Khadr's khangaroo khourt trial, khontinued

110 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Mon, 2008-10-27 10:37

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

[url=http://www.andyworthington.co.uk/2008/10/27/the-collapse-of-omar-khadrs-... Collapse of Omar Khadr's Guantбnamo Trial [/url]
by Andy Worthington

quote:

Those who have been pressing for the young Canadian’s release will now be hoping that the Canadian government (which is also a signatory to the UN Convention) will finally discover its spine, and will take advantage of the change of administration to demand his return to Canada, or that the new US government will refuse to proceed with the case. Barack Obama, who voted against the Military Commissions Act that revived the trial system in 2006, has [url=http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/remarks_of_senator_obama_the_w_1.p... to abolish the Military Commissions, which he regards (along with the use of torture, the shredding of the Geneva Conventions, and the sidelining of the US Constitution and the Uniform Code of Military Justice) as key examples of the Bush administration’s quest for “unchecked presidential power,” and even John McCain, who voted for the legislation, may wish to transfer the ailing system to the mainland, and has already [url=http://www.thestar.com/News/USElection/article/447159]explained[/url] that he would repatriate Khadr if asked to do so by the Canadian government.

[ 27 October 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]

Mon, 2008-10-27 12:00

#53

Fidel

quote:

[b]and has already explained that he would repatriate Khadr if asked to do so by the Canadian government.[/b]

And he's [i]still[/i] there at Gitmo.

Mon, 2008-10-27 12:04

#54

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

...and McCain [i]still[/i] isn't President.

Mon, 2008-10-27 12:16

#55

Fidel

McCain can say whatever he wants before an election. Same with Obama. Same with our Liberals. All four plutocratic parties in North America are distinguished liars when it comes to election season.

Mon, 2008-10-27 12:22

#56

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:

Originally posted by unionist:
[b]It is somewhat troubling, nay terrifying, that posters here would make up excuses for Canada not even trying to just plain old simply [b]ask[/b] the U.S. to send him back.[/b]

Mon, 2008-10-27 12:34

#57

Fidel

[b]NDP: Wayne Marston on Omar Khadr 2[/b]

Mon, 2008-10-27 12:53

#58

TVParkdale

quote:

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]And so once again the NDP calls for Khadr to face charges in Canada, instead of demanding his unconditional release.
Shame on you, Mr. Layton!
[ 15 September 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ][/b]

Layton is acting on the precedent set by other G7 countries in having people charged with terrorist acts have been returned to their own land to stand trial.

Once he's here--the whole thing falls under "right to trial within a reasonable period of time" [or however that is legally worded] and would probably be chucked out of court, pronto.

Mon, 2008-10-27 13:11

#59

Fidel

He conveniently de-emphasizes that part of the NDP's demand where Khadr is brought back to Canada.

The NDP provided our stoogeocrats with seven different ways to convince Yanquis that Canadian Omar Khadr should be dealt with by Canadian law not Gitmo military law. One Liberal MP in 2003 wanted Khadr trying on charges of terrorism. That one merits little mention little of the time.

Meanwhile we're supposed to assume that the Americans are looking out for Omar's best interests. Better that he's there and not here being tortured senseless by a Canadian inquisition of the NDP's creation, or some such.

[ 27 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Mon, 2008-10-27 13:25

#60

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:

Originally posted by TVParkdale:
[b]Once he's here--the whole thing falls under "right to trial within a reasonable period of time" [or however that is legally worded] and would probably be chucked out of court, pronto.[/b]

Ssssh! don't tell Harper or his yankee friends! We want to [b]trick[/b] them into bringing Khadr to Canada and then have a judge release him before they can say "D'oh!"

They're so easily conned, those dumbass neocons.

Mon, 2008-10-27 13:31

#61

Fidel

Ya-right. Yanquis only have friends in Ottawa when Conservatives hold phony minority power. I'd have said phony-majority, but even those bought and paid for governments are hard to come by these days.

Mon, 2008-10-27 16:46

#62

jrootham

quote:

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]You didn't have to do that in order for us to figure out that you have precious little regard for human rights or principles of justice.
You construct fantasy scenarios based on hopes and suspicions in order to justify treating Omar Khadr as a criminal, rather than as a victim of crime.
Your cavalier suggestion that Canada, already complicit in crimes against humanity in this case, continue the persecution of this child soldier, who has already done seven years of hard time, much of it in solitary confinement and under torture, is revolting to anyone who has any regard for justice and human rights.[/b]

My position is that Khadr should be pried out of Guantanimo by any means necessary. What you are saying is that unless he is unconditionally released he should just rot there.

Who is the supporter of human rights here?

You are willing to sacrifice him on the altar of absolute purity, all the while claiming to be the high priest of human rights, calling down anathema on anyone who disagrees.

Mon, 2008-10-27 16:53

#63

Michelle

quote:

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]You didn't have to do that in order for us to figure out that you have precious little regard for human rights or principles of justice.[/b]

This personal attack is unnecessary.

Mon, 2008-10-27 17:39

#64

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:

Originally posted by jrootham:
[b]Who is the supporter of human rights here?
You are willing to sacrifice him on the altar of absolute purity, all the while claiming to be the high priest of human rights, calling down anathema on anyone who disagrees.[/b]

Speaking of unnecessary personal attacks, it's ludicrous for you to pose as "the" supporter of human rights in Khadr's case.

You are, after all, the one who is quite prepared to have the Canadian government offer its judicial system as an adjunct to the military commissions kangaroo kourt system. This would be the same Canadian government that is already complicit in Khadr's illegal and immoral imprisonment and torture.

I'm not "sacrificing" Khadr. You talk as if the USA is demanding that Canada put Khadr on trial as a condition of his relesase from Guantanamo. Do you have any evidence that that is the case, or that there are even negotiations on the table?

I didn't think so.

So which of us is willing to sacrifice Khadr's legal rights on the altar of expediency - without even any indication that such a sacrifice is required in order to secure his release?

Mon, 2008-10-27 17:56

#65

jrootham

What part of "by any means necessary" do you not understand?

If it's not necessary, fine, if it is, do it.

What is your response if it is part of a deal to get him out of Guantanimo?

Mon, 2008-10-27 18:04

#66

Fidel

quote:

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]
You are, after all, the one who is quite prepared to have the Canadian government offer its judicial system as an adjunct to the military commissions kangaroo kourt system. This would be the same Canadian government that is already complicit in Khadr's illegal and immoral imprisonment and torture.[/b]

It's not the same government. This is a different government today violating Omar Khadr's citizen rights as well as his internationally-agreed upon child rights. There were two, no , three! [i]successive[/i] Canadian federal governments involved not one. Although I can certainly see why you refer to them as one. They are legion, and yet they are of the same business-big banking frame of mind - as if two wings of the same prehistoric pteradactyl about to lay a big rotten egg

[ 27 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Mon, 2008-10-27 18:13

#67

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:

Originally posted by jrootham:
[b]What is your response if it is part of a deal to get him out of Guantanimo?[/b]

I don't deal in fantasy scenarios. I deal with the facts as they are.

I see a person who was wrongly accused of murder, imprisoned without trial for seven years, and tortured with the connivance of my government, and I demand his unconditional release.

You, on the other hand, offer to subject him to further indignity, expense, and legal jeopardy as a condition of his release. It's a completely unprincipled position.

Mon, 2008-10-27 18:19

#68

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:

Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]It's not the same government.[/b]

This is ridiculous. Of course it's the same Government of Canada.

Only someone who wanted to absolve the Harper government of responsibility would make such a specious argument.

The fact is that the Harper government, by refusing to act to repatriate Khadr, continues the unbroken policy of Canadian Government complicity in his mistreatment that began in 2002.

Mon, 2008-10-27 18:22

#69

Fidel

And I doubt very much Khadr will be released unconditionally back into the Canadian population without a sanity check at one of our fine institutions beforehand. This man-child won't be right as rain anytime soon after having been tortured and abused for the last six years and counting.

Mon, 2008-10-27 18:27

#70

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Do you think it will help his sanity at all to be subjected to a trial in a Canadian court on trumped-up charges? Hasn't he suffered enough for the alleged crime of defending himself against a murderous assault by foreign soldiers?

Mon, 2008-10-27 18:32

#71

Fidel

What ratio of Whigs:Tories^TM will it take to do right by Khadr?

Mon, 2008-10-27 18:37

#72

Fidel

[ 27 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Mon, 2008-10-27 18:38

#73

Fidel

quote:

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]Do you think it will help his sanity at all to be subjected to a trial in a Canadian court on trumped-up charges?[/b]

He's there.

And he should be here.

Other countries lawyers were quick to get their citizens out of there.

Our guys were a little slow on the draw - about six years slow. It's a little late to be laying down international law now that Yanquis have closed the barn door.

And as long as we're mentioning what political candidates in America have said about it, I believe Byers said he doesn't believe Khadr would spend any time in a Canadian gulag. He's already spent more time at Gitmo than some people have served for "manslaughter" and white collar crime costing taxpayers billions of dollars both sides of the Can-Am border.

Mon, 2008-10-27 22:03

#74

jrootham

quote:

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]
You, on the other hand, offer to subject him to further indignity, expense, and legal jeopardy as a condition of his release. It's a completely unprincipled position.[/b]

This is either a lie, or you can't read.

He should face trial in Canada ONLY if it is necessary to get him out of Guantanimo.

Tue, 2008-10-28 06:44

#75

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:

Originally posted by jrootham:
[b]He should face trial in Canada ONLY if it is necessary to get him out of Guantanimo.[/b]

But that's not the position of Amnesty International Canada - remember? The one you think is "not unreasonable"?

They want to "bring Omar Khadr to justice." They want Canada to "immediately request the repatriation of Omar Khadr and, if there is sufficient and admissible evidence, arrange for a fair trial before a Canadian court." They don't say "ONLY if necessary to get him out of Guantanamo" - they want him tried in Canada, quite independent of anything the Americans might demand at some point in the future.

And you don't "see a huge problem" with this.

Yes, I can read, unfortunately for you.

While you and Amnesty and Byers are sitting around thinking up new ways for the Harper government to continue participating in the violation of international law and to commit more crimes against humanity (because, after all, we have to respect the views of the knuckle-dragging Harper-lovers who have a hate on for Khadr's family!) the rest of the civilized world is calling for his unconditional release.

The fact that people who are held in some regard in NDP circles don't understand the difference between demands and concessions is not very complimentary to your party, to say the least.

Tue, 2008-10-28 09:05

#76

jrootham

In what way is trying someone "with sufficient and admissible evidence" violating their human rights?

One of the things about the right to a fair trial is an obligation to face trial.

It's called the rule of law.

Tue, 2008-10-28 09:50

#77

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Why does Khadr have an obligation to face trial on a trumped-up charge? Because the prosecutors at Guantanamo say so?

If you had an ounce of concern for the rule of law you would know that the entire Guantanamo incarceration-torture-show-trial cycle is illegal, immoral and unjust. Volunteering the Canadian court system to help out in that process has nothing to do with advancing the rule of law, and everything to do with compounding the illegality, immorality, and injustice solely for the purpose of pandering to the war on terror boosters.

Offering to co-operate with the torturing inquisitors of the Guantanamo gulag is all the more despicable because it implies acceptance of the legitimacy of the process and, in the absence of any demonstrable proof to the contrary, is unnecessary in order to accomplish the goal of releasing Khadr.

The spectacle of a "human rights" organization calling for a victim of repression to be put on trial, while being silent about putting the oppressors themselves on trial, is truly absurd. Did Amnesty call for Aung San Suu Kyi, Huseyin Celil, or Umida Niazova to be put on trial "if there is sufficient and admissible evidence"? No, only Omar Khadr gets such treatment. And it's only in order to pander to knuckle-dragging Canadian Harperites who hate his family. That's your idea of the rule of law, but it's not mine.

Tue, 2008-10-28 12:39

#78

jrootham

So you are back to letting him rot in Guantanamo because you won't pander to Harper's base.

The whole argument is theoretical so refusing to answer that question is just intellectual dishonesty.

Tue, 2008-10-28 12:48

#79

Fidel

quote:

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]Why does Khadr have an obligation to face trial on a trumped-up charge? Because the prosecutors at Guantanamo say so?[/b]

He's already facing trumped-up charges now and god knows what else they continue to do.

And since other western country nationals were released from Gitmo, after being held on charges of having been "enemy combatants", now the empire is referring to Khadr as an "illegal enemy combatant. Apparently plain old "enemy combatant" represented a gaping hole for those three countries' lawyers to repatriate their citizens years ago.

Tue, 2008-10-28 13:45

#80

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:

Originally posted by jrootham:
[b]So you are back to letting him rot in Guantanamo because you won't pander to Harper's base.[/b]

What a ridiculous lie! I'm the one who wants him released immediately and unconditionally. You're the one who wants to offer to the torturers to subject him to some good 'ol Canadian-style justice if they will return him home in handcuffs - and without a shred of evidence that such an unprincipled approach would make any difference to the Americans!

It's fucking unbelieveable!

Tue, 2008-10-28 14:24

#81

Fidel

quote:

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]What a ridiculous lie! I'm the one who wants him released immediately and unconditionally.[/b]

And you're willing to leave him there until two conditions are met:

1. A new government is elected in the U.S. and finally gets around to moving Gitmo detainees to the U.S. mainland

2. Some combination of Tories and Liberals in Ottawa demand his release

It could take years before our stoogeocrats do anything for Omar Khadr. The Liberals told the NDP in 2002 that they would look out for and protect young Omar's rights. And they are still promising to do great things for everyone everywhere. They were still promising to do great and wonderful things right up to being thrown out of power.

Tue, 2008-10-28 14:41

#82

Cueball

That's another ridiculous lie. He is saying that the NDP should be demanding that the Harper government, immediatly ask for his immediate return.

Tue, 2008-10-28 14:47

#83

Fidel

quote:

Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]That's another ridiculous lie.[/b]

And the NDP has demanded that the ruling coalition parties do something more than nothing. Wayne Marston on Khadr in the House part two above.

Truth? You want the truth?

Tue, 2008-10-28 14:50

#84

Unionist

This is sad.

Pretend George W. Bush says, "we'll repatriate Khadr if Stephen Harper agrees to launch a debate in Parliament about whether Canada should sever diplomatic relations with that Communist Cuba".

Would we say: "Hell, do it - we can have the debate and we're pretty sure the House would vote no. Hahaha, pulled a fast one on GWB!"

And if we didn't say that, would we be accused of letting Omar Khadr rot in illegal detention?

I care about Khadr, but I also care about international law, Canadian sovereignty, and the need to oppose U.S. crimes.

Tue, 2008-10-28 14:55

#85

Fidel

quote:

Originally posted by unionist:
[b]
I care about Khadr, but I also care about international law, Canadian sovereignty, and the need to oppose U.S. crimes.[/b]

[b]155 Liberals told 13 NDP MP's[/b] that they cared about Khadr in 2002. It's now 2008, and Khadr is still waiting. And I don't think he desires to be made an example of for the sake of international law which his own government has already failed to uphold. International law has even less meaning for Khadr than it does for the vicious empire and hundreds of military lawyers and Republican-friendly court justices. Khadr doesn't care about those blunders, nor does he care how this looks on any political party. Omar's immediate freedom is all that counts for him today.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Tue, 2008-10-28 15:44

#86

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:

Originally posted by unionist:
[b]This is sad.
Pretend George W. Bush says, "we'll repatriate Khadr if Stephen Harper agrees to launch a debate in Parliament about whether Canada should sever diplomatic relations with that Communist Cuba".
Would we say: "Hell, do it - we can have the debate and we're pretty sure the House would vote no. Hahaha, pulled a fast one on GWB!"[/b]

What would be even sadder is if George W. Bush said nothing, but the Canadian "human rights" establishment took it upon itself to recommend that Harper launch such a debate in Parliament in the hope that this would move Bush to release Khadr.

And then if that didn't work, just go ahead and cut off diplomatic ties with Cuba anyway, just to show Bush we're totally on board with his illegal violations of international law, and then maybe he'd do us a solid and release Khadr.

Tue, 2008-10-28 15:49

#87

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:

Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]Khadr doesn't care about those blunders, nor does he care how this looks on any political party. Omar's immediate freedom is all that counts for him today.[/b]

Which is why the only principled position to take is to demand his immediate freedom.

Nobody is doing him any favours by suggesting he should be taken out of the US frying pan and into the Canadian fire.

Tue, 2008-10-28 16:07

#88

Fidel

No, I think you just have a personal vendetta against the NDP for pointing out Khadr's dilemma to our then phoniest majority government of them all in 2002. That's what I think.

Tue, 2008-10-28 16:12

#89

Fidel

quote:

Originally posted by Fidel:
[b][b]NDP: Wayne Marston on Omar Khadr 2[/b]

[/b]

Tell this NDP'er he's not doing his job

Tue, 2008-10-28 16:37

#90

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:

Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]No, I think you just have a personal vendetta against the NDP for pointing out Khadr's dilemma to our then phoniest majority government of them all in 2002. That's what I think.[/b]

You're crazy.

And as for Wayne Marston, he said exactly what I would have said if I had been an MP. Note that at no point did he urge the government to put Omar Khadr on trial in Canada.

Tue, 2008-10-28 16:47

#91

jrootham

quote:

Originally posted by Cueball:
[b]That's another ridiculous lie. He is saying that the NDP should be demanding that the Harper government, immediatly ask for his immediate return.[/b]

Which is exactly what I thought I heard Wayne Marston say in in the clip linked to above.

Also, the quote from Jack cited above had the word "if" before the reference to facing the court. That seems to be being ignored by some posters here.

Tue, 2008-10-28 16:51

#92

jrootham

quote:

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]What a ridiculous lie! I'm the one who wants him released immediately and unconditionally. You're the one who wants to offer to the torturers to subject him to some good 'ol Canadian-style justice if they will return him home in handcuffs - and without a shred of evidence that such an unprincipled approach would make any difference to the Americans!
It's fucking unbelieveable![/b]

Yeah well, it's not a lie, it's an inference from what you have written here. If you don't want to have such inferences drawn, learn how to write more clearly.

If you don't want to get into pissing matches, don't slander people.

Tue, 2008-10-28 17:02

#93

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

quote:

Originally posted by jrootham:
[b]Which is exactly what I thought I heard Wayne Marston say in in the clip linked to above.[/b]

Yeah, strange about that. Marston seems to agree with me on what a principled position should be.

Lucky he didn't take your advice and demand that Khadr fulfill his "obligation to face trial"!

Tue, 2008-10-28 17:21

#94

Cueball

quote:

Originally posted by jrootham:
[b]
Which is exactly what I thought I heard Wayne Marston say in in the clip linked to above.
Also, the quote from Jack cited above had the word "if" before the reference to facing the court. That seems to be being ignored by some posters here.[/b]

That's good. I am glad to see that some NDP MP's have caught up to many have been saying here for years. This is substantially different, for example than Beyer's legal opinion.

Tue, 2008-10-28 17:30

#95

Fidel

quote:

Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]You're crazy
And as for Wayne Marston, he said exactly what I would have said if I had been an MP. Note that at no point did he urge the government to put Omar Khadr on trial in Canada.[/b]

John McCain and Barack "Let's start a war with nuclear-armed Pakistan" Obama thinks Khadr should be repatriated, but only if some coalition ratio of Tories to Liberals asks nicely.

Even Paul Martin said Khadr should be brought home, even though he didn't do it himself when in the PMO's office.

I'm somewhat confused now that Steve Harper insisted on pursuing the previous Liberal government's policies for abandoning Omar to the American inquisition. And now all of these warmongering plutocrats think so highly of Omar Khadr, especially since mid-summer when Byers and international experts merely suggested various points of law to argue with on his behalf since the new and improved "unlawful enemy combatant" law was enacted for Gitmo purposes. It's all okay now though, because shape-shifting lizard-man McCain and Bracket Obomba promise to release Khadr sometime when they begin bombing some country or another ... if only our stooges in Ottawa would make a formal request for his release. In the meantime, the cheque is in the mail, wink-wink nod-nod. This is what international law has been reduced to between Canada and the U.S. Khadr should ask to be reincarnated as a stick of softwood lumber. The Yanks would tell us where to shove him then.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Tue, 2008-10-28 19:46

#96

jrootham

The problem with the absolutist position is that it is not working. Khadr is still in Gitmo.

I am not demanding that he face trial, I am suggesting that facing trial in Canada would be better than being stuck in Gitmo. You disagree.

The logical consequence of that disagreement is that you would leave him stuck in Gitmo if he was required to face trial in Canada.

I really don't believe you mean that, but that is what you have argued in slandering me.

Tue, 2008-10-28 19:54

#97

Unionist

quote:

Originally posted by jrootham:
[b]I am not demanding that he face trial, I am suggesting that facing trial in Canada would be better than being stuck in Gitmo. [/b]

Spending three years in a Canadian prison, maybe with day parole, would be far better than being stuck in Gitmo indefinitely. Maybe we should put that offer on the table?

C'mon, we've gotta give the U.S. something here. Not that they've asked for anything, and not that we've ever asked for him to just be sent home.

Let's put a damn offer on the table. How about: no jail time for Omar, but a public declaration of support for the mission, signed by all members of the House?

Then if anyone refuses to sign, we can find out who really really cares about Omar, and who wants to cut him loose in the name of some hifalutin "principle".

As a precaution, let me note that the above is intended as satire or irony or one of those things.

Tue, 2008-10-28 20:17

#98

Fidel

quote:

Originally posted by unionist:
[b]
Spending three years in a Canadian prison, maybe with day parole, would be far better than being stuck in Gitmo indefinitely. Maybe we should put that offer on the table?[/b]

No one has suggested Khadr spend one minute in a Canadian prison, until you mentioned it now.

quote:

[b]C'mon, we've gotta give the U.S. something here. Not that they've asked for anything, and not that we've ever asked for him to just be sent home.[/b]

The NDP [i]has[/i] demanded it happen. They're still underrepresented in the House of Commons, but the NDP [i]has[/i] demanded our impotent ones do something more than six years' worth of nothing.

Tue, 2008-10-28 20:30

#99

Unionist

quote:

Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]No one has suggested Khadr spend one minute in a Canadian prison, until you mentioned it now. [/b]

You're right! And that's why he's still rotting in Gitmo!

Hey, I'm from the union. We learn through experience that the other side will never negotiate seriously unless you put a serious offer on the table.

It's time to get serious.

How about this: No jail time for Omar - but we deport the rest of his family!

That's just an opener. I'd still keep the 3 years and day parole in my pocket as a closer.

God, I hope the U.S.ians don't monitor babble, or our brilliant bargaining tactics will be for nought.

Tue, 2008-10-28 20:38

#100

Fidel

How about this:

The Liberals threw a-way Omar's first and best chances by missing those bargaining talks when other countries blew their citizens from Gitmo.

Now is the time to do whatever it takes to get him the hell out of hell.

No more pussy footin' around the Yanks for the sake of Jean Chretien's or Paul Martin's political reps and neoliberal era legacies. None of the crooked Libranos ever did one minute in a crowbar hotel after bilking taxpayers and ignoring Khadr's rights as a Canadian citizen and a slew of other laws.

Just get him the hell home asap. To hell with sticking to international law at this point - the time for that has come and gone as far as Omar and his family in Toronto are concerned - and as far as the new military legal regime in place for Gitmo. Apparently the vicious empire doesnt abide the same international laws you ppl seem to think they should, or at least acquiesced to for the sake of admitting to gaping holes in bogus Gitmo law several years ago. Now Yanquis believe they have closed those gaping holes in their own military law. The

Yanks don't recognize an internationally agreed upon UN declaration of children's rights and basic human rights as we well know. It's the same for what is an American inquisition surrounding the phony global war on terror [b](PGWOT)[/b] from here on out

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Tue, 2008-10-28 22:14

#101

Unionist

[url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081028.wkhadr1028/B... must demand Khadr's return because of detainee's torture, court told[/url]

quote:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has an obligation to demand the repatriation of Omar Khadr because Canada was complicit in the torture of the Guantanamo Bay detainee, a lawyer for Mr. Khadr told Federal Court on Tuesday. ...
Judge O'Reilly reserved his decision.

[ 28 October 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]

Pages

Topic locked