16

Coming to a head, maybe


 

Canwest reports the Obama administration will declare its intentions for Omar Khadr by Nov. 16. That deadline, coincidentally, falls three days after the Supreme Court is to begin hearing the Harper’s government’s appeal of a Federal Court ruling ordering that a request for Khadr’s repatriation be made.


 

Coming to a head, maybe

  1. I understand we're being asked to extradite another Khadr. I understand the Harper government has refused to request Omar Khadr be brought back to Canada.

    Good.

    The fact is that under Canadian law if Omar Khadr was brought home it would be impossible to charge him with anything, he'd get time served, probably get to sue the government for a hundred million, and our reputation with the Americans would be sullied.

    • You say all that last part as if it were a bad thing, Jesse. The Americans took 7 years to charge him with something – the evidence they have probably was gotten under torture, he was in all likelihood brainwashed by his dad into fighting, and he was a child soldier under international protocols signed by Canada.

    • You say all that last part as if it were a bad thing, Jesse. The Americans took 7 years to charge him with something – the evidence they have probably was gotten under torture, he was in all likelihood brainwashed by his dad into fighting, and he was a child soldier under international protocols signed by Canada. He SHOULD be getting rehabilitated… and quite frankly. whether its a Republican administration or Democrat, I could care less if they're all mad that we don't take their black and white view on who is a terrorist and who gets to have rights and who doesn't. Hopefully Obama will take the right view and ask Canada to take him back.

      • We better get used to this kind of relatavistic interpreptation of our laws, treaties and international obligations should Harper get his majority. Oh dear! I seem the hidden agenda isn't even hidden anymore. What's more a lot of Canadians don't seem to care.

        • "We better get used to this kind of relatavistic interpreptation of our laws, treaties and international obligations should Harper get his majority."

          I just hope they don't come crying to me when it's their turn. Because I don't think I have any compassion left for people who think the rule of law and rules of evidence are trivialities.

  2. Obama sure moves fast! It's been only 9 months since Obama shut down Khadr's trial.

  3. Operative word: maybe. Remember, Omar is up on charges he KILLED a US serviceman as a non-uniformed unlawful combatant. Even under new management since January, the USA can't possibly let that one go lightly.

    • True. The thing is 1.) the US has almost certainly tortured him and 2.) they don't have any eyewitness proof that he threw the grenade. And the idea of trying someone for murder on the basis that the killed a solider in a war zone strikes me as deeply weird.

      It's certainly possible Khadr threw the grenade, and I don't like the idea of just letting him go – but I want a real trial at least, and I don't like the idea of sending him to jail a lot either. He was 15 when the US picked him up, he's spent his entire adolescence in prison not knowing if he'll ever get out, and even if he wasn't messed up before he certainly must be now. At the end of the day, how much can you hold a 15-year old kid brought up in a seriously messed-up family responsible for his actions?

      • And the idea of trying someone for murder on the basis that the killed a solider in a war zone strikes me as deeply weird.

        Absolutely true, if Omar were a Geneva Conventions recognized enemy soldier (by being a uniformed soldier in service of a signatory of those very conventions). Which he was not.

      • And the idea of trying someone for murder on the basis that the killed a solider in a war zone strikes me as deeply weird.

        Absolutely true, if Omar were a Geneva Conventions recognized enemy soldier (by being a uniformed soldier in service of a signatory to those very conventions). Which he was not.

        • He might not have been a "Geneva Conventions recognized enemy soldier (by being a uniformed soldier in service of a signatory to those very conventions)" but he certainly was a child.

        • Okay, so then where's his civilian trial then MYL?

          • Obama shut it down, in January.

          • In fact, the Conventions, as I have read, would have permitted the USA to off him right there. Instead, they did all they could to save his bacon right there on the battlefield.

            As for the civilian trial: Anyone who is steadfastly wedded to the "child soldier" line (and I am at least partially sympathetic to that argument) ought to be lining up behind the RCMP as they perp-walk dear ol' Ma Khadr to the courthouse for converting her son into a child soldier.

      • the US has almost certainly tortured him

        You are almost certainly lying.

        • it was uncontested in the proceedings he was subject to sleep deprivation and his legal rights were violated by his treatment while being captured. If there's a line at all between torture and what he was subjected to, it's thin indeed.

Sign in to comment.