Canadian Government Guilty of Violating Khadr's Rights

[Born Free]

Nah...just set him free in Afganerstan with an RFID chip in his ass...for Predator target practice!

Man are you ever the tough guy...it's not impressive though...

[eyeball]

That's hardly a Canadian kid in my books.

In the books that govern our country he's entirely a Canadian kid and as go his rights so go any of our's. At the same sort of ambiguous whimsy whenever it suits the government.

[dizzy]

Agreed...thank you for confirming that Charter Rights for the disabled are a hollow promise, lacking investment and enforcement except for American big block retail stores.

PS: All of "my streets" and businesses are disabled accessible....it's the law. How 'bout you?

Yup, looking back over the past week, every single building I accessed was either setup to accommodate the disabled or universally accessible.

I did have a brief conversation with some dude from LA while I was in belize last month, who was complaining because his landlord grandmother was being sued for having a bunch of buildings that were not accessible to the disabled. Apparently, one guy is having a field day launching lawsuits in LA because there are so many buildings in contravention to accessibility rules. My conversation mate called it a 'scam', wondering how his grandmother and all of these honest hard-working landlords were supposed to know better. Clearly the accessibility message is not in the public eye, in at least some areas of the US.

FTR, i think it's pretty shitty to use vulnerable peoples' struggles as a foundation for a my-daddy-is-better-than-your-daddy calibre debate. Both countries are doing comparatively well in accommodating people with disabilties. But both countries could also do more.

[capricorn]

I don't believe it really does. I heard about the shiny new rape law, even posted about it. The controversy was a while ago, back in April 2009. Did you hear much more about it, after Karzai said he would 'review' the law, in order to appease Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton? Not much was discussed about what happened next.

Yes, I was aware that he managed to bring it into law in spite of widespread condemnation. He's quite the determined politician.

ANYONE who thinks that this is about removing safe haven for terrorists, I ask how that could be done, when the very same mentality and values, disdain for western equality sits in the government of Afghanistan itself.

You're saying the Afghan government is terrorist so it will tolerate terrorists in their country. I don't agree. What I would say is they don't want western influence in the way they govern their country and may in fact resent it. Ultimately and ideally, influence on the government of Afghanistan will have to come from the Afghan people itself.

These are the people our troops are fighting for, to keep them in power. Because it seems to me that there is no Taliban as a distinct cultural/ ideological movement, separate from the people of Afghanistan.

I'm not conversant with what constitutes the distinct cultural/ideological movement of the Afghan people. Are you? Ordinary Afghans don't want to be governed by the violent, insurgent types found in the ranks of the Taleban. I think they're just like most people around the world who want to live in peace and provide for their families. I like to think these are the folks our troops are fighting for. Our troops are smart enough to know they have no control or influence over who is in Karzai's government and don't make it their concern. They have an assignment and stay focused. Once the coalition withdraws, it will be up to Afghans to improve on their government in such a way as they are willing to tolerate.

[eyeball]

There are billions of people on the planet to be concerned with. I fail to see why I should be concerned with the fate of one fanatical, violent jihadist. In fact, I'd make a deal with his lawyers that he renounce his citizenship in exchange for being given asylum in Sudan or Iran or some other Islamist shithole, as long as they promise not to let him on any planes. I'd also be okay with the Americans shooting him if they find him guilty of murder. I honestly don't care what happens to him as long as he stays away.

Clearly you don't care but thankfully the laws of our land and most of the civilized parts planet do and for good reason, in this instance because he was a kid with a moral compass that was deliberately broken, in his case his parents. Its as plain as day that this kid was led astray for years. Given that, how on Earth was he supposed to know right from wrong? If the government had a policy of telling Canadian kids when and why it's sometimes wrong to obey their parents then it could be justifiably argued that Omar Khadr willfully chose to commit the crimes he's alleged to have done.

This is no different than trying to punish someone with diminished capacity for doing something they couldn't understand if they wanted to. It's disgraceful.

[bush_cheney2004]

...FTR, i think it's pretty shitty to use vulnerable peoples' struggles as a foundation for a my-daddy-is-better-than-your-daddy calibre debate. Both countries are doing comparatively well in accommodating people with disabilties. But both countries could also do more.

Welcome to equality....don't whine when it comes your way. The point at hand was the lack of remedies or enforcement for Charter rights....it's not all about you. Regardless of your observations, there remains no federal mechanism in Canada for realizing the "universal" rights of the disabled. And it can't be blamed on "foreign policy" encroachment.

Edited February 1, 2010 by bush_cheney2004

[eyeball]

... of nothing, really. What counts is eveidence that HE committed criminal act.

What really counts is evidence that he committed this with a sound informed mind. Kid's who have been abused, mentally or physically, do not legally fit that definition. Automatically in so many cases by now that this one should have been a no-brainer since day one.

[eyeball]

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.

It's too bad you're a Canadian.

[dizzy]

Welcome to equality....don't whine when it comes your way. The point at hand was the lack of remedies or enforcement for Charter rights....it's not all about you. Regardless of your observations, there remains no federal mechanism in Canada for realizing the "universal" rights of the disabled. And it can't be blamed on "foreign policy" encroachment.

You're right, it's not about me, which was kind of my point. Nor is it about... you.

I would love for you to show me evidence that people with disabilities have a better quality of life in the US than in Canada. If there are things that my country can learn to make things better, I want to know!

Of course, until you do, I'm going to stick to my non-nationalist pose and admit that our respective countries are more alike than different on these kinds of issues.

Edited February 1, 2010 by dizzy

[eyeball]

I don't consider Khadr to be Canadian, or to have ever been Canadian. I don't think I'm alone in that.

The law does however.

[capricorn]

In the books that govern our country he's entirely a Canadian kid and as go his rights so go any of our's. At the same sort of ambiguous whimsy whenever it suits the government.

I have no problem calling him a Canadian citizen solely on the basis that he was born on Canadian soil. Calling him a Canadian kid sounds an awful lot like saying he is symbolic of Canadian youth.

Oh, and let's not forget that being born over Canadian airspace also makes you a Canadian citizen. Is that child also what you would call a Canadian kid because his mother birthed him while on an international flight over Canada?

Because she was born in Canadian airspace, baby Nadine will have Canadian citizenship.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060925/baby_plane_060925/20060925?hub=Canada

To say that our books are really quirky would be an understatement.

[Wild Bill]

In the books that govern our country he's entirely a Canadian kid and as go his rights so go any of our's. At the same sort of ambiguous whimsy whenever it suits the government.

Such points remind me of some of the debates shortly after Trudeau first instituted our new Consitution and Charter of Rights. We had test cases and debates about whether or not convicted prisoners should still have full rights, including the right to vote. Also, if illegal refugees should have full protection under the Charter. There were a couple of other situations as well but memory fails me at the moment.

Anyhow, our courts ruled in virtually all these situations that these people were fully covered, to the total extent of the laws. Paul Bernardo gets to vote and if Idi Amin had snuck aboard an airplane and managed to get even one foot off the plane at a Canadian airport he had full Charter rights.

As a people none of us ever got to vote on these cases. Nor were they ever planks in the Liberal campaigns during elections, or for any other party. The newspapers covered a surprising amount of debate by columnists and in Letters to the Editor, so it was obvious that a hefty chunk of Canadians had strong feelings either way.

Didn't matter! It was just done! A fait accompli that no ordinary citizen had any power to influence. There was some grumbling and some pundits believe that these actions eventually helped add to the resentment that swept out the Liberals for the two most massive Tory majorities in our history but hey, so what? The legal decisions stand to this day.

There will always be a segment of the population that disagrees with these rulings. It all depends on how you define or value citizenship and the rights accorded. Some feel that since Khadr is an admitted traitor he abrogated his citizenship and any right to Charter protections. Others feel that the Charter is sacrosanct and should be applied even to Satan himself! Their view is that NOTHING someone did can invalidate your Charter protections!

This also ties in with the resentment of the abuse of dual citizenship, as we saw during the Lebanon evacuation, where many Lebanese with dual citizenship were vocal in complaining that Canada didn't do enough for them and yet returned to Lebanon as rapidly as possible after things quieted down.

It may be all but impossible now but I suspect that if we don't ever achieve some kind of consensus on the questions of Charter and citizenship applicability that we dodged back in the 70's we will never come together on these points.

[eyeball]

It may be all but impossible now but I suspect that if we don't ever achieve some kind of consensus on the questions of Charter and citizenship applicability that we dodged back in the 70's we will never come together on these points.

I've long held the position that every generation should get at least one crack at amending the constitution that governs them.

I'd dearly love to include something that lets kids know when its appropriate to not obey their parents. Obviously they need to have this information at a very early age given that it seems the public consensus and laws that define what a child is have changed.

Edited February 1, 2010 by eyeball

[eyeball]

To say that our books are really quirky would be an understatement.

Its not surprising given how quirky people are.

[bloodyminded]

No, it's a pejorative and somewhat contemptuous term but it speaks to culture, not race. What "race" am I putting down, and in what way?

The best guess would be the Arabs.

And why does the hard core Left make a fetish of self-loathing and self-hatred,

I don't hate myself at all. I am sickened by the hypocritically criminal actions of some of the world's most powerful countries.

It would only be "self-loathing" if I were to make the soul-destroying error of totally conflating my identity with that of my country, in absolute terms.

of attacking everything our culture stands for while glorying in everything hostile to it.

No. I glory in freedom, and attack it's lack. I glory in the notion of human rights, and attack that we don't hold to them.

You're the one who despises what our culture stands for, calling the Americans' "too soft" use of torture the actions of "girlymen."

Fat, smug and safe, never challenged, never in danger, none of you have the imagination to even consider where you'd be without the institutions and principals you denigrate.

I don't denigrate them. You possess an uncanny inability at reading comprehension.

And no one's more smug than the sycophants-to-Power, which is the essence of the rabid nationalist.

But without any sense of proportion, without any context, your joyous bouts of heaping scorn and contempt on us while enthusiastically explaining away the barbarism and savagery of our enemies show no real concern with anything but your own rigid ideological hatreds.

"Rigid ideological hatreds"? You can't open your mouth without screaming about "the left," and engaging in military fetishism. (BTW, you should read Andrew Bacevich's articles on this ugly, cowardly phenomenon. Don't worry, he's a social conservative and a career military man, so you won't get tainted with the ghost of Marx, or gays, or single mothers, or other sinister creatures of your nightmares.

Edited February 1, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Gabriel]

Nice try. It is very well documented that there was one than one interrogation. The first was preceded by sleep deprivation.

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.

[Gabriel]

Correction: furtunately, there are laws that prevent arbitrary detention and protect the assumption of innocence, as they protect all of us. That's not a cost, but a main benefit of living in our society.

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.

[Gabriel]

The matter of contradictory evidence is easy to find if you google. There are inconsistencies throughout the narrative of that night. The most notable matter is that he was not alone at the time of the grenade throw, despite earlier claims, making it quite possible that he wasn't responsible.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/02/25/khadr-opposition.html

But what if he did? Had he been killed by soldiers or air personnel during the battle, would we have charged those responsible with murder? This was a theater of war. I don't have any affection for this family, but we are talking about a child soldier and international agreements respecting this should be respected.

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.

[Gabriel]

How about answering a simple question. Its not about whether you believe or disbelieve the said evidence.

The question is...do you believe that Khadr should or should not be given a trial?

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.

[CANADIEN]

With respect to you exchange with Argus regarding various types of torture, your statement of "torture is torture" is nonsense.

The only nonsense is in claiming that sleep-deprivation as a method of interrogation is not torture. That's the thing that 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.

And the fact that neither him, you or I would want either illustrates the fallacy of the "this is not torture" argument.

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.

The issue is not how better or worse he would have been treated anywhere else, but if he has been treated according to fundamental justice. He hasn't.

Too many people in here are incorrectly equating sleep deprivation with torture. Sleep deprivation may or may not be torture,

Correction: too many people are incorrectly failing to see that sleep-deprivation as a mode of interrogation is torture.

Although mistakes have been made in this case with respect to legalities and Omar Khadr's rights (...) [\quote]

A delibarate policy is not what I call a mistake.

I really just don't give a damn.

Good thing that some do.

He's not some innocent person being wronged by the system.[\quote] The fact that he is legally innocent until proven guilty, the Supreme Court has made it very clear that he HAS been wronged by the system.

He is a piece of garbage and he'll get what he deserves.

He's a failed human being, and he will get what he deserves for the crimes he is found guilty of.

[dizzy]

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 do think that the heat of war will naturally effect memory. But an unfortunate requirment of jurisprudence is the ability to prove guilt without a reasonable doubt. What, exactly, is he guilty of? ANd how do you prove it?

I think the khadr family are shits. I think his mom needs to pay for what her husband escaped through death - accountability for being a bad parent. But, with the geneva and international conventions on child soldiers considered, khadr junior should be a free man in need of rehabilitation. If he engaged in a crime that violates international conventions (like genocide), then I'm happy to see him fry, but there is no publicly available evidence of this.

Edited February 1, 2010 by dizzy

[CANADIEN]

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.

It is most certainly damaging to the accusation of murder of the prosecution fails to meet the standard of proof.

Again, any sensible person knows Khadr is most likely guilty of countless crimes that we'll never know about.

And any sensible person also knows that "crimes" we'll never know about" have no bearing in a court of law.

[cybercoma]

Allow me to oversimplify...

Was the US wrong? Yes.

Was the Canadian agent wrong? Yes.

Was Khadr wrong? Yes.

[Gabriel]

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.

[Gabriel]

It is most certainly damaging to the accusation of murder of the prosecution fails to meet the standard of proof.

And any sensible person also knows that "crimes" we'll never know about" have no bearing in a court of law.

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.