Guantanamo Khadr interrogations

[basketcase]

Which, to danmand's point, is why most countries have taken their citizens....

OTB

His claim sounds pretty fishy to me. If it were true, the only prisoners there would be American citizens even though we know a number of them are not.

Some quick research seems to show how wrong he is.

Since the beginning of the current war in Afghanistan, 775 detainees have been brought to Guantanamo, approximately 420 of whom have been released without charge. As of May 2008, approximately 270 detainees remain.[9] More than a fifth are cleared for release but may have to wait months or years because U.S. officials are finding it increasingly difficult to persuade countries to accept them, according to officials and defense lawyers. Of the roughly 355 still incarcerated, U.S. officials said they intend to eventually put 60 to 80 on trial and free the rest. On February 9, 2008, it was reported that 6 of the detainees at the Guantanamo Bay facility would be tried for conspiracy in the September 11, 2001 attacks.[10]. In May 2008, the Pentagon claimed that 36 former Guantanamo inmates were "confirmed or suspected of having returned to terrorism"[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp

 

[Insidious Von]

We have to take part in whatever war the US wants us in. They defend our country when push comes to shove. Im pretty sure no one else will.

But we should still have no opinon

The Khadr family are known perponents of terrorism, I have no sympathy for any one of them. They, like the Tamil Tigers and the Khalsa National Front are taking advantage of Canadian benevolence.

But I take umbrage with anyone that suggests Canada is weak militarily, we are more than holding our own in Kandahar. And let's not forget that while Americans sat on their asses and ate chilli dogs, Canadians fought THROUGHOUT WW I and II.

And as for Lancs being deported to England, I'm sure he'd fit right in at the Millwall terraces.

 

[dcbogey]

His claim sounds pretty fishy to me. If it were true, the only prisoners there would be American citizens even though we know a number of them are not.

Some quick research seems to show how wrong he is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp

Khadr is the only remaining western prisoner - all others have been released to their own countries.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080710.wwharper-khadr0710/BNStory/International

“There is very little question that if Canada, the last western country to allow its citizen to be detained in Guantanamo Bay, demanded Omar's repatriation from Guantanamo to face due process under Canadian law, that the U.S. government would heed that request,” he said.

 

[Insidious Von]

Showing neer-do-wells like the Khadr family that their shit is no longer tolerated is one of the few good things the Haper government has done. I'm also hartened to know that Canada is cracking down on the Tamil Tigers extortion cells that raise money for their vicious war in Sri Lanka.

 

[onthebottom]

King George III thought the American colonial opponents
traitors. In today's lingo they would be called terrorists.

Those who oppose an invasion of their country are
patriots and nationalists by their people.

You just don't get it.

NATO was invading Canada?

OTB

 

[dcbogey]

Showing neer-do-wells like the Khadr family that their shit is no longer tolerated is one of the few good things the Haper government has done.

Perhaps, but I don't think it is right that the son suffers for the sins of the father. If the Khadr family hadn't come back to Canada and said what they did, it is my belief that Omar would be in Canada, and his case would have been dealt with legally and fairly.

 

[Insidious Von]

King George III thought the American colonial opponents
traitors. In today's lingo they would be called terrorists.

Those who oppose an invasion of their country are
patriots and nationalists by their people.

You just don't get it.

DQ, my Slovene paisan, your reference to George III is erroneous.

If the Khadr's genuinely believed in their cause, they should have remained in their native land and fought for it. To seek the protection of a liberal democratic nation and then to flaunt that nation's goodwill does not make them patriots - it makes them cowards.

But I'll forgive your "erroracio", you appear to be quite sensible most of the time.

 

[danmand]

***************

Since when have you become judge and jury based on personal opinions.

You seem to have enough of them yourself but no one has suggested you go back to anywhere.

Canada belongs to all Canadians period. Now if you don't like that idea well.......

Oh yes, I have repeatedly been asked to go back to where I came from.

I find a perverse pleasure in asking Lancslad to return to his country of birth.
Both Lancslad and Lookingforitallthetimehave repeatedly suggested that I,
as well as a myriad of other immigrants, reurn to our country of birth.

 

[Insidious Von]

Those Afghanistan fighters were fighting an invading
army and not in the US.

We invaded them. That's where the battle occured.
Not in NY or DC.

My military doesn't or didn't behave that way throughout
our history. It is an affront on our military tradition.

Those Afghan fighters were Pushtuns, who only represent 1/3 of the country's racial mix. They were aligned to al-Qaedah, and used bin Laden's Arab forces to gain complete control of the nation. They also follow Talibanism - a Pakistani movement.

...anything else DQ?

 

[Insidious Von]

Regretably, unlike my father and my grandfather, I have not. My family moved to Canada so that their children would never have to experience warfare. Since coming here, over forty years ago, we have been hard working, law abiding Canadian citizens.

The Khadrs are Egyptians, what were they doing in Afghanistan and why do some of them still seeks the protection of Canada. A nation they hold in contempt.

 

[mmmburritos]

That is a fair request.

First, when the americans (or was it Nato) found a 15 year old boy in a war zone in Afghanistan, I think he should have been returned to Canada where children's Aid Society could have taken him as a ward, and the canadian courts could have dealt with his crimes. It has been stated that the americans kept him, because his father has high connections in Al Quada.
That, to me, is punishing him for his fathers sins. Take costody away from his parents.

Now, I am not sure the US is to blame for keeping him in Guantanamo for 6 years. I believe that he is the only "foreign" national still kept in Guantanamo. All others have been returned to their respective countries, at the request of their countries. I blame Canada for not requesting his return to Canadian justice, like every other allied country has done. Here Canada charters a private jet to get a women back from Mexico convicted of money laundering, but leaves a boy to years of "advanced interrogation" in Guantanamo.

I reject the idea that there are more than one single class of canadian citizens. I know some members here think that native indians or recent immigrants, or muslims, or sikhs are less canadian than themselves. I believe we are all equal for the law in Canada.

I suspect that Khadr when this is over, will sue the canadian government, and receive a large settlement, just like the guy who was sent to Syria for "advanced interrogation". Then we will all pay.

I don't agree with everything you have to say, but I respect your point of view.

 

[Insidious Von]

I respect your heritage and your belief in the rule of law...but you are still missing the point.

I have no use for Bush/Cheney and their cadre of chicken hawks - but the Khadrs are not much better. They used Canada as a safe haven and they laundered money for bin Laden. That one of them is now caught in a trap, of his own making, does not leave me overwhelmed with sympathy.

 

[y2kmark]

Well, Lancs, most canadians are against you then, 'cause they are sure not with you.

maybe you should go back to England.

Hear, Hear, old chap!!

 

[TQM]

The case here is simple.

1. Omar Khadr fought along side the Taliban. He was captured. He should be treated like a prisoner of war as per international conventions. He should not be released until he's deemed no longer a threat.

2. He was 15 when captured. That's old enough to be considered responsible, even if it's not old enough to be considered an adult.

3. The Taliban were morally outrageous. Khadr can either be considered to be completely brainwashed to engage in the kinds of activities he engaged in or morally depraved. At some point, it doesn't really matter.

4. His parents - mother is the only one still alive here - are certainly responsible - and in fact, by their actions push the boundaries of acceptability. The mother has perhaps not broken any law, but has raised a child so reprehensibly that any normal person would feel uneasy having them live next door.

5. Omar Khadr is not a terrorist. At 15 we do know he was an amazingly stupid person. (The very idea of engaging the U.S. militarily is paradigm stupidity.)

 

[LancsLad]

Are you a judge? have you the knowledge to convict him?

Civilized people do not convict suspected criminals without a trial.

Obviously, when dealing with other members of the same civil society thats the way it should be.

This is a different kettle of fish, in this case its some vermin slime from "them" that should be dealt with summarily.





.

 

[james t kirk]

Afghanistan was a war zone.

Fighting in wars doesn't make a participant
a criminal. They're known as enemies,
not crminals.

The difference is so clear that any other
discussion is purely absurd and illogical.

I have to agree.

I have no sympathy for the kid whatsoever, however, at the end of the day, he is an enemy combatant.

The US is playing games with words on this refusing to recognize the Taliban as enemy combatants, instead calling them "terrorists". In doing so, they (the US) feel that they can hold a guy forever without charge and do as they see fit.

That's not the way it works.

On the other hand, typically enemy combatants are held for a certain period of time after the conflict has ended. Since the conflict in Afghanistan has not ended, the Americans are free to keep them (or him) as long as the fighting continues. (Correct me if I am wrong, but after WW2, all German soldiers had to do 2 years in an allied POW camp (and if they were really unlucky, the Russians sent them off to starve to death.)

Kadr should receive the same rights as any enemy combatant under the terms of the Geneva Convention (or whatever they call it). End of story.

I am getting sick of hearing about him on the CBC however. All day long, it's been nothing but Kadr this and Kadr that as if he was somehow akin to David Milguard or somehthing. He is not. He is an enemy soldier. (And I suppose looking at the bright side, he hasn't been tried for Treason (which used to end up with the guy swinging by his neck from the end of a rope.)

 

[onthebottom]

Slippery, meaningless and off topic.

The war on terror turned into an afront
on American values.

Since 1776 our military and government
never conducted such an assault on our
Constitution?

Then again, do you care to protect our
rule of law and our Constitution?

This is beyond doubt the blackest day
of our glorious history.

Our military never, never treated combatants,
legal or illegal, the way the Bush-Cheney
cabal have behaved in such a disrespectful
way to the rule of our law.

Then again, there's no economic paradigm that
deals with moral authority and the rule of law.

The rule of law transcends economics and the
expediency of the moment.

OML won. We dissed our values and history.

We never did this shit in 'Nam.

Then again, I have little value despite my
personal experiences. Since my experiences
have no value why should you try and understand.

We old folks remember when we were better
than this.

Ah, a classic DQ response. When shown to be wrong, change the subject, insult and pontificate....

If he was a Canadian in Afghanistan fighting NATO doesn't that make him a mercenary?

OTB

 

[onthebottom]

I have to agree.

I have no sympathy for the kid whatsoever, however, at the end of the day, he is an enemy combatant.

The US is playing games with words on this refusing to recognize the Taliban as enemy combatants, instead calling them "terrorists". In doing so, they (the US) feel that they can hold a guy forever without charge and do as they see fit.

That's not the way it works.

On the other hand, typically enemy combatants are held for a certain period of time after the conflict has ended. Since the conflict in Afghanistan has not ended, the Americans are free to keep them (or him) as long as the fighting continues. (Correct me if I am wrong, but after WW2, all German soldiers had to do 2 years in an allied POW camp (and if they were really unlucky, the Russians sent them off to starve to death.)

Kadr should receive the same rights as any enemy combatant under the terms of the Geneva Convention (or whatever they call it). End of story.

I am getting sick of hearing about him on the CBC however. All day long, it's been nothing but Kadr this and Kadr that as if he was somehow akin to David Milguard or somehthing. He is not. He is an enemy soldier. (And I suppose looking at the bright side, he hasn't been tried for Treason (which used to end up with the guy swinging by his neck from the end of a rope.)

I think the 4th Circuit just said an enemy combatant can be held "forever".

At the same time, the divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit affirmed the president's wartime power to hold accused combatants apprehended in the United States without trial, reversing a previous ruling by a panel of its own judges.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/15/AR2008071502779.html

OTB

 

[someone]

Question for DonQuixote

You often bring up your military past on these threads. This time, I actually think that your background both as a lawyer and in the military is relevant. I’ve been rather impressed with the navy lawyer Khadr has. He seems to have been very aggressive on his client’s behave, e.g. getting a Canadian court order to release tapes the U.S. military would not release, etc. Given your experience in the American military, is this likely to hurt his career? Also, is it unusual for American military defence lawyers to be this aggressive in cases where they are basically arguing against American policy?

 

[danmand]

I think the 4th Circuit just said an enemy combatant can be held "forever".

At the same time, the divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit affirmed the president's wartime power to hold accused combatants apprehended in the United States without trial, reversing a previous ruling by a panel of its own judges.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/15/AR2008071502779.html

OTB

Oh, well, if the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit ............