The_Squid Posted July 11, 2012 Report Share Posted July 11, 2012 Here is the judgement by the SC: http://scc.lexum.org/en/2010/2010scc3/2010scc3.html [24] We conclude that Canadian conduct in connection with Mr. Khadr’s case did not conform to the principles of fundamental justice. That conduct may be briefly reviewed. The statements taken by CSIS and DFAIT were obtained through participation in a regime which was known at the time to have refused detainees the right to challenge the legality of detention by way of habeas corpus. It was also known that Mr. Khadr was 16 years old at the time and that he had not had access to counsel or to any adult who had his best interests in mind. As held by this Court in Khadr 2008, Canada’s participation in the illegal process in place at Guantanamo Bay clearly violated Canada’s binding international obligations (Khadr 2008, at paras. 23-25; Hamdan v. Rumsfeld). In conducting their interviews, CSIS officials had control over the questions asked and the subject matter of the interviews (Transcript of cross-examination on Affidavit of Mr. Hooper, Exhibit “GG” to Affidavit of Lt. Cdr. William Kuebler, March 2, 2005 (J.R., vol. III, p. 313, at p. 22)). Canadian officials also knew that the U.S. authorities would have full access to the contents of the interrogations (as Canadian officials sought no restrictions on their use) by virtue of their audio and video recording (CSIS’s Role in the Matter of Omar Khadr, at pp. 11-12). The purpose of the interviews was for intelligence gathering and not criminal investigation. While in some contexts there may be an important distinction between those interviews conducted for the purpose of intelligence gathering and those conducted in criminal investigations, here, the distinction loses its significance. Canadian officials questioned Mr. Khadr on matters that may have provided important evidence relating to his criminal proceedings, in circumstances where they knew that Mr. Khadr was being indefinitely detained, was a young person and was alone during the interrogations. Further, the March 2004 interview, where Mr. Khadr refused to answer questions, was conducted knowing that Mr. Khadr had been subjected to three weeks of scheduled sleep deprivation, a measure described by the U.S. Military Commission in Jawad as designed to “make [detainees] more compliant and break down their resistance to interrogation” (para. 4). [25] This conduct establishes Canadian participation in state conduct that violates the principles of fundamental justice. Interrogation of a youth, to elicit statements about the most serious criminal charges while detained in these conditions and without access to counsel, and while knowing that the fruits of the interrogations would be shared with the U.S. prosecutors, offends the most basic Canadian standards about the treatment of detained youth suspects. [26] We conclude that Mr. Khadr has established that Canada violated his rights under s. 7 of the Charter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonlight Graham Posted July 16, 2012 Report Share Posted July 16, 2012 (edited) The Khadr situation is a major injustice to him. He was 15 at the time of capture, so deserved/deserves some special regard in that case. He would/should be considered a child solider if he is indeed guilty of the crimes accused, though that is in dispute because who knows what tactics could have been involved in getting him to agree to a plea deal. The trial, a military trial in Gitmo, is IMO not very legitimate anyways. The odds of him having a fair trial are stacked against him in that situation. Having a 15 y/o kid stuck in Gitmo for that long is a disgrace no Canadian should ever go through, even if guilty of war crimes. I expect Khadr to sue the Canadian government upon his return and he has every right to. Unfortunately that compensation would come out of everyone's pockets and not just the politicians involved. Latest on Khadr, with Vic Toews stalling on making a decision on his return: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/khadrs-lawyers-urge-decision-on-return-to-canada/article4417108/ Edited July 16, 2012 by Moonlight Graham Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted July 16, 2012 Report Share Posted July 16, 2012 I expect Khadr to sue the Canadian government upon his return and he has every right to. Unfortunately that compensation would come out of everyone's pockets and not just the politicians involved. I've come to a point, I really don't care anymore. Just get Omar back on Canadian soil, reunite him with his family, heal whatever psychological wounds his doctors claim, pay compensation and turn the page. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted July 16, 2012 Report Share Posted July 16, 2012 (edited) The Khadr situation is a major injustice to him. His trial was an injustice. But, that's about it. Child soldiers are considered to be under 15 years of age. There's no indication Omar was forced to join the insurgent effort in Afghanistan. And the Canadian government is not obliged to nor can it force a foreign government to relinquish a prisoner. He has no grounds to sue the Canadian government beyond perhaps the breach of his Charter rights that the Supreme Court found had taken place when Omar was interviewed by CSIS officers at Guantanamo. (And, if that were the basis for a lawsuit, why hasn't it taken place already?) [ed.: +] Edited July 16, 2012 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted July 16, 2012 Report Share Posted July 16, 2012 Child soldiers are considered to be under 15 years of age. There's no indication Omar was forced to join the insurgent effort in Afghanistan. Omar Khadr was pronounced a child soldier by the Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict, the highest authority in the world on the subject, and he was a lot younger than 15 when he was forced into being one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 16, 2012 Report Share Posted July 16, 2012 As I said earlier, Khadr was certainly not tortured by any stretch of the imagination. The documentation revealed that Khadr was subjected to sleep deprivation for a short time (something like a week or two), where he was not permitted to sleep for more than four continuous hours and was regularly moved to different cells. This was done for interrogation purposes, to make it easier for information to be gleaned from him during interviews. This hardly amounts to anything approaching torture. Sleep deprivation is regarded as torture under international law and is branded as such by the United Nations. Sleep deprivation may sound quite harmless in comparison to other methods of torture; however, ongoing sleep deprivation is an extraordinarily cruel form of torture which leads to a breakdown of the nervous system and to other serious physical and psychological damage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted July 16, 2012 Report Share Posted July 16, 2012 (edited) Omar Khadr was pronounced a child soldier by the Special Representative for Children and Armed Conflict. Not after the age of 15, when he was arrested, he wasn't. We've been through this before. And that particular matter has no legal bearing on the Canadian government, anyway, beyond the case that's already been decided by the Supreme Court. Omar wasn't imprisioned in Canada. [ed.: + link] Edited July 16, 2012 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radsickle Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) His case has been shady from the start and EVERY American involved in his incarceration says he's "A GOOD KID". Here's one source: Noting his government was "not known for being soft on terrorism," Khadr's U.S. military lawyer Lt.-Col. Jon Jackson said Thursday that the United States wouldn't agree to a transfer if it thought Khadr was a threat. Prison guards and senior military brass, he suggested, are anxious to see Khadr go and government officials he's spoken with have expressed "frustration and disappointment" with Canada."He's a good person with a good heart and he wants to get an education and make a positive difference on society," Jackson said of Khadr. "Could he fool me and could he fool hundreds of guards over a 10-year period? I guess it's possible but at the end of the day, we rely on what we see and how we interact with Omar . . . He's a good kid and he deserves a chance at life." one source... Another source: One of his Pentagon-appointed U.S. lawyers said Khadr is not a threat."I've spoken to dozens of guards and staff at Guantanamo Bay and they all say the same thing about Omar Khadr, it needs to be clear to Canadians: He is a good kid and he deserves a chance at life," said Lt.-Col. Jon Jackson. another source In fact, why don't you doubters do your own friggin' research? Because you're still trying to promote a failing opinion? Sure, get semantic with me; not `every' American agrees; I spelled "Capital" wrong; I made it sound like Canada `locked him up'; I made a slight mistake on this or that fact.... If that's what you need to re-inforce your delusional, pseudo-moral opinion on why a Canadian kid should be thrown under the bus, go ahead, tough guys. Edited July 17, 2012 by Radsickle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radsickle Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) Every American involved in his defense perhaps; though I doubt that, too. But he wouldn't have remained incarcerated if every American involved in his incarceration said he was a good kid. In fact, some Americans have said just the opposite. Here's but one example: At least one American expert has sounded a chilling warning. After examining him over eight hours, the prosecution’s forensic psychiatrist told a military sentencing tribunal that Khadr shows no remorse and is likely to re-enter a life of terrorism. “He’s highly dangerous,” Dr. Michael Welner told the hearing 18 months ago. “In my professional opinion, Omar Khadr is at a high risk of dangerousness as a radical jihadist.” link Do you have an example from someone who isn't a celebrity-seeking, cliche-ridden idiot? Your `expert' is a fool. Do you have another fool to quote? (Preferrably not from a right-wing, crap newspaper.) After all, you said he's "but one example"... Edited July 17, 2012 by Radsickle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radsickle Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) It's actually the exact opposite, Khadr became one of the religious leaders at Gitmo due to his sufficient command of various languages and his familiarity with Islamic religious practises. He also radicalised even further while in Gitmo, evolving and "maturing" (for lack of a better word) as an Islamist terrorist. Some of this is touched on in the PBS Frontline series "The Al-Qaeda Files", drawing from interviews with one of his brothers who rejected Islamism and Jihad, Abdurahman Khadr. I think you're `touched'; Khadr may have interpreted for others but you're grasping at dung-covered straw to suggest Omar was a "religious leader". He was simply a friendly kid. Please provide a link to such silly suggestions that he `further radicalized'.... You binars can only think in ones and zeroes, eh? "Exact Opposite"?! What incredibly juvenile, manipulative, fascist language. Edited July 17, 2012 by Radsickle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 Not after the age of 15, when he was arrested, he wasn't. We've been through this before. So the special rep wrote a diplomatically worded letter that fell short of a direct indictment - she was probably at a loss for words at the thought of having to write such a letter to such an enlightened and honourable a people as the putative good guys in this goofy war. Quibbling about his age at the time he was made a POW/rescued from indoctrination is the sort of abrogation of the spirit of the conventions on child soldiers that's captured in the SC's use of the word "offends" in the ruling it has rendered in his case to date. And that particular matter has no legal bearing on the Canadian government, anyway, beyond the case that's already been decided by the Supreme Court. Omar wasn't imprisioned in Canada. You're saying the Geneva conventions don't bear on the nations that sign them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 Evidently, according to bambino, if a child in Africa is made a soldier at 7 years old, is forced to murder people and do drugs, but is caught at 15... he is no longer a child soldier, but a completely autonomous and rational combatant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 Evidently, according to bambino, if a child in Africa is made a soldier at 7 years old, is forced to murder people and do drugs, but is caught at 15... he is no longer a child soldier, but a completely autonomous and rational combatant. Evidently cybercoma feels irrelevancies are a valid contribution to discussions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) he was probably at a loss for words at the thought of having to write such a letter to such an enlightened and honourable a people as the putative good guys in this goofy war. Quibbling about his age at the time he was made a POW/rescued from indoctrination is the sort of abrogation of the spirit of the conventions... Not really, since the conventions are very specific about the age of 15. I didn't pick the number at random; it's where both Section 77.2 of Additional Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Article 38 of the 1990 Convention on the Rights of the Child draw the line. You're saying the Geneva conventions don't bear on the nations that sign them? No. [+] Edited July 17, 2012 by g_bambino Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraychik Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) The Khadr situation is a major injustice to him. He was 15 at the time of capture, so deserved/deserves some special regard in that case. Why? He would/should be considered a child solider if he is indeed guilty of the crimes accused, There is absolutely no doubt about his guilt. Although his own statements are irrelevant, he did plead guilty. He was arrested on the battlefield and was witness to have thrown the grenade that murdered an American medic. There are videos of him easily viewable on the internet of him engaging in terrorism (building and assembling IEDs, for instance). One of his brothers operated as a double-agent in Guantanamo Bay and told us all about his terrorist family. The fact that you add "if" as a preface to his guilt, as if you are sincerely unsure of Khadr's guilt, really tells us everything we need to know about you when it comes to this story, doesn't it? though that is in dispute because who knows what tactics could have been involved in getting him to agree to a plea deal. Oh, so maybe he's innocent, right? The trial, a military trial in Gitmo, is IMO not very legitimate anyways. The odds of him having a fair trial are stacked against him in that situation. I'm gonna guess that you don't know the first things about military tribunals and what distinguishes them from regular trials. Having a 15 y/o kid stuck in Gitmo for that long is a disgrace no Canadian should ever go through, even if guilty of war crimes. I expect Khadr to sue the Canadian government upon his return and he has every right to. Unfortunately that compensation would come out of everyone's pockets and not just the politicians involved. So Canadians are now immune to being justice by virtue of their citizenship? And Khadr was fifteen years old the entire time he in detention? Thank you for exposing the left's support for Khadr, and by extension, for mass murdering terrorists like Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. Edited July 17, 2012 by kraychik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraychik Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 I think you're `touched'; Khadr may have interpreted for others but you're grasping at dung-covered straw to suggest Omar was a "religious leader". He was simply a friendly kid. Please provide a link to such silly suggestions that he `further radicalized'.... You binars can only think in ones and zeroes, eh? "Exact Opposite"?! What incredibly juvenile, manipulative, fascist language. Watch Son of Al-Qaeda, it was a documentary series released through PBS Frontline quite a few years ago. Omar Khadr's brother, Adburahman, talks about it. I'm not responsible if you haven't informed yourself about the story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraychik Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 Here's one source: one source... Another source: another source In fact, why don't you doubters do your own friggin' research? Because you're still trying to promote a failing opinion? Sure, get semantic with me; not `every' American agrees; I spelled "Capital" wrong; I made it sound like Canada `locked him up'; I made a slight mistake on this or that fact.... If that's what you need to re-inforce your delusional, pseudo-moral opinion on why a Canadian kid should be thrown under the bus, go ahead, tough guys. So his lawyer described him as a "good kid", what do you expect? How does that support your original absurd comment about "...involved in his incarceration says he's "A GOOD KID". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kraychik Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 Sleep deprivation is regarded as torture under international law and is branded as such by the United Nations. Sleep deprivation may sound quite harmless in comparison to other methods of torture; however, ongoing sleep deprivation is an extraordinarily cruel form of torture which leads to a breakdown of the nervous system and to other serious physical and psychological damage. Thank you for exposing the ignorance of the left is asserting that sleep deprivation is now an "international crime" and tantamount to torture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 Thank you for exposing the ignorance of the left is asserting that sleep deprivation is now an "international crime" and tantamount to torture. Ignorance of the "Law" is no excuse as Judges are apt to say in court...with your post you become the definitive example of ignorance... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Peeves Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 I thought GITMO was long closed. Thanks for the continued interest in this erstwhile Canuck. Let's bring this poor boy Omar Khadr, a convicted war criminal, home to join his loving family. He's entitled to our Canadian benefits even if he was serving in military exchanges with our enemies against our allies. why the delay? I thought this was all cut and dried. Personally I'm ashamed he and the family are deemed Canadians. Ottawa to decide on Khadar's transfer by The Canadian Press - Story: 74039 Apr 18, 2012 / 8:02 am The Canadian government has received a formal request for the transfer of convicted war criminal Omar Khadr from Guantanamo Bay to Canada, Ottawa confirmed Wednesday. A spokeswoman for Public Safety Minister Vic Toews said Ottawa is now considering the request. "The government of Canada has just received a completed application for the transfer of prisoner Omar Ahmed Khadr," spokeswoman Julie Carmichael said. "A decision will be made on this file in accordance with Canadian law." As of July 2012, 168 detainees remain at Guantanamo. I thought it would be closed by now. On January 22, 2009, the White House announced that President Barack Obama had signed an order to suspend the proceedings of the Guantanamo military commission for 120 days and that the detention facility would be shut down within the year.[9][10] On January 29, 2009, a military judge at Guantanamo rejected the White House request in the case of Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, creating an unexpected challenge for the administration as it reviews how America puts Guantanamo detainees on trial.[11] On May 20, 2009, the United States Senate passed an amendment to the Supplemental Appropriations Act of 2009 (H.R. 2346) by a 90-6 vote to block funds needed for the transfer or release of prisoners held at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.[12] President Obama issued a Presidential memorandum dated December 15, 2009, ordering the preparation of the Thomson Correctional Center, Thomson, Illinois so as to enable the transfer of Guantanamo prisoners there.[13] The Final Report of the Guantanamo Review Task Force dated January 22, 2010 published the results for the 240 detainees subject to the Review: 36 were the subject of active cases or investigations; 30 detainees from Yemen were designated for 'conditional detention' due to the security environment in Yemen; 126 detainees were approved for transfer; 48 detainees were determined 'too dangerous to transfer but not feasible for prosecution'.[14] The Federation of American Scientists published a report entitled 'Enemy Combatant Detainees: Habeas Corpus Challenges in Federal Court'.[15]On January 7, 2011, President Obama signed the 2011 Defense Authorization Bill which places restrictions on the transfer of Guantanamo prisoners to the mainland or to other foreign countries, thus impeding the closure of the detention facility. He recently stated in a press release that he would not allow Guantanamo Bay to close because he does not support terrorist actions, however he strongly objected to the clauses and stated that he would work with Congress to oppose the measures.[16] U.S. Secretary of Defense Gates said during a testimony before the US Senate Armed Services Committee on February 17, 2011: "The prospects for closing Guantanamo as best I can tell are very, very low given very broad opposition to doing that here in the Congress."[17] After the United Nations called unsuccessfully for the Guantanamo Bay detention camp to be closed, one judge observed 'America's idea of what is torture ... does not appear to coincide with that of most civilized nations'.[18] In April 2011, Wikileaks began publishing 779 secret files relating to prisoners in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp.[19] As of July 2012, 168 detainees remain at Guantanamo.[20][21] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 (edited) I thought GITMO was long closed. Thanks for the continued interest in this erstwhile Canuck. Let's bring this poor boy Omar Khadr, a convicted war criminal, home to join his loving family. He's entitled to our Canadian benefits even if he was serving in military exchanges with our enemies against our allies. why the delay? I thought this was all cut and dried. Personally I'm ashamed he and the family are deemed Canadians. a while back there was former child soldier from africa in the news in canada and he was greeted warmly everywhere, it wasn't his fault he was the victim and was celebrating his freedom in Canada...and why would you feel shame? that's silly...you are no more responsible for what happened to Kadr then you are for the last mass shooting in Toronto or Dave Picton... where you can feel shame is in regards to our government, it's behavior toward child soldiers reflects on us the people who elected them.... Edited July 17, 2012 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 Do you have an example from someone who isn't a celebrity-seeking, cliche-ridden idiot? Your `expert' is a fool. Do you have another fool to quote? (Preferrably not from a right-wing, crap newspaper.) After all, you said he's "but one example"... I see. So people who agree with you are intelligent, educated people concerned only in the truth - as those who disagree with you, prove you wrong, are "celebrity seeking, cliche-ridden idiots." And of course your sources are unbiased, fair and balanced, not left-wing crap newspapers - because we all know the only "crap newspapers" are those which prove you wrong and/or don't agree with you - which also automatically makes them right-wing. Got'cha. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g_bambino Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 where you can feel shame is in regards to our government, it's behavior toward child soldiers reflects on us the people who elected them.... The government isn't elected by the people. That aside, do you have an example of the government's maltreatment of a child soldier that we should be ashamed of? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 The government isn't elected by the people. :lol: That aside, do you have an example of the government's maltreatment of a child soldier that we should be ashamed of?ya I do...Khadr! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 ya I do...Khadr! He killed somebody. Like I said before. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.