Omar Khadr's case is a polarizing one, to say the least. Some people think that he's an evil, psychopathic, Islamofascist terrorist monster, while other people say that he was a victim of circumstances, a child soldier and a Canadian citizen who should have had his legal rights respected and been given a fair trial. These two sides tend to see the other in a hostile light. For those who hate Khadr, people who see him as a child soldier and Canadian citizen and therefore entitled to certain rights and procedures are America hating scum who really love Khadr because he killed an American soldier. We, who think Khadr's rights should have been respected think the other side are documented supporters of the torture of a teenager who have a Nazi/Stalinist disregard for the rule of law.
Tsk-tsk. I do so hate it when political debates become so polarized that people can't see the merit in other people's ideas. Perhaps the truth about the Khadr case comes down somewhere in the middle? Perhaps he was a bad 15-year old who definitely committed an action that isn't quite a war crime and he should only have been tortured a little bit?
Nah.
It's pretty cut-and-dried really. No matter what he might have done, as a child soldier and a Canadian citizen, Khadr was entitled to certain rights and both a Liberal and a Conservative government let the US government ignore those rights. I was around forty years old when Khadr was captured at the age of 15. I'm sure that I wouldn't have had much in common with the lad and the fact that he might have killed an American soldier doesn't endear him to me because I'm not "anti-American" to be perfectly honest. Legal rights and civil rights and human rights belong to everyone. End of story.
"What about Christopher Speer's rights you 'useful idiot'? Did Khadr respect Sgt. Speer's right to life? Or his children's right to their father?" shout Khadr's critics. Which only goes to show their total intellectual bankruptcy. Supposedly, if someone is murdered, we would be able to lock up one of Khadr's supporters for 12 years and respond to the outraged cries for their legal rights with emotional appeals to the dead victim and their family. "But Khadr confessed!" they'd whine, forgetting that Khadr had been tortured and that he was faced with indefinite detention in Guantanamo unless he copped a plea. Obviously, Khadr was in that house when it came under attack, and he might have thrown a grenade (his "war crime") but in the end, withholding evidence, torturing teenagers, and kangaroo courts are not the way to establish guilt and uphold the rule-of-law. (And of course, it goes without saying that one can never mention the innocent civilians murdered by US troops, nor the pain and trauma of the victims' families, to argue anything ever.)
I'm writing about this because today the CBC reports that Vic "DO fuck the babysitter!" Toews is using a report about Khadr written by a US military psychologist, which says that Khadr was suspicious and hostile and saw himself as a victim, as evidence for why the harper government is reneging on its deal with the US government to repatriate him. Toews is being laughable (as usual). This report is bullshit.
Once more, for emphasis: Khadr was a teenager and he was tortured in violation of international law and he was subjected to a legal process not recognized anywhere but in the USA itself (only when it's the USA employing such methods) and craven lick-spittles in the unelected harper government. So ends my contribution to Canada's political conversation for Friday, July 27th, 2012.
Tsk-tsk. I do so hate it when political debates become so polarized that people can't see the merit in other people's ideas. Perhaps the truth about the Khadr case comes down somewhere in the middle? Perhaps he was a bad 15-year old who definitely committed an action that isn't quite a war crime and he should only have been tortured a little bit?
Nah.
It's pretty cut-and-dried really. No matter what he might have done, as a child soldier and a Canadian citizen, Khadr was entitled to certain rights and both a Liberal and a Conservative government let the US government ignore those rights. I was around forty years old when Khadr was captured at the age of 15. I'm sure that I wouldn't have had much in common with the lad and the fact that he might have killed an American soldier doesn't endear him to me because I'm not "anti-American" to be perfectly honest. Legal rights and civil rights and human rights belong to everyone. End of story.
"What about Christopher Speer's rights you 'useful idiot'? Did Khadr respect Sgt. Speer's right to life? Or his children's right to their father?" shout Khadr's critics. Which only goes to show their total intellectual bankruptcy. Supposedly, if someone is murdered, we would be able to lock up one of Khadr's supporters for 12 years and respond to the outraged cries for their legal rights with emotional appeals to the dead victim and their family. "But Khadr confessed!" they'd whine, forgetting that Khadr had been tortured and that he was faced with indefinite detention in Guantanamo unless he copped a plea. Obviously, Khadr was in that house when it came under attack, and he might have thrown a grenade (his "war crime") but in the end, withholding evidence, torturing teenagers, and kangaroo courts are not the way to establish guilt and uphold the rule-of-law. (And of course, it goes without saying that one can never mention the innocent civilians murdered by US troops, nor the pain and trauma of the victims' families, to argue anything ever.)
I'm writing about this because today the CBC reports that Vic "DO fuck the babysitter!" Toews is using a report about Khadr written by a US military psychologist, which says that Khadr was suspicious and hostile and saw himself as a victim, as evidence for why the harper government is reneging on its deal with the US government to repatriate him. Toews is being laughable (as usual). This report is bullshit.
Once more, for emphasis: Khadr was a teenager and he was tortured in violation of international law and he was subjected to a legal process not recognized anywhere but in the USA itself (only when it's the USA employing such methods) and craven lick-spittles in the unelected harper government. So ends my contribution to Canada's political conversation for Friday, July 27th, 2012.
4 comments:
Citizenship has to mean something, thwap.
If the government can conveniently forget his rights, they can forget your rights, my rights, anybody's rights.
Owen,
You know that and I know that. But those fucking nutbars can't grasp it.
Citizenship rights are now just as arbitrary as voting rights. Seriously, if the suspected electoral fraud occurred in a Latin American, African or Asian country, the international community would be up in arms in condemnation. When these same rights are tampered with here and in the US, it's just considered not that big a deal. Frightening.
Beijing York,
It's like the way that cops see everyone as a combination of trouble-makers and needy whiners because of their vantage point, but they can't grasp that their own drunkenness, spousal abuse, thuggery and god-awful whining makes them just as pathetic and dangerous as the citizenry they despise.
Post a Comment