• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Khadr Thread

And from the "No, not the National Enquirer" department: Khadr's sister's ex-husband and his new wife are missing and feared kidnapped in Afghanistan.

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1309097--khadr-s-canadian-ex-husband-and-new-wife-missing-in-afghanistan
 
Why am I not surprised at all at his connection to that family.  When I read a bit about this couple and the situation I wondered to my self who be so totally stunned as to go there on a trip like that and not expect this to happen.  Seeing as he's been dancing close to the fire already it comes as no surprise.  Kind of like Beverly Giesbrecht, totally stunned.  :not-again:
 
Interesting, when this story first went up and I read it, no mention was made of the Khadr connection, just that they were tourists.  Wonder why the sudden transparency?
 
The case of Khadr was one of extreme patience and tolerance on the part of authorities or persons of authorities. If prompted to cover up the issue, they can easily convolute arguments invoking the Anti-Terrorist Law and juvenile crime laws. Knowing who among the justices of the Supreme Court and the lower courts can pass judgment on a contentious issue hounding the Anti-terrorist law to their favour, CSIS or RCMP can easily land the case on a sympathizer. But no, they have to pass the case to a presiding objective judge through raffle. Hence, adverse judgments on the Arar case and the rest. These rigged raffles are common in Arab countries like Iran,Iraq when it was under Saddam Hussein and Afghanistan under the Taliban. In other words, you cannot escape injustice committed by these terrorists. CSIS and RCMP have all the last aces in their sleeves to treat this one as a decided issue through convoluted arguments in connivance with sympathizers in SC. But no, the law must take its course. Rule of law in Canada made her one of the best places to live in!
 
When you happenED to be a naive annd innocent tourist in Iran who just went there to practice the sport of rock or mounting climbing, I am betting my last 200 thousand, you will end up in jail as a suspected 'CIA' agent just like what happened to 3 teenagers. Of course, you have to 'appear in front of television and 'admit' them to escape the death penalty.
 
ObedientiaZelum said:
This just in.

Afghanistan isn't a good place to vacation.

Whoa.  So, that really good deal I got on the Internet for a 6 night stay at Disneyland Bagram wasn't such a good idea?
 
I only unlocked it so 'Dap' could post that article.............maybe the flies will go away if I lock up the trash again for a while.
Bruce
 
The following Globe and Mail article is posted at the request of E.R. Campbell.

I am also unlocking the thread. We'll see how it goes for a while.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/omar-khadr-to-appeal-convictions-on-murder-terrorism-spying/article11587422/#dashboard/follows/

Canadian Omar Khadr to appeal terrorism convictions

PAUL KORING

WASHINGTON — The Globe and Mail

Published Saturday, Apr. 27 2013, 6:00 AM EDT

Last updated Saturday, Apr. 27 2013, 7:17 AM EDT

Omar Khadr’s plea-bargained guilty plea and conviction on murder, terrorism and spying charges will be appealed to a U.S. civilian federal court that has tossed out similar Guantanamo military tribunal convictions for two high-profile al-Qaeda defendants.

If the appeal succeeds, Mr. Khadr could be freed immediately.

Mr. Khadr, now 26, is imprisoned in a special security unit dubbed Guantanamo North at Millhaven Penitentiary near Kingston after being repatriated last September from the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo, Cuba.

“Omar has given his approval to file an appeal,” Dennis Edney, his Canadian lawyer confirmed. A U.S. appellate legal team has been named.

His lawyers expect the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to overturn Mr. Khadr’s conviction – just as it did in the cases of two of Osama bin Laden’s close personal aides, Ali Hamza Bahlul and Salim Hamdan, both also convicted at Guantanamo.

That would create consternation in Ottawa, where ministers have called Mr. Khadr a terrorist and successive Liberal and Conservative governments refused to extricate him from Guantanamo despite his Canadian citizenship and his hotly debated status as a child soldier under international law. He pleaded guilty in 2010 to multiple crimes committed in Afghanistan in 2002. As part of that plea, he confessed to throwing a grenade that killed U.S. Sergeant Christopher Speer.

The Pentagon’s Office of the Chief Defense Counsel has named an appellate team of attorneys for Mr. Khadr led by a civilian Sam Morison. Now armed with a formal go-ahead from Mr. Khadr, the team is expected to file the appeal soon.

They’re confident the military tribunal convictions will be overturned. “In our view there are serious questions about the validity of all these convictions,” Mr. Morison said, adding: “As the law now stands, I don’t see how his convictions can be affirmed.”

In rulings on Mr. Hamdan last October and again in January on Mr. al-Bahlul, the civilian appeals court overturned the terrorism convictions against the two. It concluded the military war crimes tribunal created by the George W. Bush administration after the 2001 terrorist attack that levelled New York’s twin towers and left the Pentagon ablaze had tried and convicted detainees on crimes that didn’t exist when the defendants were captured. President Barack Obama has opted to retain the military commissions and keep Guantanamo running, despite his pre-2008 election vow to close the infamous prison complex.

Mr. Khadr’s case is additionally complicated because, unlike Mr. Hamdan or Mr. al-Bahlul, he pleaded guilty at his week-long trial in October, 2010, that included a remorseful statement to Sgt. Speer’s widow. As part of that deal, Mr. Khadr waived his right to appeal.

Mr. Khadr admitted to murder in violation of the law of war, attempted murder in violation of the law of war, conspiracy and providing material support for terrorism and spying.

But if the underlying acts weren’t crimes – at least not war crimes – then the waiver may also be unreliable and the appeal could still be accepted by the U.S. federal court.

"Not only weren't they war crimes at the time of their commission but, I would argue," Mr. Morison said, "that none of them are crimes today, not in international law."

The exception is spying, which was so broadly redefined in the Military Commissions Act, it bears little resemblance to espionage as defined in international law.

It could be months before the appeal is formally launched, let alone heard.

In the meantime, Mr. Khadr, who has been held prisoner since 2002, will be eligible under Canadian law for a parole hearing in July this year, when he will have served one-third of the eight-year sentence he agreed to at his 2010 trial.

Mr. Khadr, near death, was dug out of the rubble of an Afghan compound bombed by U.S. warplanes in June, 2002, where the then-15-year-old son of a major al-Qaeda figure was living with a group of militants building and planting roadside bombs.

Even if Mr. Khadr threw the grenade that killed Sgt. Speer, killing a combatant on a battlefield isn’t a war crime except in narrowly defined cases. Those include shooting a defenseless descending parachutist, a wounded soldier or one indicating surrender.
 
Even if Mr. Khadr threw the grenade that killed Sgt. Speer, killing a combatant on a battlefield isn’t a war crime except in narrowly defined cases. Those include shooting a defenseless descending parachutist, a wounded soldier or one indicating surrender.



Ummmm?  Was Sgt Speer not a medic and wearing a Red Cross?  If so, then it would be a war crime.
 
Yes, funny how a 'Geneva Convention-protected' medic didn't make the lawyer's list of war crime human targets... :not-again:
 
Do we really think that Delta Force medics in Afghanistan in 2001/02 were wearing red crosses? Were they even wearing uniforms?  Maybe I'm wrong, but I would be surprised to learn that they were wearing either.
 
He wasnt wearing a uniform. Thats a known detail about the incident.

I couldnt find my other reference. But even the Wiki mentions it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Speer
 
Container said:
He wasnt wearing a uniform. Thats a known detail about the incident.

I couldnt find my other reference. But even the Wiki mentions it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Speer
All they (Wiki) mention is that he wasn't wearing a helmet.
 
GK .Dundas said:
All they (Wiki) mention is that he wasn't wearing a helmet.

"Speer, who was not wearing a helmet at the time because the mission called for indigenous clothing, suffered a head wound from a grenade and succumbed to his injuries approximately two weeks later."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Speer
 
I quite frankly despair when I see what is bone idle laziness on the part of the Canadian Press.

The Globe story, which in general parrots the utterings of Khadr's off again on again lawyer, utterly fails to conduct any critical analysis of the situation.

Firstly, In 2011 Khadr fired his longtime Canadian lawyers and took up new Canadian lawyers. At the time it was reported that he wrote his old lawyers that "changing counsel at this time is in my best interests."

http://www.thestar.com/news/world/2011/08/05/khadr_fires_canadian_lawyers_hires_new_ones.html

Subsequent thereto he made his plea bargain.

Some time after Khadr was repatriated he met with his old lawyers and shortly thereafter his newer Canadian team felt compelled to withdraw and the old team was back.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2013/01/22/toronto-khadr-new-lawyer.html

To date no one has taken up the question about what is behind this shifting representation. I won't speculate but to me this is a fertile field which a good investigative reporter should have a field day with.

The second issue is the failure of the press to make even a half hearted attempt at a fair and balanced review of the legal issues. Instead we get a headline of "Will walk free if successful". No attempt to look analyse whether the Hamdan decision which revolved around a new crime of "providing material support" or the more recent Hamza decision re the same charge and making terrorist propaganda. Note in particular that the recent Hamza appeal court decision which was vacated the conviction was in itself vacated last week by the full seven member court pending a rehearing before the full court in September.

Last time I looked someone who is not a legitimate combatant under the Laws of Armed Conflict and who throws a grenade that kills someone, regardless of whether he wore a red cross armband etc etc is guilty of a crime that existed in 2001. That alone distinguishes this case from the other two. The fact that he pled guilty to this while having highly qualified legal counsel, and further agreed to waive his right of appeal for the reduced sentence that he got, are all further relevant factors to take into consideration.

Again. In MHO a reporter who is not just a lazy mouthpiece for the defence should be taking a more critical look at the circumstances and report all of the facts and potential outcomes to this case.

But then again I live in an imaginary world where reporters are actually interested in making fair and balanced reports rather than just publishing some shallow drivel from CP.  :2c:

:deadhorse:

 
Back
Top