[BeaverFever]

$1:

Khadr where he belongs - In Canada, in prison

Dan Tandt
Ottawa Citizen

September 30, 2012 8:06 PM


Depending on which news sites you favour, Omar Khadr is either an innocent pawn, who if paroled would re-integrate seamlessly into civil society just like any other wrongfully imprisoned, harmless former child conscript soldier; or a cold-blooded terrorist and unrepentant murderer champing at the bit to get back to bomb-making and mayhem.

Judging from the public and media response to Khadr’s repatriation Saturday, there is little dusk or dawn between these positions. The Toronto Star wants him released now, and make it snappy. Sun News’s Ezra Levant, incandescent with glee and fury, thinks the Conservatives have perpetrated the ultimate betrayal. “Khadr’s 26 years old and has never kissed a girl,” read a Levant weekend tweet. “I wonder how many wives he’ll have upon return. Not including his Media Party girlfriends.”

But what if the truth were more nuanced? What if the facts called on us to both condemn Khadr for his past actions on the enemy side in the war in Afghanistan, yet still acknowledge that he has been treated unjustly by Washington and by Ottawa? Ah, but that would be complicated. It’s so much easier, in Canada today, to stick with simple.

The irony, of course, is that the Conservatives themselves laid the table for a backlash by demonizing Khadr for years and stubbornly resisting his repatriation, which could and should have happened a year ago, under his plea deal with U.S. military prosecutors. At that time, a 40-year sentence was commuted to eight; all but one year was to be served in Canada. Did Toews & Co. think that, as long as they refused to look at Khadr, he wouldn’t exist?

Either way, they have him now. Who, exactly, do they have?

On Oct. 25, 2010, Omar Khadr pleaded guilty to murder, in violation of the laws of war; attempted murder in violation of the laws of war; providing “material support” for terrorism, spying and conspiracy. A widely published summary of evidence to the U.S. Combatant Status Review Board, dated Aug. 31 2004, described Khadr as an “enemy combatant” and “al-Qaida fighter” who “admitted he threw a grenade which killed a U.S. soldier during the battle in which the detainee was captured.”

According to the summary, Khadr attended a terrorist training camp in Kabul, where he was trained in “small arms, AK-47s, Soviet made PK guns and RPGS.” Further, he “admitted to working as a translator for al-Qaida to co-ordinate landmine missions. “On July 20, 2002, he planted 10 mines “against U.S. forces” between Khost and Ghardez. “This region is a choke point where U.S. convoys would travel,” the summary says. It needs to be said: Those convoys may as well have been Canadian.

Events culminated in the July 27, 2002, firefight in eastern Afghanistan, during which U.S. special forces soldier Sgt. Christopher Speer was fatally wounded by a grenade, and in which Khadr himself was seriously wounded. Khadr has pleaded guilty to throwing that grenade. There are legitimate questions about the legal validity of the plea, and the tribunal to which it was made. But this much does not appear to be in doubt: Before he turned 16, at an age when most Canadian boys are interested primarily in their social lives, Omar Khadr was a seasoned insurgent, fighting on the wrong side. To present him as some kind of latter-day Steve Biko is silly.

That said, there are enormous problems with his status legally. First, what makes him so different from other enemy combatants captured in Afghanistan? Khadr did not wear a uniform or operate under a traditional chain of command; but no insurgents do. He was trained in terrorist methods, such as IEDs, that do not discriminate between combatants and civilians. But that applies to all insurgents. His most serious “war crime” occurred on a battlefield, during a firefight, in which he himself almost died. How, logically, does that constitute “murder in violation of the laws of war?” Whose law, and which war? At Kandahar Air Field in 2007, I was surprised to learn that wounded enemy insurgents were routinely treated at the Role 3 medical centre, then released. How was Khadr’s case different from theirs?

Most obviously, he is different because he is Toronto born and bred, and took up arms against his country and her allies. He was also 15 at the time, under the influence of elders with a hateful, warped world view. The first difference explains why he’s so despised by the Right; the second why he’s so lionized by the Left. But neither extreme view bears much scrutiny, it seems to me, when set against the details of the case. Millhaven Institution is, in fact, a maximum-security penitentiary. It’s where Khadr belongs.

He should have been out of Guantanamo, and back in Canada, years ago. One doesn’t have to like him, much less absolve him of responsibility for his actions, to say so.

© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/News/Tandt+Khadr+where+belongs+Canada+prison/7322641/story.html

[ShepherdsDog]

If Omar really has sworn off the jihadist movement, than the worst thing the government can do is let those slavering whores(aka Mom and Sis Khadr) get their talons into him and bring him back into their coven of hate.

[BeaverFever]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

If Omar really has sworn off the jihadist movement, than the worst thing the government can do is let those slavering whores(aka Mom and Sis Khadr) get their talons into him and bring him back into their coven of hate.

...as opposed to the positive role models in Gitmo?

[martin14]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

If Omar really has sworn off the jihadist movement, than the worst thing the government can do is let those slavering whores(aka Mom and Sis Khadr) get their talons into him and bring him back into their coven of hate.

Many get parole conditions of not associating with former friends and such.

His own actions will show the way.



Besides, if he is such a sweet innocent boy, what's he doing in the PC
section of a maximum security prison ?

[ShepherdsDog]

Funny how all the anal ostriches like to quote the shrink used by the def attornies to tell us how wonderful this turd is. ....yet they totally ignore the opinion of the psychiatrist who spoke for the prosecution. He said Khadr was angry, frustrated and a a danger, who identifies with the jihadist cause. These dum phuks may want to offer their throats to the jihadis but I certainly don't. The bleeding hearts once again prove that their 'diorder' results in an insufficient flow of blood to the brain

[Thanos]

I'm sure that his supporters already have everything triangulated properly for when he gets out and starts blowing things up and killing again. Doing so won't be his fault, it'll be Stephen Harper's.

These people have no shame.

[EyeBrock]

I'm just watching CBC NW. They have his female lawyer on. Saint Omar of Scarborough. Just a mis-understood Muslim kid.

The CBC couldn't pick a worse case to show in a sympathetic light. Another million or so normal Canadians are squirming in their seats with me.

[Curtman]

Thanos Thanos:

I'm sure that his supporters already have everything triangulated properly for when he gets out and starts blowing things up and killing again. Doing so won't be his fault, it'll be Stephen Harper's.

These people have no shame.

No it'll be Stephen Harper's fault when he gets a big huge cheque for compensation because his government failed him. The rest of it is on the Khadr family.

[EyeBrock]

Curtman Curtman:

Thanos Thanos:

I'm sure that his supporters already have everything triangulated properly for when he gets out and starts blowing things up and killing again. Doing so won't be his fault, it'll be Stephen Harper's.

These people have no shame.

No it'll be Stephen Harper's fault when he gets a big huge cheque for compensation because his government failed him. The rest of it is on the Khadr family.

I think you believe eveything that ever went wrong is Harpers fault Curt. Your a bit like the boy who cried wolf on this mate.

[Curtman]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Curtman Curtman:

Thanos Thanos:

I'm sure that his supporters already have everything triangulated properly for when he gets out and starts blowing things up and killing again. Doing so won't be his fault, it'll be Stephen Harper's.

These people have no shame.

No it'll be Stephen Harper's fault when he gets a big huge cheque for compensation because his government failed him. The rest of it is on the Khadr family.

I think you believe eveything that ever went wrong is Harpers fault Curt. Your a bit like the boy who cried wolf on this mate.

No, I just finished saying that only that one thing is Harper's fault.

$1:

“Mr. Khadr was the only Western citizen left in Guantanamo. And that’s because other countries, Australia for instance and others, had repatriated their citizens back to their countries,” said Dewar.

Canada is the only country that did this to one of their citizens. Thats what will be discussed at the trial.

Even the Americans were repatriated. Imagine that.

$1:

Yaser Esam Hamdi (born September 26, 1980) is a now-former American citizen who was captured in Afghanistan in 2001. It is claimed by the U.S. government that he was fighting against U.S. and Afghan Northern Alliance forces with the Taliban. He was declared an "illegal enemy combatant" by the Bush administration and detained for almost three years without charge.
He was initially detained at Camp X-Ray at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and was later transferred to military jails in Virginia and South Carolina after it became known that he was a U.S. citizen.

[EyeBrock]

I think I can forgive our government for leaving him to rot. Why do you want him back so bad?

[Curtman]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

I think I can forgive our government for leaving him to rot. Why do you want him back so bad?

I don't want him back here at all, nobody does. I don't want our government picking and choosing which Canadians are worthy of rights, and which aren't. Ten years is a long time. Why didn't the Australians leave their citizens to rot? You think we're better than they are because we ignored our obligations?

[EyeBrock]

So, you don't want him back but our government are facists because they didn't want him back. Ok then.

[Curtman]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

So, you don't want him back but our government are facists because they didn't want him back. Ok then.

Fascist? What?

Whatever Harper wants isn't the issue.



It will be their fault when Omar gets his compensation. I hope they feel it was worth it.

[ShepherdsDog]

Schrödinger's Muslim