedoms and rights we enjoy are benefits and on the whole are good aspects of our system. Why can you not concede that it is frustrating to see these rights and freedoms exploited by evil persons? Of course one of the costs of freedom is that evil people get to enjoy the freedoms and exploit them. There is nothing untoward or controversial about that statement. In no way am I advocating some sort of dictatorship, I'm simply observing an obvious phenomenon.

I'm not trying to do anything, I'm simply posting it for people to reference. Khadr was interrogated by CSIS folks several times, obviously this is not the only example. With respect to you exchange with Argus regarding various types of torture, your statement of "torture is torture" is nonsense. This shouldn't have to be explained. Argus illustrates the point very well by asking you what circumstances you would find preferable - Gitmo with sleep deprivation or some Iranian prison. That question should make it easy to understand why many of us aren't outraged at Khdr being subject to sleep deprivation. It's just not that big of a deal. I have no doubt in my mind that as far as treatment for terrorists goes, Khadr had been treated exceptionally well. I'd go so far to assume that his conditions are probably better at Gitmo than many infamous North American prisons. Too many people in here are incorrectly equating sleep deprivation with torture. Sleep deprivation may or may not be torture, it depends on the circumstances. Although mistakes have been made in this case with respect to legalities and Omar Khadr's rights, I really just don't give a damn. I don't see this case as some sort of stepping stone towards Canada losing its way or us compromising our values, as some would led us to believe. He's not some innocent person being wronged by the system. He is a piece of garbage and he'll get what he deserves.

For those who are interested, here's the released video of Omar Khadr's interview (it can hardly be described as an interrogation, in my view). He definitely does NOT look sleep deprived to me, and he's being coddled as far as I can see. He seems to grasp the severity of his crimes and as far as I can tell, is crying our of fear of the consequences of his actions.

CANADIEN, I can't really see myself replying to too many more of your posts. The absurdity continues. Are you really comparing the treatment of Khadr at Club Gitmo to what McCain endured? Or what Maher Arar endured? Why are you so consistently ridiculous? I also haven't seen any information to support your earlier claim that Omar Khadr was undergoing sleep deprivation for a month. Even if your claim is true (again, your word can't be taken at face value as far as I'm concerned), it would depend on what degree of sleep deprivation he endured if we are to decide on whether or not it qualified as torture. Most ridiculous is your rejection of the importance of analyzing Khadr's family history, as if it has no bearing at all on this story and this case. It is wholly relevant to this case. I'm speechless. How am I supposed to respond to such a crazy suggestion?

So what? It's a war. What do you expect? It was a fight between Americans and terrorists, of course there will be differing recollections of the details of the event when everyone's stress levels were extreme. This is basic psychology. To me it seems that the grenade charge is a token charge. Since those of us who are honest know he must be guilty of a laundry list of crimes, the only way to get justice is to charge him for his involvement in the battle at which he was captured - as there will be some evidence to support this. He has obviously assisted in the killing and harming of American and other allies' soldiers prior to these events. He was living and working with a group that ONLY does harm. Perhaps he also played a role in killing and harming civilian non-combatants, as well. He is a monster and needs to be dealt with, so given the realty that "In a court of law, the crimes he's committed but that are not prosucuted for lack of evidence do not exist" (your own words), we need to find a way to keep him behind bars given the system we have. Unfortunately, the rights that are there to protect us also protect our enemies. That's one of the costs of living in a free society, that evil people also have access to these rights. Time will tell, let's just hope that justice is served and that he receives a harsh punishment. It's too bad he won't be executed.

I'd still like to know where you're getting your information regarding the eyewitness testimony being contradictory. All I can find online is that Khadr's lawyers claim there are some contradictions betwen the original Pentagon story of Khadr being the last survivor of the fight and an American soldier saying otherwise. So what? You seem to be implying that this somehow absolves him of guilt. Try being honest for a moment, and ask yourself what a fifteen-year-old from a known terrorist family (which is indisputable) is doing in Afghanistan fighting with the terrorists. Like I've already said, he certainly wasn't on a nature retreat. Khadr has already admitted to being a terrorist, anyways (not that a confession is even necessary). As far as any rational and honest individual is concerned, a young Muslim Canadian being in Afghanistan living among terrorists coming from a well-known terrorist family is obviously guilty of providing material support to our enemies.

Since when is evidence made public before a trial, anyways? Have you even considered that perhaps there are national security matters involved in this case? It's also untrue that evidence hasn't been made public, you're free to do a Google search and learn about some of the public knowledge about the case - that he comes from a family of terrorists (that's quite a big piece of evidence!), he was captured fighting alongside the terrorists in Afghanistan (he wasn't there on a boyscout trip), he has confessed to being a terrorist, etc, etc. He wasn't just arbitrarily picked up, charged, and detained for years just for the hell of it.

Where are you getting your information from? Since when was there contradictory eyewitness testimony? Allow me to ask a broader question: do you actually believe there is a possibility that Omar Khadr ISN'T guilt of providing material support to our terrorist enemies in assisting them to harm and kill American soldiers? He's facing several charges, one of which is murder - throwing a grenade that killed an American medic. From my perspective, the list of crimes he's committed will never really be known. The five charges he is facing are only crimes that there is evidence to support. Imagine how many other crimes he committed while working with the enemy. Please answer the question - do you actually think there is a shred of possibility that Omar Khadr is innocent of the crimes he is being charged with?

Exactly. Agreements between states, as have been made for how many centuries, now? - are not synonymous with merging states into some sort of megastate or empire. What is this maple_leaf182 person smoking? Are you a 19-year-old arts student, maple_leaf182? I'll take a pass on you Alex Jones, New World Order, "loose change", Michael Moore, and Zeitgeist. To everyone else, this thread is a complete disaster. It seriously degenerated into one of those grade-eight calibre America vs Canada debates masquerading as some sort of intelligent investigation into culture. But it is what it is, immature squabbling. Anyways peace, love, and blessings to all.

CANADIEN, you've hit a new height of absurdity.... cutting off hands and limbs? Are you serious? It shouldn't have to be said, but there's quite a range between not having a lawyer present when being interviewed by CSIS and having your limbs cut off. And sleep deprivation isn't necessarily torture, no matter how many times to try to imply that it is. It's so typical to suggest that the USA is some bully that goes around the world abusing everyone, and doing whatever it pleases. My initial impression of you was correct. I don't want to derail the thread into the Afghan detainee issue, but there's a slight problem with suggesting that Canada detain all of its prisoners WITHOUT ANY OF OUR OWN INFRASTRUCTURE. Imagine if someone like you was in charge, you'd led the detainees go because they didn't have access to correspondence education courses in prison. There's reality, and then there's your fantasy.