Canadian Government Guilty of Violating Khadr's Rights

[Born Free]

Irrelevant. He does not qualify for GC protection. The reasons for his inelligibility are his criminality, his trial was a trial by fire.

He lost.

Horesepucky. We arent talking about the GC here. Its about the US SC rulings.

[Oleg Bach]

This means that any Canadian that steps off Canadian soil has no protection....What has really taken place here as far as the Supreme Court is a proof of sorts that the powers that be look upon any group or person that even so much messes with their bottom line is a terrorist - Our powerful buisness heads refere to all those that possible threaten their empire of greed and corruption as terrorists. As they abandon Khadr..they abandon all Canadian citizens who wander abroad - and I will tell you why - Those that appointed the Supreme Court don't give a damn about Khdar or anyone else on the planet for that matter.

[Argus]

Unfortunately, as much as I don't like it, the law says otherwise. And that's the one thing that counts.

I freely acknowledge that under the legal mechanisms put in place by the Liberals some years back anyone who is born here, even to illegals, even to foreigners who immediately take them back home, has all the rights and privilages as a fourteen generations Canadian who has lived here for seventy years.

I'm not entirely sure why they thought that was a good idea, but that is the mechanism in place. So even though Khadr has hardly spent more than a few months of his life in Canada, that period just after he was born and before his family moved out of Canada, he is still, legally speaking, a Canadian.

But personally, I don't consider him one, and so I'm not going to get worked up over his fate.

[M.Dancer]

No, his ineligibility stems from the shortsightedness of the GC framers who failed to account for the reaction that super-rogue diddling might provoke.

So you think the GC are wrong because they didn't ascribe to your own personal nonsense?

here's a hint, the GC are not concerned with the justifications of war, and as such, cannot be used to justify war crimes.

There are 2 things here that are obvious.

1) You haven't a clue what the purpose of the GC are.

2) You really don't care what they are

Thankfully he's still eligible for Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms protection, he still hasn't lost that yet. Admit it you're just as ashamed to be Canadian as I am aren't you?

Your natural state of consciousness is shame....not so much me.

I think Khadr should cowboy up and should do a Bobby Sands...

[eyeball]

But personally, I don't consider him one, and so I'm not going to get worked up over his fate.

Oh yes you will, I predict you will be in a bloody frothing lather over his fate.

[M.Dancer]

every one remember The PMO violated canadian law ...

& the Geneva convention never forget that!!.

Before we can remember, it would be helpful to know which geneva convention you think we have violated?

This should not be a long search, given that most of the conventions related to belligerents do not apply to Omar Khadr.

Horesepucky. We arent talking about the GC here. Its about the US SC rulings.

Following the thread is the best way to avoid looking silly.

[Argus]

He may not be worthy of our affection, but he was born here and he retains canadian citizenship. Who can claim he's not canadian?

Paul Bernardo is a human being - technically, but I can deny him the slightest sympathies or care about his well-being if I so desire.

If the immigration laws in this country weren't so wacked none of the Khadrs would be "canadians". There should be a ten year waiting period before you can even apply for citizenship. That allows us to know just what kind of people these prospective citizens are. It used to be seven years - I'd settle for that. The Liberals lowered it to three, probably to curry favour with immigrants.

Almost everything the Liberal party has done has been designed to benefit itself at the expensive of Canada.

[Oleg Bach]

Paul Bernardo is a human being - technically, but I can deny him the slightest sympathies or care about his well-being if I so desire.

If the immigration laws in this country weren't so wacked none of the Khadrs would be "canadians". There should be a ten year waiting period before you can even apply for citizenship. That allows us to know just what kind of people these prospective citizens are. It used to be seven years - I'd settle for that. The Liberals lowered it to three, probably to curry favour with immigrants.

Almost everything the Liberal party has done has been designed to benefit itself at the expensive of Canada.

The first bit of mother's milk you sip that is generated by Canadian soil makes you a Canadian - It's like a flower that pops up in your back yard. It is your plant. You sound like a creepy crawler - "curry flavour" what did you grow up on? Craft dinner and Campbells tomato soup?

[Argus]

Torture, no matter the degree, is not mere mistreatment. Want to prove otherwise, how about you go for a three week vacation at Gitmo, complete with being deprived of sleep the whole time?

I'm sure I wouldn't enjoy it - I like my sleep - but I'm sure I'd survive it intact, which is a helluva lot more than you can say about the roach infested dungeons which exist throughout the third world. If you really care about human rights and the mistreatment of people why focus on one of the cleaner, safer, saner places and ignore the more vile, evil, violent ones?

... when it serves your own "let's keep non-whites out" agenda. And you have trivialized human rights abuse committed in Gitmo, Bagram, or Abu Ghraib.

I've criticized Russia and Serbia rather severely, and our own government when it violated the rights of left wing proteestors during the APEC summit. I don't need to justify concerns over human rights to self-hating Left wing wack jobs whose sole concerns hover around the gleeful opportunity to critize Americans or Jews.

[Argus]

Sleep deprivation is torture. Of that, there is no doubt.

If you're a whiner, i guess. Funny how we torture our own soldiers during times of emergency,and how doctors seem to feel that 24, 36, and 48 hour shifts are just peachy kean for new doctors.

I offer you the same opportunity i have others. Choose between sleep deprivation and getting a hot iron shoved up your rectum. Think they're the same?

[Argus]

Neither you or anyone else in this forum has ever seen the evidence. Its all anecdotal. If you continue to claim to know exactly what all the evidence is, you must have been receiving it via your toaster.

The fact his lawyers aren't disputing it seems like a clue to the sane among us.

[Argus]

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.

By your lights all the unsophisticated hordes of the third world, particularly the really religious ones throughout the Muslim world, are innocent of wrongdoing no matter who they kill simply because their parents, famly, culture, government and religious leaders have led them astray. One cannot punish any of them or judge them badly because nothing is their fault.

Of course, the standards are somewhat different for us here. Not only are we guilty, even if we're simply following the behaviour pattern ingrained in us by family and culture, but we're guilty of things done here before we were even born - by our ancestors who, uh, were unsophisticated and led astray... but that doesn't matter, cause they were white, and you expect better of white people because white people are superior to all others.

Right?

[Born Free]

The fact his lawyers aren't disputing it seems like a clue to the sane among us.

Do you actually believe what all lawyers have to say. Bill Clinton, F Lee Baily and Johhny C. immediately come to mind.

[eyeball]

By your lights all the unsophisticated hordes of the third world, particularly the really religious ones throughout the Muslim world, are innocent of wrongdoing no matter who they kill simply because their parents, famly, culture, government and religious leaders have led them astray. One cannot punish any of them or judge them badly because nothing is their fault.

Of course, the standards are somewhat different for us here. Not only are we guilty, even if we're simply following the behaviour pattern ingrained in us by family and culture, but we're guilty of things done here before we were even born - by our ancestors who, uh, were unsophisticated and led astray... but that doesn't matter, cause they were white, and you expect better of white people because white people are superior to all others.

Right?

Nope.

[Argus]

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.

In Indonesia, children as young as 8 are charged as adults for the slightest crimes, and serve time in adult prisons. Laws aren't an awful lot different throughout much of the third world. Our laws have been softened repeatedly over the past few decades, to the point murderous youth now walk free after a few months gentle lecturing. Your belief that youths are not responsible for their actions if they were "misinformed" by their parents is ludicrous, and taken to extremes, by the way, would let off every racist skinhead and KKK member whose parents were bigots.

[Born Free]

Following the thread is the best way to avoid looking silly.

...perhaps you should step back from your constant confrontational nature and you just might understand that the reference point at this juncture is about Ghadr's trial whch has everything to do with the US SC and NOT the GC.

Have a great day...

[Gabriel]

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.

[Born Free]

The Bush administration also thought waterboarding wasnt torture either...

[Gabriel]

Before we can remember, it would be helpful to know which geneva convention you think we have violated?

This should not be a long search, given that most of the conventions related to belligerents do not apply to Omar Khadr.

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.

[Gabriel]

The Bush administration also thought waterboarding wasnt torture either...

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?

Edited February 1, 2010 by Gabriel

[Born Free]

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?

Lets not use Dancers favourite line. "So what" doesnt cut it. I must assume that you believe everything that Bush told you. Intentionally depriving a person of sleep and waterboarding are forms of torture...its all a matter of degree.

Edited February 1, 2010 by Born Free

[Argus]

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'm not sure why you would bother. You're speaking about a profession which has so expanded the condept of "rights" to the degree that clearly and obviously guilty killers are set free to punish the government for violating obscure technicalities of law. There is no doubt in my mind that if Adolph Hitler was found aliive in Canada, and the police didn't let him sleep on a comfortable bunk at regular intervals, or spoke rudely to him, or didn't ge thim his favorite cereal in the morning, the judges would be aghast at his mistreatment, order him released, and then let him sue the government for millions.

There is no sense of proportion or interest in justice among the legal profession or the laws which they write and which judges twist and expand. It is all about the phrasing and interpetation of laws, and who wins and who loses among the lawyers. Right and wrong are irrelevent, as is justice. If you "violate someone's rights" - however the learned judges are defining it this year - that person gets to go free. And nobody even knows what people's rights are now because they can change depending on any of a number of court cases active at any given moment.

The legal system is all a game played by layers, and the cases are about deciding the score. The higher the score, the more money a lawyer makes, and so, ultimately, the legal system is all about making money for lawyers. All else is just dross.

[Gabriel]

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.

[Argus]

every one remember The PMO violated canadian law ...

& the Geneva convention never forget that!!.

Actually, CSIS and whatever minster approved it in the Liberal government violated the Charter when it sent agents to interview teh guy. The only thing the current government is guilty of is failing to remedy this by trying to have Khadr set free.

The Geneva Convention doesn't apply but I don't expect you to be capable of understanding that.

[Sir Bandelot]

Choose between sleep deprivation and getting a hot iron shoved up your rectum. Think they're the same?

What an "assinine" comparison