One can only imagine what it must be like for an adult prisoner to endure US treatment at Guantanamo. But for Omar Khadr, who was sent to the facility when he was just fifteen years of age, his experience must have been all the more traumatic.
Today the Toronto Star released video footage of Kadr, then sixteen, being question by CSIS agents. In the video, which was secretly shot through an air vent, Khadr appears to be suffering from complete emotional detachment. When the agents leave the room, and he is left alone, his fear and extremely heightened state of anxiety remain visibly amplified, indicating that either, at the age of sixteen, he deserves an academy award because he knew he was being filmed, or that he was indeed so traumatically enveloped as to render him in such a state.
Legally, Khadr should never have been taken to Guantanamo. International law dictates that he should have been classified a child soldier and treated as such. Instead he was shipped off to the world’s foremost black hole and has been a prisoner there ever since, subjected to God knows what. If FBI documents released this year are any indication, entirely unethical interrogation practices were certainly on the menu.
Of course, your average ‘kill-em-all pundit’ thinks it all pathetic, that the video demonstrates that the CSIS agents that questioned Khadr displayed a semblance of compassion. But let’s remember one thing – they left him there. In fact, they, and the government of this country at the time, and currently, are just as complicit as those holding Khadr.
So what does that make us, exactly?
If you’re a Canadian that believes that this nation is not the sort of nation that stands shoulder to shoulder with those that have been responsible for holding individuals for years only to discover that many of them are innocent (see the McClatchy reports from June), despite the fact that they’ve been denied their rights under the law and international conventions while, at the same time, those holding them profess to be globally instilling the virtues of the rule of law, then you have cause for serious concern. Because that is not what my grandfather and two of my great uncles fought to defend sixty some odd years ago, and that is certainly not the nation in which I want to die.
I have traveled across this country almost seventy times, coast to coast, and seen more of it, and its people, than the majority of Canadians ever will. And I can honestly say, given my experiences, the acceptance, and even the participation, in such criminality is not what this country stands for.
If CSIS agents interviewed Khadr that means that our government has been complicit in condoning US detentions and all that they entail.
From the Toronto Star article…
“Documents released by Khadr’s lawyers last week raised questions about just what Canada knew concerning Khadr’s treatment. Canadian officials have always publicly stated that they have “sought and received assurances” from the U.S. that Khadr has been treated humanely. But a foreign affairs document released last week revealed that Gould had been told that Khadr was subjected to a sleep deprivation regime the U.S. military dubbed the “frequent flyer program.”
The practice is considered mental torture, according to international law and the U.S. Army Field Manual that governs military interrogators.
“It is shocking to learn that as far back as five years ago Canadian officials knew of the torture and ill-treatment Omar Khadr had experienced but did not intervene on his behalf,” Amnesty International Canada wrote to Harper after the information was revealed.”
While contacting the office of the Prime Minister is somewhat of a futile gesture given that complaints from actual citizens are routinely disregarded, the action itself, with regards to the belief that this nation’s government is still accountable to the people, is important. I therefore urge you to email the office of the Prime Minister about this affair. You can also contact his office by mail or fax at the address listed below…
Office of the Prime Minister
80 Wellington Street
Ottawa
K1A 0A2
Fax: 613-941-6900
Report
Given the current government’s promise to toughen sanctions for youth crime, our complaints will most certainly fall on deaf ears. But if enough of us complain, we can only hope they’ll actually realize that they are not doing what voters want, and that’s all they really care about – not about what’s morally right, despite what they say.
Report
Thanks for the entry..
“I therefore urge you to email the office of the Prime Minister about this affair.”
I’ll do so. I’m not Canadian but that’s not just a canadian issue, I think. We’ve had our Omar Khadr and it hurts that the world hasn’t learned anything since Murat Kurnaz.
I can’t get theses ill sounds off my head he was making just like someone deeply traumatized would do.
The point is that these people and their fates fall into oblivion once they come home and the spotlights of the media turn off them. And ask Kids in middle school for the name of Murat Kurnaz most of them will just shrug. That’s bitter. But yeah how can one expect it to be any different considering the fact that even children are getting indoctrinated via children’s news and other such programs of “high educational value” by simply telling them lies on current affairs.
Report
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/07/15/gitmo.tapes/index.html
Try reading the comments on that article without getting pissed off. I had a hard time trying to not write a nasty comment but my common sense told me they’d never let it get past moderation anyway. I love how they brand him as a murderer for killing a soldier fighting in a war in which the risks were obvious. Why don’t they just go drop some more bombs on wedding parties and sexually abuse their prisoners…
Report
I hate to be pessimistic but if Amnesty International’s pleas to Harper are ignored, then what makes you think he’ll listen to anyone? The truth is that democracy does not exist in our country in it’s definitive form. We are a democratic country for one day every five years and even then, that consists of us given the choice between this self serving politician or that one. This is a growing problem everywhere in the world. Look at the situation that is brewing with Iran. Even the protests from other countries fall on deaf ears.
My heart goes out to this young man and if there was anything that I could do that would be anything more than trying to ease a guilty conscience, I truly would. I have, in the past, signed petitions on many different issues, wrote to members of parliament, gave support in any way I could for things that I felt were injust and all it’s ever done is create frustration. If anyone can argue that I’m wrong, please do.
Report
That blog is truly sick. I must be so naive: I didn’t realise that human beings really could be this ignorant :0(
I will email your OoPM. Thank you Matt.
Report
I’ve got to agree with comment # 3.
How does one get charged with murder for killing an enemy in the middle of a warzone?
Child soldier or not, that’s what soldiers do. They kill each other.
But surely it’s not murder when our men and women in uniform kill a member of the Taliban.
That’s because we’re on the “good” side.
Report
Done.
Report
Maybe I could suggest also sending an email to the office of your federal member of parliament as well as to the PMO.
Report
Don’t forget that it’s free postage to mail any member of Parliament!
No effort is futile when it comes to standing up for what one believes.
Apathy is costly. Freedom is not free … sending a letter to your MP is.
Report
I feel for this kid.. It’s not his fault at all that Americans were attacking his family.. They have different values than we do and a different perspective on life.. They wont factor that into the court case, poor kid, he just has major separation anxiety from his family. I can’t imagine the pain he is going through day after day being in that piece of garbage of a prison. This is depressing and extremely unfair for him, if I had the choice I would probably just let him go and keep an eye on him. He only killed in self defense and in the united states that is not even a crime.
Report
I just saw the video on the BBC’s Ten O’Clock News here. Blink, and you’d miss it though… :0(
Report
Done and Done. Email sent.
Report
Did that agent ACTUALLY try to make the argument that remaining in Cuba was better than going home to Canada because “the weather’s nice, there’s no snow”? Seriously? Tell me my feverish brain just made that up on its own…
This whole case is appalling.
Report
the issue is a little more complex than Canadian media makes it out to be.
to be a soldier, you have to be properly defined as one. meaning you have to wear distinct uniforms and other markings which give you soldier status. otherwise, you are merely a militant. and unlike, say lebanon or palestine, where resistance by non-soldiers is not only legal but a moral necessity, in a war zone like afghanistan, where the afghan people and the international community want the eradication of the taliban, to fight for the taliban is not a legally or morally defensible position. this notwithstanding, the bottom line is if you’re not identified as a soldier, you don’t get treated as one.
secondly, I think a relevant analogy of child soldiers is the young offenders act. an exception to the young offenders act is the commission of federal crimes, which eventually lead to the young offender being tried as an adult. murder is a federal crime.
a 15 year old is fully capable of knowing right from wrong. unlike ishmael beah, who had his whole family killed, was told to fight or die and fed a steady stream of drugs, khadr had the benefit of growing up in a civilized society and the option of going to the police and having his dad arrested for terrorism and what one could humbly call bad parenting.
finally, it is important to note that khadr and his militant peers were not defending themselves. they initiated the attack by killing two afghan interpreters. an A-10 got called in, leveled the house, and upon closer inspection khadr(who was the only person alive at the time, in the building) throws a grenade which kills a medic. for everyone who claims to know about international law and the laws of war, look up the combatant status of medics, and what their killings constitute.
finally, it should be noted that khadr’s trial has been expedited, as under international law as an unlawful combatant he can be held as long as the conflict exists, in afghanistan’s case, indefinitely. as critical as I am of American policies, I think its fair to say khadrs case has been expedited because he is such an unusual case.
in terms of canada’s role in this whole mess, its not as clear cut as to say “hes a child soldier, hes canadian, he should be brought back to canada etc..” don’t take my word for it, greater minds appreciate the complexities and new legal ground this case is breaking:
http://utorontolaw.typepad.com/faculty_blog/2008/05/the-significanc.html
last thought: I encourage people to consider what role the media has in controlling the perception of this case, and distancing people from rational thought by whipping people up into an emotional frenzy. remember, the media is a business, and is selling a product. it is not educating and informing us. many of the readers here cite chomsky when convenient. I courage everyone to read his views on mainstream media, and frame their opinions on this matter with those thoughts in mind.
Report
Email campaigns are easily dismissed via the delete button in most email sites. The Only way to champion this cause would be a mass demonstration or rally in ottawa. Sometimes you have to make a big visible noise in order to be heard.
Report
A child should never be treated as an adult,
Consider my email sent.
Report
Quoting FirstJusticeThenPeace:
Given that brilliant logic I suppose we should inform the Taliban that because they don’t wear desert camo fatigues that they aren’t real soldiers and they should just give it up already.
I’m sure they’d go for that.
Report
This will be another of those things that Canadians look back on in absolute horror.
Read this from the Toronto Sun if you really want to take a look at some tortured logic.
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Worthington_Peter/2008/07/14/6157766-sun.php
Peter Worthington stoops to some amazing new lows in this one. If I only had a rocket launcher….
Report
Could there not be an opposition parliamentary motion to bring Kadr home? Not right now obviously, but when parliamentary sittings resume.
Report
Quoting Yossarian:
That article seems to have been raped by an editor - with those ‘in the traditional sense’ things all over.
That small dead animals blog is an abomination. What a terrible thing to have come from my province.
Report
As a mental health professional who has worked with Young Offenders for the past 20 years, this sickens me to a degree I cannot describe. When I was wide awake at 3:30 am I saw the videos and transcripts online and did email “our” PM via AI. However, I hear what a previous poster was saying in that email campaigns are easily ignored. Despite the fact I am in BC, have never been to Ottawa and have no money to spare (who does?) I would make it a priority to attend a protest in Ottawa for this cause.
I saw Senator L Gen Romeon Dallaire speak in Vancouver last fall, on the topic of child soldiers. What we–I mean CANADA–are not doing in this situation to assist this CANADIAN citizen is an utter disgrace and something we will forever be required to explain. THIS IS WRONG!! How can mental health professionals–psychologists, psychiatrists, doctors–condone this? It is so wrong.
If anyone has any idea or information on how to mobilize ourselves to agitate for his return to Canada, please post…I feel helpless just sending an email.
Report
At the risk of being unpopular I will say this….
Having watched the video I fail to see what the big deal is. Should he be tried for his crime?Absolutely. Does this video provide the smoking gun that he was treated unfairly?Maybe yes, maybe no……but considering what he is accused of doing, and keeping in mind that as bad as things may have been for him, this is nothing like the video of , say , Nick Berg or others screaming and gurgling while some maniac with a dull sword cuts their head off……
I just find it hard to sympathize with someone that, while innocent until proven guilty, certainly espoused the ideas that violence against westerners and infidels was OK. Taking issue with how the western powers treat nations like Afghanistan or Iraq is fine by me, but promoting violence, whether by doing violence yourself or not, is unacceptable in my view….
Live by the sword, die by the sword I say.
My 2 bits…
Report
Quoting ianb:
that’s logic? why don’t you look up article 4 of the geneva conventions, big guy
Report
Quoting sato5555:
And at age 15, what beliefs did you hold? This is not about justice, as the words “trial” and “crime” might imply, this is about fundamental human rights. He was a child. In Canada we say that we do not treat children this way. Do we mean it, or do we mean it only for little white Christian children?
And how exactly does “live by the sword, die by the sword” not promote violence?
Report
Quoting Susan McEwan:
When you promote violence, you lose all rights to claim you are a victim….
And as for what values did I hold at 15? Certainly enough to know that throwing a grenade at another human being to kill them was wrong….
Report
Quoting sato5555:
Well said…
Report
Quoting FirstJusticeThenPeace:
Geneva Conventions? You mean in this post 9/11 world we live in countries still have to abide by those old rules?
I thought the US has made it abundantly clear that we don’t have to anymore. You know, just do whatever the hell you feel like. Screw rules.
Report
Also, ince we got on this topic of Geneva Conventions, I thought I’d draw some attention to this…
http://projectorhead.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/abu-ghraib-torture-715244.jpg
Nuf said.
Report
http://www.amnesty.ca/take_action/actions/canada_bring_khadr_justice.php
Amnesty International has a page dedicated to writing the PM on this issue!
Report
Quoting sato5555:
You’re presuming a lot, considering there’s evidence Khadr didn’t even throw the damn grenade.
Second, since we’re talking right and wrong: I may be a lot older than 15, but I certainly have enough values to know that what goes on at Guantanamo is wrong… no matter who is involved.
Report
An excellent piece. I enjoyed reading it, because a lot of what is in the media is frankly confusing as to what is true and factual and covered on all sides.
It’s true that Omar Khadr was a child when he was involved in the firefight. I guess I’m not sure the issue is so black and white as to why he ended up in jail in the first place. I do not think that a prisoner should be subjected to torture, etc. However, what kind of family do you come from when your extra curricular activities are involvement with your father in fire fights? The family lives in Toronto and have told journalists in articles that they hate Canada, only live here to get a free education and moved away at one point in 1980’s because she was sick of drug addicts and homosexuals. I’m not sure what everyone else thinks, but that in itself is deplorable: to teach your young children to hate others because of sexual orientation.
Believe me, I don’t think that torturing a prisoner of 15 years of age is okay. What I am trying to get at is that Omar Khadr’s problems also began with the type of family he is being raised in and the values he has been taught.
I would be interested as to what others think…
Thank you.
Report
Hrm… like those who quote only what Chomsky supports their arguments, it seems we will only look at those parts of the Geneva Convention which support the notion that Khadr is a terrorist through and through.
In order for Medics to receive special protection under the Geneva Convention they cannot take direct part in hostilities. Given that SFC Speers was present during the conflict and tasked with infiltrating the compound he was obviously taking a very direct part in the hostilities that day. As a result the special status afforded to him under the Geneva Conventions as a medic does not apply to this case.
I’m not even going to touch the part of this debate that surrounds his upbringing and status as a child soldier…
Report
FirstJusticeThenPeace:
Your first paragraph leaves me scratching my head. The media? Is Matt Good’s blog now the “media”? The people here represent the “media”?
Now as to the didactic tone of your entry, you can drop the “smarter than thou” approach. What your saying, being that Afghanistan didn’t have a national army in 2001, is that the citizens of Afghanistan had no right to try to repel the invading force of their homeland based on the fact they didn’t have coordinating outfits and ranks? Just sit and let it happen would be your approach?
Again, lacking in logic and reason, and reeking of rhetoric.
Second, that isn’t a relevant analogy. Canada has a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Afghanistan didn’t. Canada is a democratic nation, Afghanistan is and was not. Fuck, we have running water, Afghanistan….. Since when does defending oneself in a war zone from an invading force constitute a federal crime or a crime at all? Where in the Geneva Convention does it mention this? Page numbers would be appreciated.
“a 15 year old is fully capable of knowing right from wrong”
Really? Then why are 15 year olds classified as CHILD SOLDIERS under the Geneva Convention? You can’t cherry pick the parts you like and ignore the ones you don’t.
Period.
“khadr and his militant peers were not defending themselves. they initiated the attack”
Um, hate to burst your big ideologue bubble here, but they were under attack, by AN INVADING FORCE of their sovereign homeland.
As to Khadr “being the only one alive” again, enough with the cherry-picking. There are several witnesses, all US servicemen that contradict this statement. Careful with the absolutes friend. Your inner-idealogue is showing and the rhetoric your spewing is a little heavy handed.
And finally finally who is it that determined Khadr was an “unlawful combatant” again?
The Geneva Convention determines Khadr as a POW. Unlawful enemy combatant doesn’t apply, nor is it mentioned.
Funny that.
As to the final statement, again your didactic posturing is nauseating. Yes, you’re the only one here that has applied any form of critical thinking to the subject matter, the rest of us are just being emotional about this. Chomsky’s irrelavant to the subject matter, but it was a nice attempt at starting a strawman argument Bubba.
Report
causing unnecessary suffering, against a soldier or civilian, regardless of age, gender or sex - is against the laws of armed conflict.
period.
Report
People seem to forget that children learn what they are taught. Would I have killed a man at the age of 15? Probably not, but that’s because I, like most people on this site were taught that murder is wrong. It’s easy to cast judgement from an egocentric perspective. “I know murder is wrong, ergo everyone knows that murder is wrong.” Well, guess what. There’s a reason that we know violence is wrong, and it’s not some innate moral superiority that we were gifted with at birth. Most of us were lucky enough to be brought up in an environment that promoted peace and respect for life. If a child was brought up in a household that promoted something else, you can’t be surprised if those values are ingrained in the child.
Report
Quoting FirstJusticeThenPeace:
Actually all crimes that fall under the Criminal Code of Canada are “federal” crimes, and there is no “exception” to the YCJA. If a youth is convicted of a presumptive offense (eg: murder) the Crown can apply to have the youth sentenced as an adult. There is no “being tried as an adult”. And the onus is on the Crown to make the argument that an adult sentence is appropriate. Secondly, as someone who has worked many years with youth, I could tell you about many 15 yr olds who were not “fully capable of knowing right from wrong”. Whether they do or don’t is an assessment to be made by forensic mental health professionals, not the media, the general public, CSIS, nor the US military. In all fairness, it is a moot point because Mr. Khadr has not been convicted of ANY crime. As a child soldier, he must be removed and treated according to the international convention that Canada signed on to. Please see the recent remarks from Lt. Gen Romeo Dallaire. To do otherwise is discriminatory and hypocrisy at best.
Report
Quoting FirstJusticeThenPeace:
Under international law, 15 is considered a child soldier. You are also discounting the relevance of indoctrination given that he is, by definition, a child soldier. If you’re from Liberia and are a child soldier, do you go to the authorities at 15 and claim that so and so is responsible for crimes? No, you don’t, because that would result in harm, or at least as far as you had been told and pressured to believe, your death.
If the French can argue this issue and claim that he was indeed a child soldier, then why can’t Parliament? And comparing what occurred to him with a federal offense in this country, given the circumstances, is a stretch. You can classify those that indoctrinated him any way you choose, but the reality is that others do consider them a legitimate guerrilla movement. We, on the other hand, who have tarnished international laws in our favour, can act as we choose because we are in the position to do so. And that includes classifying fighting for the Taliban as being indefensible. What of the recent actions of Northern Warlords against occupational forces? Hey, they aided in the invasion of the country initially. Are we now to classify them however we see fit? Is the insurgency in Iraq legitimate? Is the insurgency in Afghanistan only illegitimate because we’re the only thing keeping the government of that country in existence?
You can apply speculation as to whether a 15 year old knows what they’re doing or not, but it doesn’t hold water until you examine, or have seen the realities, of what the phenomenon of employing child soldiers can produce psychologically.
That’s human rights 101.
Report
Quoting sato5555:
So where does that leave the ‘peace loving nations’ that represent the world’s foremost arms manufacturers and gun runners? The ones that have taken this world to the edge - literally. The ones that proliferate conflicts to suit agendas?
If you seriously believe what you have written, then you have just justified the attacks of 9/11.
Report
In regards to comment # 37, I was waiting for that one Matt.
Nicely done.
Report
Quoting Matthew Good:
I understand that that statement goes both ways. And I think what I was implying through my first post, and more than likely never said it, was that whatever the supposed “justification” is, killing should never be looked at as the easy option. The sad reality that this is exactly what both sides do in the conflict.
Report
Circumstance is a bitch - however this happened it is not a singular event - many have come before him - unnoticed ……
How many years did it take our government to exonerate Steven Truscot and pay him 6.5 million in compensation…..
Send your emails, we can do it again in the near future for someone else. Voices unheard.
And when he is finally released the ruling body will take credit, disregarding all those lonely voices that pleaded for justice.
Peace.
Report
Quoting Mark Mallett:
So, again, I ask–in all humility, helplessness and sincerity–WHAT CAN/SHOULD WE DO??
I remember learning about the Second World War and the Holocaust and thinking, as a young idealist, that if WE (my generation) were around at that time, we would never have allowed this to happen….what’s wrong with our parents/grandparents/etc. that they allowed this? Hmph, we would have done something different…
So, now I am at a loss. What do I/we do? What will our children/grandchildren say about us, or more frighteningly (?) ask us…..?
Report
“Um, hate to burst your big ideologue bubble here, but they were under attack, by AN INVADING FORCE of their sovereign homeland.
As to Khadr “being the only one alive” again, enough with the cherry-picking. There are several witnesses, all US servicemen that contradict this statement. Careful with the absolutes friend. Your inner-idealogue is showing and the rhetoric your spewing is a little heavy handed.
And finally finally who is it that determined Khadr was an “unlawful combatant” again?
The Geneva Convention determines Khadr as a POW. Unlawful enemy combatant doesn’t apply, nor is it mentioned.
Funny that.”
Perhaps some facts are in order.They were attacked by an invading force.You mean the the coalition forces invited into Afghanistan by the democratically elected govt? They (Messrs.Khadr and co.) were Taliban, and most found in that compound were not from Afghanistan, including Khadr.Canada is his “sovereign homeland’
One of the men closest to the action, a special forces sgt. (who lost an eye..) states that there was no other one in the compound who could have thrown the grenade, as all except Khadr were dead or otherwise incapacitated.
As far as the Genevea conventions go, If you are not recognized by them, i.e., fighting in uniform with national insignia, you are considered a non-uniformed enemy combatant.As such, you are not afforded any protection under the convention and in fact can be shot out of hand for your partisan actions.It is only through the goodwill of those on the ground that night that this man is even alive.He caused the death of one of two medics , and just as easily as not bled out and died.
For the poster that thinks that somehow, medics are not with fighting soldiers, and are kept somewhere behind the lines till needed, i am afraid you are sadly mistaken.
In saying all of this, i have a few questions of my own.Why do i see most of the poster’s here expressing concern for this man? This person, if he had the chance, would destroy everything that you hold dear as a Canadian.Where is the sympathy for the soldier he killed, or his family? Or the countless Afghans who suffered greatly under Khadr’s compatriots? What special place does this bad seed from our land hold in the hearts of many of you here? Is it because he ’stuck it to the man’ in Afghanistan? Is it that you hold your anti-Americanism in higher regard than your capability to call a spade a spade?
As a former soldier who has seen many conflicts and much tragedy, i find your allegiance to this man somewhat questionable.He turned his back on our society, after being given a very good head start in life.Perhaps if you want to hold some one accountable for the poor dear, you should look no furthur than his parents.If the Canadian govt( under the Liberals) had not obtained the release of his terrorist father from Pakistan, and deported his Al-queda connected family, we would not be talking about this.
Instead, we get to hear the opinion, lovingly lapped up by the MSM, of his mother and sister, two avowed Anti-western Muslim bigots.Day after day.Is this what you want?
If we do bring him home, what then? Will i hear some of you mewling that we should let him walk the streets freely? I would love to hear from some of the posters here, if this is what they feel should be done with this man If he comes to Canada, would you support him being charged with treason? Or jailed for the rest of his life? I for one, do not want to see him walking the streets of our land, or living anywhere near me.
We all make decisions in life..thankfully, some of his family have made the right one’s and have turned their backs on extremism. Sadly, Khadr will never join their ranks, and must be kept away from our society, the one his family and he chose to hate..
Report
We really would have to basically knw his earier life well enough to really tell if this was something he was willfully doing anyways…..even if he was capable of knowing right or wrong, the issues he must have dealt with are unimaginable to us, I wouldn’t say he is someone that wants to promote violence, but is being forced into it.
What was his reaction during the firefight(as he is said to have been there, but not done what he is accused of). Did he seem scared? Even just a little bit. If anything this is not just a case of him being evil, but more of a case of sychological harm.
And given his youth, and the horrid treatment he is facing, that doesn’t help.
I also love my(US) governments thoughts on international law. Which seems to be only comply with it or recognize it when it is too your advantage. Not just with this, but with Saddam and the chemical weapons attacks in the Iran-Iraq war. Where was the minds of our right winged white house that when in power always claims to be so great with national security? They also claim to be great morally as well but I can’t see why they’d think that.
I am not saying I support any acts of terror, but if we are allowed to do this, then why is it so much worse that they do these horrific things on the other side?
Report
Quoting Kursk:
That is exactly the point; he was NOT a MAN…he was a CHILD, as defined by Canada, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, The UN Paris Principles, of which Canada is a signator. As a CHILD and a CANADIAN CITIZEN, we have an obligation to intervene. We cannot choose WHICH children or Canadian citizens are more deserving of the rights we claim to hold as fundamental. Every other point–his innocence/guilt, his family, your feelings on terrorism, religion, etc. detract from the only real issue, which is: as a child and a Canadian citizen, why is it that our government is not choosing to intervene?
Report
The 4th Article of the Conventions is not as black and white as “wearing an insignia” unfortunately. And that is besides the point with regards to the status of child soldiers.
Report
He would glady destroy everything we believe in given the chance, yet our hearts are gushing for the return of the boy with blood on his hands. It’s pitiful how we can be emotionally manipulated by the media. The other side of the story is a corpse.
Report
Quoting mr gonzo:
where do i start?
where did I say this blog is “media”? actually, technically it is media but the context of my statement refers to the sources of most of the posters information: the mainstream media. I’ll not belabor this point, its upon each individual to decide for themselves how seriously they take the MSM. all i’ll say is a humble recommendation that everyone use a diversity of sources of information(including referring to relevant geneva conventions and laws of war, and of course, ignoring far right blogs and other such propaganda boxes)
its “you’re”, not your. there is an important grammatical distinction.
“smarter than thou”? settle down, friend, just trying to have a civilized discussion, and offer a dissenting point of view from whats fashionable. “bubba”? that’s just ad hominem.. “strawman”? do you even know what that means?
but I digress. I’ll not pick up my flamethrower, you win that by a long shot. let me try to address a couple of your serious claims:
in terms of being a relevant analogy. its an analogy. but the point is that at a certain point, certain crimes lead to certain charges and consequences. “im just a kid” doesn’t cut it in a lot of cases. re child soldiers, this is a debatable point. compare khadr with ishmael beah and there are differences. I seem to recall khadrs first words to his captors being “just kill me now”-translation: I fought my jihad and now I want my virgins”..by the way, does anyone else think it a little risky to disavow oneself of all charges because hes a “child soldier”? why don’t we let him out so he “can get his revenge”? http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/16/60minutes/main3516048.shtml
and khadr is a Canadian citizen. in terms of jurisdiction, that’s debatable. but since khadr killed(allegedly) an American citizen, I’m not entirely uncomfortable with American jurisdiction on this one. should he be in guantanamo? personally id say no, but he being an alqaeda/taliban jihadi(allegedly of course!), I won’t lose too much sleep over it.
should he be shipped to canada to face treason charges? how would your bleeding hearts feel about him facing even more serious charges?
“Yes, you’re the only one here that has applied any form of critical thinking to the subject matter, the rest of us are just being emotional about this.”
no, but you certainly are..
Report
Quoting Matthew Good:
I agree that the 4th geneva convention is a bit ambiguous. but this is deliberate and there is a good reason for this. you can’t expect every palestinian to suit up, when international law recognizes the illegality of israel’s occupation. with iraq, I deem it a legitimate resistance, because it was an illegal war. therefore I have more sympathy for the resistance than I do for the soldiers. afghanistan is unlike both these cases(in that it was sanctoned by the international ommunity and abided by jus ad bellum[just cause] war norms), therefore the soldiers of that conflict are held to the normal standard(of having to distinguish themselves). the “uniforms/insignias” rule exists to protect civilians. but remember that besides American incompetence, a big reason for civilian casualties is that the taliban doesnt distinguish themselves in terms of appearance. soldiers having to wear uniforms is expressly required to protect civilians. it doesn’t matter if you can’t afford or don’t have the time to make uniforms. hell, you can fight without them, but then you also have to realize theres a disincentive to do so. you don’t mortgage all your rights, but you certainly dont get the same ones a regular POW does.
but heres the relevant issue which thus far has been lacking from the discussion: has khadr been tortured? if so, I ABSOLUTELY agree that canada should attempt to bring him to canada to face treason charges, possibly mitigated by the fact of his age. in no way should the case be thrown out because hes a “child.” but has he been tortured? if you believe his lawyers, who seem to throw around every claim imaginable and hope it sticks(the friendly fire theory being especially ridiculous), then yes, he has been. but really, is mild sleep deprivation torture? I sure as hell don’t think so. in a proper interrogation(his father was an alqaeda financier and his brothers are both terrorists, one of which in jail), it is one of the more effective methods, which actually work, unlike torture which is the deliberate infliction of pain. might he have been tortured? possibly, given the US’ track record. but I’m unconvinced and I don’t think its fair to assume that he was tortured automatically because such atrocities have occurred in the past. if mild sleep deprivation isn’t torture, you have to admit the allegations saying so are specious at best.
Report
All guerrilla resistances operate in relatively the same manner. Iraqi insurgents operate in areas populated by civilians, as most guerrilla groups do, as the base of any movement is steeped in civilian support and from a tactical standpoint it amplifies their effectiveness with regards to confronting superior conventional forces. The Taliban is no different. It is not an autonomous group without civilian support as there are those that do, in fact, support it for varying reasons. The same thing applies to groups throughout the world whether we agree with their causes or not.
Regarding Khadr, the argument has nothing to do with whether he was identifiable as a soldier. Are child soldiers in Africa in uniform? If one, at the age of 15, shoots a soldier, are they suddenly placed beyond being classified as a child soldier? This is simply a case of popularization because an American was killed and because the boy’s family obviously indoctrinated him. It is also a case that exemplifies how the United States has chosen to completely disregard all standards and practices in the post 9/11 world and can get away with it because there is no one that is able to seriously challenge them.
If you believe that Khadr shouldn’t be afforded rights and should be tried by a wholly bias US military tribunal, then say as much. If you believe that international law regarding child soldiers applies to other 15 year olds, just not Khadr, then say as much. It’s that simple really.
As for what he has endured at Guantanamo, what can be produced at a tribunal that can be substantiated? Even sleep deprivation can be denied. And even if it is admitted to, then what is to say that worse did not occur? According to those that have been released, worse did occur at the camp. In fact, even members of the FBI have claimed as much in written complaints to their own director. But ultimately all of that is beside the point because of the convolution of the process itself. Omar Khadr is not being tried so much as he is being judged. All that truly remains to be seen is what that judgment will render.
Report
Quoting Matthew Good:
Well stated. There have been so many diversions from the issue at hand–people’s values, emotions, beliefs, etc.–that I have not yet heard a well-stated argument as to why Canada should contravene the charter and international conventions we have signed and agreed to in this case. That’s the thing with rights and civil liberties–they are there to ensure that emotions and biases do not cause unfair treatment for some of our citizens. If we would throw out this child’s rights then which ones are we willing to throw out next? And who gets to decide?
Report
ok. heres the deal with child soldiers; according to the 1977 Additional Protocols to the four Geneva Conventions and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989):
“2. States Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure that persons who have not attained the age of 15 years do not take a direct part in hostilities.
3. States Parties shall refrain from recruiting any person who has not attained the age of 15 years into their armed forces. In recruiting among those persons who have attained the age of 15 years but who have not attained the age of 18 years, States Parties shall endeavour to give priority to those who are oldest.
Additional Protocol II (applicable in non-international armed conflicts) is similar. Article 4(3)(c) states:
********* “children who have not attained the age of 15 years shall neither be recruited in the armed forces or groups nor allowed to take part in hostilities.”‘*************
So initially, the age cutoff was 15, which makes Khadr’s case debatable(according to the Geneva Conventions). HOWEVER, while this supports my initial argument I do recognize that the age increased from 15 to 18 with “The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict” adopted by the UN General Assembly on 25 May 2000.
Its main provisions:
Article 1:
State Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure that members of their armed forces who have not attained the age of 18 years do not take a direct part in hostilities.
Article 3:
1. States Parties shall raise the minimum age in years for the voluntary recruitment of persons into their national armed forces from that set out in Article 38(3) the Convention on the Rights of the Child, taking account of the principles contained in that article and recognize that under the Convention persons under 18 are entitled to special protection.
2. Each State Party shall deposit a binding declaration upon ratification of or accession to this Protocol which sets forth the minimum age at which it will permit voluntary recruitment into its national armed forces and a description of the safeguards that it has adopted to ensure that such recruitment is not forced or coerced.
3. States Parties which permit voluntary recruitment into their national armed forces under the age of 18 shall maintain safeguards to ensure, as a minimum, that:
- such recruitment is genuinely voluntary;
- such recruitment is done with the informed consent of the person’s parents or legal guardians;
- such persons are fully informed of the duties involved in such military service, and
- such persons provide reliable proof of age prior to acceptance into national military service.
..note at the end no absolute ban on child soldiers, and conditions that recruitment of child soldiers by countries who allow the practice must make sure such recruitment is *voluntary* and with the informed consent of the parents.
Look, the language of the law is nebulous. I’m not saying you all are wrong because I think its clear the intention is to ban child soldiers. But I think its important to note that there is NO absolute ban on child soldiers, and no explicit abrogation of the rights and responsibilities of the child soldiers who choose to fight.
which begs the question, did Omar Khadr willingly pick up an AK and hand grenades, or was he forced to? and if the former, what should the consequences be?
Report
sourced from human rights watch:
http://www.hrw.org/campaigns/crp/int-law.htm
Report
“bubba”? that’s just ad hominem.. “
Bubba, ad hominem? Really?
Ad Hominem:
.–adjective
1. appealing to one’s prejudices, emotions, or special interests rather than to one’s intellect or reason.
2. attacking an opponent’s character rather than answering his argument.
So you were saying…
Now, your ““strawman”? do you even know what that means” is certainly along those lines. Ironic isn’t it?
“in terms of being a relevant analogy. its an analogy”
Yes, but not relevant. That was the point.
“first words to his captors being “just kill me now”-translation: I fought my jihad and now I want my virgins”..by the way, does anyone else think it a little risky to disavow oneself of all charges because hes a “child soldier”? “
Um, how is it you pretend to know Omar Khadr’s thought’s upon capture, let alone that what you’ve been told he said is even true? No “translation needed, thank you. I’ll wait for hom to actually clarify what he intended.
Disavow? where did I write that? Or anyone else for that matter? You certainly have a bad habit of assuming things and then going on rhetorical rants about the things you assume.
“how would your bleeding hearts…” More inflammatory rhetoric. This is getting exhausting.
and finally:
“rest of us are just being emotional about this.”
no, but you certainly are..”
Um, nice try Bubba, but that device doesn’t work very well here. No emotion attached or intended. Please, if you can, cite where the “emotion come into play on my part?
Matt, I usually won’t engage trolls looking to pick fights, but sometimes the rhetoric and hyperbole needs to be called.
By chance have you ever read “Gorgias” by Plato? It’s Socrates arguing the merits, or lack thereof, of rhetoric with Gorgias. Worth the read.
Report
Quoting FirstJusticeThenPeace:
Or did he at all?
That’s exactly the issue. Did he or didn’t he? In your original comment # 14 you make it quite clear that Omar did infact “initiate the attack” and throw the grenade that took the life of the American medic.
You talk about it as if you were there in person and witnessed what happened first hand.
The fact of the matter is that no one knows exactly what went down on that day. The only people who know for sure are those that were there and some of those people are dead. Even those who were present on that day have given conflicting accounts of exactly what occurred. So at the end of the day no one knows for sure.
It doesn’t matter how many rhetoric laced comments you leave, how many sources you link and how many Geneva Convention tidbits you quote.
Omar was 15 when he was captured and has been held (without direct evidence) in a prison where he has most likely been tortured (both mentally and physically) for a supposed act that he may or may not have even committed.
In my mind, there is something wrong with that.
Report
“is mild sleep deprivation torture? I sure as hell don’t think so”
Well, until you’ve actually experienced exactly what they’ve done to Khadr, I wouldn’t be soooo quick to judge. It would depend on how long he had to endure it.
And by the way, your whole paragraph is basically a strawman argument, an argument based on a presumptive fallacy. That sleep deprivation isn’t that bad, hence not considered torture and besides his family are terrorists.
Again, drop the didactic stance. I know it’s hard, but it’s seems most of your arguments are either ad hominem attacks, strawman arguments or pure hyperbole based on your “opinion”. Great tactic.
Report
To my absolute dismay, I read today where “our” PM, Stephen Harper has “dismissed empirical evidence that crime rates [in Canada] are actually falling, suggesting that emotion is a more telling barometer. Haper has said those who point to statistics to oppose elements of the Tory law-and-order agenda as apologists for criminals: ‘They try to pacify Canadians with statistics…your personal experiences and impressions are wrong, they say; crime is really not a problem.’” Justice Minister Rob Nicholson said “we are not governing by statistics. We are governing by what we promised Canadians in the last election and what Canadians have told us.”
With logic like that, Omar Khadr hasn’t got a hope in hell. Any faint hope I had that Canada would not bend to emotion but would look at the facts–a 15 yr old Canadian citizen charged with War Crimes; a charter, federal law and a signed UN convention that absolutely states we (Canada) do not condone this action against a child–is gone. Human rights, civil liberties are gone. Facts are meaningless. What matters is who vents their emotion the strongest. And you can damn well bet it won’t be children, the poor, mentally ill, disabled. Their voices are lost.
Report
I think you’re right, Susan. Our only hope is a change in government.
Report
Again… stick to the college crowd.
Report
“Complacency regarding this issue will not do”
I fear it will. The will of the people seems to be for complacency.
Helplessness and Defeat are not roommates I am comfortable with, but they are moving in nonetheless. Brought their redrawn maps of the world and put them on the walls, turned back the calendar, kicked the cat. These two, they throw out the recycling on purpose, laugh when they do so. No rules in this household, though it always seems I am breaking one. Thing is, the rules change all the time, and I never know which ones apply to me. These two watch FOX news and cheer, take my civil liberties and compassion for humanity off my shelves and throw them on the floor; jump all over them in their jackboots. I tried to leave but they told me I can’t….get used to us, they said, this is NOW, Baby. WE are your future. And they climb into bed with me and even though I put the pillow over my head they talk and talk and jabber on at me until I am exhausted. Until I finally agree with them, just so they will put out the light and let me sleep.