Join 3,512 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Khadr judge removed
May 29, 2008 8:08 PM   Subscribe

The military judge presiding over child solider Omar Khadr's case has been replaced. Khadr's lawyer claims the judge, Colonel Peter Brownback, was fired because he “threatened to suspend proceedings in the case of Omar Khadr if prosecutors continued to withhold key evidence from Omar's lawyers.” Defence officials claim Brownback was planning to retire.

Although Khadr was only 15 when he was captured, and is the only Western citizen still being held at Guantanamo Bay, Canada's Conservative government has refused to seek extradition or repatriation for him.
posted by cdmckay (72 comments total)

 
As much of a horrible example of US War on Terror justice this is, I think I speak for most Canadians when I say we don't really want him or his family back any time soon.
posted by Space Coyote at 8:13 PM on May 29, 2008 [2 favorites]


As much of a horrible example of US War on Terror justice this is, I think I speak for most Canadians when I say we don't really want him or his family back any time soon.

I can agree with you on not wanting his family back, but I have a hard time saying Omar Khadr should rot in Guantanamo because of the poor choices of his parents.
posted by cdmckay at 8:17 PM on May 29, 2008 [4 favorites]


I think of my own brother, when he was 15, and how gullible and eager he would have been to carry a Big Ass Gun to go and shoot the Bad Guys, whoever they happened to be at the moment. There are real terrorists out there and real criminals too -- but 15 year olds with guns thrust into their hands by devious adults aren't the real threat to the USA. I can honestly only wonder why we continue to hold onto that kid.

"The whole purpose of setting up Guantánamo Bay is for torture. Why do this? Because you want to escape the rule of law. There is only one thing that you want to escape the rule of law to do, and that is to question people coercively—what some people call torture. Guantánamo and the military commissions are implements for breaking the law. Why build a prison here when there are plenty of prisons in Nebraska? Why is it, when we see photos of Abu Ghraib, we think that it is "exporting Guantánamo"? That it is the "Guantánamo method"?"
—Lieutenant Commander Charles Swift to the author, January 2007.
posted by Avenger at 8:23 PM on May 29, 2008


"Why in the hell are there so many kangaroos hopping around in this courtroom?"
posted by Dasein at 8:31 PM on May 29, 2008 [2 favorites]


Has there ever been a successful conviction from Guantanamo that was not a plea bargain?
posted by BrotherCaine at 8:41 PM on May 29, 2008


I'll give the American (and it's military) justice system some credit: no matter how much the government has tried to intervene in this pantomime of justice, it has yet to make it a 100% kangaroo court. That's got to be worth something.

I'm disjointed though that Canada hasn't done more for one of its citizens. Here's what Senator (and retired Lieutenant-General) Romeo Dallaire has to say about it.
posted by furtive at 8:50 PM on May 29, 2008


s/disjointed/dissapointed
posted by furtive at 8:50 PM on May 29, 2008


Furtive: You're joking aren't you?

How is a proceeding where 'evidence' is classified and thus unavailable to the defence NOT a kangaroo court? Where the accused is assigned counsel who must be a member of the US military? And where a real defence of the accused is career suicide for such counsel?

If they wanted real trials, they wouldn't need to worry about using the nowhere-land of Guantanamo Bay.
posted by pompomtom at 9:00 PM on May 29, 2008 [1 favorite]


pompomtom: because it hasn''t proceeded... the judges haven't been going along with it, or at least that's the impression I've got. They keep having to replace judges, rework the way the trail runs...
posted by furtive at 9:03 PM on May 29, 2008


Space Coyote: "As much of a horrible example of US War on Terror justice this is, I think I speak for most Canadians when I say we don't really want him or his family back any time soon."

Speak for yourself.
posted by zouhair at 9:22 PM on May 29, 2008 [3 favorites]


Furtive: Ta. I see your point, though I'm not sure I concur.
posted by pompomtom at 9:33 PM on May 29, 2008


Yeah. I'm Canadian, and this bullshit makes me sick. For the government to let a Canadian citizen, no matter what he may or may not have done, rot in some super-secret gulag and not even make the showy attempt pretending to get him out, let alone take any concrete action...

I mean Jesus, he hasn't been declared guilty yet. The trial is still ongoing. Yet Canada has washed its hands of him entirely and said sure, let him be tried in secret using classified evidence at the behest of another nation's military. Fuck "innocent until proven guilty", nevermind the fact that he was 15 when he was arrested and it's taken years for charges to even be laid.

If I go somewhere and I'm falsely accused of a serious crime, is my embassy going to say "so long"?

I'm ill just thinking about this.
posted by geodave at 9:35 PM on May 29, 2008


pompomtom: Ouch, those quotes are brutal. How come I've never seen them before (oh, right).
"One of the biggest problems at Guantanamo is that the detainees gain too much weight because we feed them so well." In response to a question as to whether she endorses the practice of extraordinary rendition and the CIA's kidnapping of foreign citizen's in other countries, Crawford said: "Well, I don't think we always have the right to kidnap foreign citizens."
- Susan J. Crawford, appointed the convening authority for the Guantanamo military commissions
posted by furtive at 10:14 PM on May 29, 2008


Americas still one of the few countries that executes minors, right? Awesome.
posted by Artw at 10:27 PM on May 29, 2008


Americas still one of the few countries that executes minors, right?

Not anymore.
posted by homunculus at 10:44 PM on May 29, 2008


I think I speak for most Canadians when I say we don't really want him or his family back any time soon

I think I speak for a bunch of Canadians when I say that's a really un-Canadian comment to make. Not most or a few, mind you, just a bunch.

Here's hoping that poor loser gets out of that mess eventually, if only so that I can make the "Welcome Back, Khadr" pun that's been taking up room in the back of my brain for the last four years.
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:56 PM on May 29, 2008 [3 favorites]


Any court that tries a child soldier is a kangaroo court.
posted by Jairus at 10:59 PM on May 29, 2008


Here *I* am, speaking for (I hope) most Canadians, when I say that I want Mr. Khadr to get a *fair* trial, in the best tradition of New World justice (as opposed to the travesties of justice that have so far occurred). If the US government has evidence to present, then let them do so, quickly and honestly, rather than using the methods we've seen so far, which include isolating prisoners for so long that they lose the capacity to present a rational defense to the hobbled defense that they've been granted; or methods which include torturing defendants until they'll say anything to make it stop; or methods which go up to beating people to death because they won't say what they're supposed to say.

Honestly, I'm sickened by the entire story of Omar Khadr and his capture and treatment. All of it, including any participation by the Canadian government and how the US government has handled it.

Now, if I find out that most Canadians don't feel somewhat close to what I feel, then I guess it's time to move, because that would be too much to bear.
posted by Dipsomaniac at 11:14 PM on May 29, 2008 [4 favorites]


Alvy, I think you're right. At least, I hope you are.
posted by Dipsomaniac at 11:15 PM on May 29, 2008


Americas still one of the few countries that executes minors, right?

Not anymore.


I had no idea about that ruling. Its good to know that the court struck down executions for minors, even if it was 5 to 4.

Still, supposedly Guantanamo is beyond the reach of US jurisprudence. If the US Military decided to execute Khadr, I'm not sure that the USSC or anyone else could do much about it.
posted by Avenger at 11:19 PM on May 29, 2008


Yay! My misinformed gripe is saved!
posted by Artw at 11:52 PM on May 29, 2008


This makes me so uncomfortable. You see I am a Canadian living abroad who would never ever vote for Harper. Even worse I am French Canadian. Do I still deserve the protection of my country or is my passport just an ID card now?
posted by srboisvert at 1:35 AM on May 30, 2008


What, even with the way they instantly spang into action on the whole Maher Arar thing?
posted by Artw at 1:38 AM on May 30, 2008


I hadn't heard abotu this at all. he was 15 for gods sake and they won't even disclose any real evidence of his guilt??!?!?!? what the hell is happening to the world we live in. Bush and his cronies need to be shot.
posted by mary8nne at 5:51 AM on May 30, 2008


Commence hand wringing!
posted by a3matrix at 7:29 AM on May 30, 2008


What, even with the way they instantly spang into action on the whole Maher Arar thing?

Maher Arar was not captured after a four-hour firefight with militants in Afghanistan. Omar Khadr was. Maher Arar did not play with Osama Bin Laden's children while growing up. Omar Khadr did. Maher Arar's father did not raise him to be a militant jihadist. Unfortunately for Omar Khadr, his father did.

That being said, Omar Khadr should be tried in a real court of law and be provided with all the protections of The Geneva Convention.
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 7:35 AM on May 30, 2008


As much of a horrible example of US War on Terror justice this is, I think I speak for most Canadians when I say we don't really want him or his family back any time soon.
posted by Space Coyote


Speak for your own goddamn self. As a Canadian, I echo what Dipsomaniac said: I want him to get a fair trial, governed by rule of law, with all the appropriate rules--e.g., actually fucking providing him with the evidence against him.

I would be willing to bet cold hard cash that many, many more Canadians feel that way than would agree with your horrid little opinion.

Maher Arar was not captured after a four-hour firefight with militants in Afghanistan. Omar Khadr was. Maher Arar did not play with Osama Bin Laden's children while growing up. Omar Khadr did. Maher Arar's father did not raise him to be a militant jihadist. Unfortunately for Omar Khadr, his father did.

None of which is important because...

That being said, Omar Khadr should be tried in a real court of law and be provided with all the protections of The Geneva Convention.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 8:15 AM on May 30, 2008 [2 favorites]


If I go somewhere and I'm falsely accused of a serious crime, is my embassy going to say "so long"?

Pretty much, yeah. That's the way these things normally work, unless the crime you're accused of is politically useful.

For example, US consular services to citizens arrested overseas:
- visiting the prisoner as soon as possible after notification of the arrest;
- providing a list of local attorneys to assist the prisoner obtain legal representation;
- providing information about judicial procedures in the foreign country;
- notifying family and/or friends, if authorized by the prisoner;
- obtaining a Privacy Act Consent;
- relaying requests to family and friends for money or other aid.

...and that's it. They'll lodge a formal complaint if they find out you're being savagely beaten or something, but unless there's a political angle you can work, you're hosed. Canadian rules are slightly different, of course, but the basic premise is the same because these things are controlled by international treaties like the Vienna Convention.

Point being: do not rely on your embassy to do much of anything if you're arrested overseas. Think of them as being that "free phonecall" you see on TV when people get arrested.
posted by aramaic at 8:18 AM on May 30, 2008


I hear where you're coming from, dnab. I think it is important to understand the differences between the Maher Arar case and the Omar Khadr case and how those differences have influenced the Canadian government's refusal to seek extradition or repatriation for Khadr. It would be nice is Justice was blind but obviously politics do come into play, especially in a case like this.

Would Canada be better off without the Khadr family? I believe we would be better off, absolutely. Let's not pretend the Khadrs are model citizens. In this I agree with Space Coyote.

However, I also agree with cdmckay when he or she says, I can agree with you on not wanting his family back, but I have a hard time saying Omar Khadr should rot in Guantanamo because of the poor choices of his parents.
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 8:36 AM on May 30, 2008


I hope it's not too much of a derail to ask: does anyone here know what's going on with Arar v. Ashcroft? The last I can find is about the appeal being argued on Nov. 9th which seems like a long time ago.
posted by tomcooke at 8:41 AM on May 30, 2008


Saying the Canadian goverment "leapt in to action" there was me being a little sarcastic, btw.
posted by Artw at 9:38 AM on May 30, 2008


I would also agree that Canada is better off without the Khadr family. The contempt with which they appear to treat their citizenship is appalling. Just look at some of the things that the matriarch as said to the media regarding their family, their other son etc.

However we don't just kick out the people because they're loud, abrasive and unseemly. Who knows, maybe a couple generations will turn them into model citizens that we can be proud of. We sure as hell shouldn't leave kids to rot in jail because of their fathers. We should always push for fair trials and humane treatment. And we should attempt to support our citizens and make sure that their rights are upheld in the country in which they are incarcerated no matter how stupid they may have been. I'm very disappointed in the way that our current government has handled this.
posted by captaincrouton at 10:58 AM on May 30, 2008


However we don't just kick out the people because they're loud, abrasive and unseemly.

Well, we did get rid of Conrad Black. Don Cherry's still around, though.


I think it is important to understand the differences between the Maher Arar case and the Omar Khadr case

I do understand those differences. They are largely immaterial. One of our nationals--whether we approve of him and his family or not--is being held illegally without recourse to the mechanisms in law for protection of the accused. Note: accused. Mr. Khadr has not been convicted of any crime, and it would behoove our government to scream long and loud that whatever he may have done, he deserves a fair trial. We should be pushing for him to come home and face a fair trial here.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 12:35 PM on May 30, 2008 [1 favorite]


(of course, that being said, it's not at all clear that he has committed any crimes at all, much less any against Canada. the whole 'on trial for being an enemy combatant' thing boggles my mind.)
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 12:43 PM on May 30, 2008


dnab, to you those differences are immaterial. To the politicans, however, the circumstances of who Omar Khadr's family is and the circumstances of how and when he was captured do make a difference, and have played a huge role in influencing the Canadian government's refusal to seek extradition or repatriation for Omar Khadr.

You are absolutely right when you suggest that legally, these circumstances should not matter. Unfortunately for Khadr, politically and in 'the court of public opinion', they matter a great deal.

It seems that we agree on the main issues here : A) The Canadian Government should step up and demand the full protection of the law for any and all of its citizens being held in foreign detention centers
and B) Omar Khadr should get his day in court. A real court.
posted by Fuzzy Monster at 1:20 PM on May 30, 2008


Three Former Gitmo Prisoners to Address US Audience in Historic Event
posted by homunculus at 1:34 PM on May 30, 2008


The forgotten anniversary of a Guantanamo suicide
posted by homunculus at 1:46 PM on May 30, 2008


The Khadr family is the best advertisement I can think of for extrajudicial killing. It's absurd that people like that are permitted to live in such a wonderful country, and I applaud the Canadian government for not lifting a finger to extradite that worthless little bastard.
posted by alexwoods at 2:29 PM on May 30, 2008


alexwoods --- You are advocate state murder and applaud the Canadian government for being a spineless toady of the US. I find your expressed opinion on this matter to be repugnant.
posted by dougzilla at 5:49 PM on May 30, 2008


Add in another Canadian chiming in to say he doesn't really care about Khadr's family, nor even Omar himself, so long as he gets a fair trial.

Which he is not. The whole thing is a disgusting farce and Canada is doing the kid wrong by not stepping in to bat for him. Even if our government believes him guilty the very least that should be done is to incarcerate him in Canada to await a real trial.

Our government leaders are behaving criminally. I am so very disappointed with this Harper government. It is not the kind of government I want.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:48 PM on May 30, 2008 [1 favorite]


Jailed for Protesting Gitmo: 34 Convicted for Demonstrations Outside Supreme Court
posted by homunculus at 9:17 PM on May 30, 2008 [1 favorite]


I am so very disappointed with this Harper government. It is not the kind of government I want.

Agreed, but it's worth pointing out that Khadr had already been in Guantanamo for three years before Harper and Co. ousted the Liberals.

alexwoods: Your comment is just as appalling as some of the Khadr clan's soundbites. Sad/funny old world, ain't it?
posted by Alvy Ampersand at 10:06 PM on May 30, 2008


The Khadr family is the best advertisement I can think of for extrajudicial killing.

You are a vile and disgusting human being.

I applaud the Canadian government for not lifting a finger to extradite that worthless little bastard.

I can only presume you're American. How about we kidnap one of your citizens, hold him for years without trial or evidence in a location that is essentially a black hole? I somehow doubt you would be singing the same tune.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 10:14 PM on May 30, 2008


Dirtynumbangelboy, America does not require all of its citizens to be assholes. While I admit there is a high correlation, some of us believe in civilization and the rule of law.
posted by BrotherCaine at 10:51 PM on May 30, 2008


Fair enough, but words like 'extrajudicial', in my experience, don't tend to be used by people on the other side of the pond.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 10:53 PM on May 30, 2008


Space Coyote, whomever you speak for in this country, it isn't for me.
posted by Phalene at 11:11 PM on May 30, 2008


Guantanamo Trial Unraveling
posted by homunculus at 5:55 PM on June 2, 2008 [1 favorite]


They should've killed him on the spot instead of saving his wretched life.
posted by raider at 6:29 PM on June 2, 2008


And why should they have killed him, raider? I'd like to hear your cogent argument.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:06 PM on June 2, 2008


Sure. Because he was an enemy combatant in a deadly firefight.
posted by raider at 7:18 PM on June 2, 2008


If I'm part of a deadly attack on a military unit, am I not accepting a certain degree of risk? As in, these fuckers will kill me?
posted by raider at 7:26 PM on June 2, 2008


That's all well and good, had they snuffed him in combat. But the fact is Kadhr was shot in the back, twice, rendering him unconscious and no longer any sort of threat to the unit.

You appear to be suggesting they should have murdered the unconscious Kadhr.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:48 PM on June 2, 2008


Khadr labelled 'good kid' by U.S. captors. Prison stay could radicalize him, officials told
posted by homunculus at 10:29 AM on June 3, 2008


You appear to be suggesting they should have murdered the unconscious Kadhr.

Geneva convention says you can do that, right? I mean, I'm sure it doesn't say you can't.
posted by Artw at 10:31 AM on June 3, 2008


He wasn't unconscious.

Khadr was given on-site medical attention, during which time he repeatedly asked the medics to kill him, surprising them with his English. An officer present later recorded in his diary that he was about to tell his Private Second Class to kill the wounded Khadr, when Delta Force soldiers ordered them not to harm the prisoner.[41]


So instead of complying with the quite conscious -- and irredeemable -- Khadr's wish, the military behaved in an exemplary fashion by your standards. Gee, that worked out well.

And while no, I don't endorse flat-out murder in any battlefield (though it's a difficult question for me), I do wish that there was less emphasis on shooting people "nicely" then worrying about saving them. Especially when the people in question are fine with tactics such as playing dead on top of live mines and forcing women and children into suicide bombing (ahem, Geneva what?)

They are The Enemy. I'm no military strategist but I thought the idea was to reduce their numbers.
posted by raider at 11:27 AM on June 3, 2008


In the long term does shooting children reduce the number of your enemies? History would seem to indicate otherwise.
posted by Artw at 11:31 AM on June 3, 2008


Shoot and kill willing antagonists who have demonstrated deadly intentions.

We're not talking razing villages here...
posted by raider at 12:18 PM on June 3, 2008


My bad, Khadr passed out subsequent to being handled by the medics.

So instead of complying with the quite conscious -- and irredeemable -- Khadr's wish, the military behaved in an exemplary fashion by your standards. Gee, that worked out well.

It worked out quite well. Severe, even systemic, problems with the military tribunals. It also revealed some rather dirty work by the Canadian spy agency. Regardless any consequences for Khadr, the process that has been undertaken has served to clarify and improve the system.

Shoot and kill willing antagonists who have demonstrated deadly intentions.

What proof is there of Khadr having demonstrated anything?

Maybe you're unaware, but that's the big challenge the tribunal is facing: there is no proof that Khadr was anything but a bystander. Caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, it seems he's being set up as the fall guy for mistakes the military made.

Like I said earlier, I couldn't give two shits about what happens to Khadr in the end. All that is necessary is that he receive a fair trial. That is not happening.

And that is shameful. We are better than that.

Or, at least, I'm better than that. You seem to be more than willing to break the law, kill potentially innocent people, and basically behave every bit as badly as the enemy. It wouldn't surprise me were you to next suggest we start following in the Russian's footsteps, disguising landmines as children's toys; or following in the terrorists footsteps and start using the mentally handicapped as remote-control bombs.
posted by five fresh fish at 5:11 PM on June 3, 2008


c/Severe, even systemic, problems with the military tribunals./It has revealed severe, even systemic, problems with the military tribunals./
posted by five fresh fish at 6:48 PM on June 3, 2008


Fresh fish should avoid slippery slopes.

If you'd do me the honour of reading my last few posts you'll find that your final paragraph is a wee bit hysterical in all senses of the word. I have already refuted the evil -- yes, evil -- you project on me.

I applaud your demand for due process. However it seems to me that whatever flaws there may be in our ("western") system Khadr has gotten a pretty fair shake compared to, say, Daniel Pearl.

You're Canadian, Mr. Fish. Where's the protest against M. Elmasry who endorses indiscriminate murder?

COREN: Anyone over the age of 18 in Israel is a valid target.

ELMASRY: Anybody above 18 is a part of the Israeli army...

COREN: So everyone in Israel and anyone and everyone in Israel, irrespective of gender, over the age of 18 is a valid target?

ELMASRY: Yes, I would say.




So Khadr was just playing Yahtzee inside that compound, was he? These guys beg to differ:

He was captured in eastern Afghanistan, a region notorious for harboring members of al Qaeda and the Taliban. In July 2002, U.S. Special Forces were patrolling the area when they got a tip that some al Qaeda members were holed up nearby.

Back then, Layne Morris was Sergeant Layne Morris. When his unit approached a walled compound, he says al Qaeda gunmen opened fire, killing Morris' interpreters.

"These guys just shot them point blank in the face," Morris says.

He says two interpreters were killed instantly. And then Sgt. Morris felt something hit his right eye.

"A piece of the hand grenade shrapnel cut the optic nerve," he says. "So I'm blind in one eye."

The fighting went on for hours. By the time it was over, the compound was completely destroyed by 500 pound bombs.

Morris didn't think anybody inside the compound could still be alive. "The assumption was that everybody's dead in there," he says.

But when soldiers went in, someone threw a hand grenade at them. One of the medics, Sergeant Christopher Speer, was killed. Then they found Omar Khadr, barely alive, lying in the rubble and blinded in one eye, just like Layne Morris.

"He's lucky," Morris says. "Because he killed one medic. The second medic saved his life."

Asked if the medic described the kid, Morris tells Simon, "All he said was, 'Man, we got up on that kid and he begged us to kill him.' He said 'Just kill me.'"

And he said it in perfect English.

The U.S. Department of Defense declined to give 60 Minutes an interview about the Khadr case, so Simon spoke to retired General John Altenburg, a lawyer who reviewed the initial evidence against Khadr and counseled the military to put him on trial for war crimes.

"I understand that the evidence reveals that a grenade was thrown over a wall, but that nobody saw him throw it," Simon remarks.

"I think it's fair to say that no person saw him actually throw the grenade," Altenburg replies.

So why the charges?

Says Altenburg, "Because there is circumstantial evidence that would indicate he was the one who threw the grenade."

Meaning no one else was found alive who could have thrown it.

posted by raider at 7:45 PM on June 3, 2008


Oh and for anyone confused about what remains of the Khadr family, they have spent the last several years in the dreaded shackles of the.... Canadian welfare system.....
posted by raider at 8:23 PM on June 3, 2008


All this hand-waving of yours is making it difficult to tell whether you're backpedaling on your original suggestion that Khadr should have been shot on the spot instead of taken prisoner as per Geneva Convention rules.

Hell, let's cut to the chase: do you believe there are rules to be followed in war?
posted by five fresh fish at 9:36 PM on June 3, 2008


I have already refuted the evil -- yes, evil -- you project on me.

Hmm, no actually you haven't.

I applaud your demand for due process. However it seems to me that whatever flaws there may be in our ("western") system Khadr has gotten a pretty fair shake compared to, say, Daniel Pearl.

Oh, okay. It all makes sense now. Because he has received incrementally better treatment from us (we're supposed to be the Good Guys, remember?) than someone received from the Bad Guys, it's all good?

I guess you don't really comprehend what it is that makes us the Good Guys: we give everyone the exact same shot at the legal system. Everyone. That's what 'rule of law' means, you sickening psychopath.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 6:08 AM on June 4, 2008 [1 favorite]


FFF, yes of course I do, as per several previous posts.

Speaking of cutting to the chase, care to share your feelings about Elmasry? Surely an informed person such as yourself would have something to share with the class. This is relevant because I am challenging your equivocation.
posted by raider at 9:26 PM on June 4, 2008


Sickening psychopath? That's not very nice, Dirtymumbler or whatever your name is.

This is too easy:

Because he has received incrementally better treatment from us (we're supposed to be the Good Guys, remember?) than someone received from the Bad Guys, it's all good?

Uh, US military saved Khadr's life on the battlefield, then incarcerated him after he killed one of their own. Daniel Pearl was a journalist who was kidnapped and decapitated and the video made public.

This is an "incremental" difference to you?

Get a clue, my friend.
posted by raider at 9:41 PM on June 4, 2008


No. US military has locked Khadr up without proper access to legal counsel, without charge, for five years--in contravention of their own laws, the Geneva convention, and international standards of law. He has presumably been subject to various forms of torture. It's really not that far a leap from kidnapping and beheading--Khadr's just not dead yet.

The thing about being the Good Guys is that we have to keep doing the right thing in order to stay the good guys.

The USA is categorically and emphatically not doing the right thing.

Also? Don't call me your friend. I would never be friends with someone whose views are as repugnant as yours.
posted by dirtynumbangelboy at 5:09 AM on June 5, 2008


I've no desire to continue discussion with the likes of you, either, Raider. Goodbye.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:54 AM on June 5, 2008


Geez you try to be a nice guy....


Thanks for the W, gents. Y'all have a great day.
posted by raider at 6:04 PM on June 5, 2008


Homeland Security's inspector general says new evidence suggests officials may have broken laws by sending Maher Arar to Syria.
posted by Artw at 10:22 PM on June 5, 2008 [2 favorites]


If the lawsuit is re-opened and this evidence results in a handslap, I'll be very impressed. Not as impressed as I would be if there were real consequences, ie. someone responsible being canned, but I'm a realistic. Just recognizing that there was a problem would be a welcome relief these days. Small steps, small steps!
posted by five fresh fish at 10:42 PM on June 5, 2008


Guantanamo Bay interrogators were told to destroy handwritten notes in case they were called to testify on detainee treatment, a military lawyer alleges.
posted by homunculus at 10:17 AM on June 9, 2008


The insanity inside Guantánamo: A new report reveals that many prisoners -- even some long ago cleared to leave -- are spiraling into hallucinations, despair and suicide.
posted by homunculus at 11:17 PM on June 9, 2008 [2 favorites]


« Older State by state electoral college analysis and pred...  |  Senior High:... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments