quote:

---

A Guantanamo judge has rejected an argument that the war crimes trial of Canadian Omar Khadr is too secretive and violates his right to have a public trial.

But exactly what U.S. Army Col. Patrick Parrish ruled yesterday is a secret too – since his decision wasn't released publicly.

In fact, since Parrish took over Khadr's case in May, not one of the dozens of written pre-trial motions and decisions filed in the case has been released.

That means journalists are left to rely on Khadr's lawyers to report on the outcome of the rulings since the Pentagon's Office of the Military Commissions, which oversees the Guantanamo trials, can only confirm a ruling has been rendered.

"The military judge has the sole authority to determine whether or not any given filings can be released," commissions spokesperson Gail Crawford explained this week.

According to Khadr's military lawyers, Parrish issued rulings on five motions yesterday, including one that turned down an application to have the 21-year-old detainee from Toronto undergo an independent psychiatric evaluation.

---

Why hasn't Brenda Martin spoken out publicly about Khadr and his lot? Is it because her and all her supporters are a bunch of white supremacists who could give a shit about anyone who isn't white.

Martin was a Canadian charged and tried according to the constitution of a country that Canada has "good relations" with. Khadr is a Canadian tortured, illegally imprisoned, and tried in a secret extra-constitutional hearing by a country that Canada has "good relations" with.

Martin had MPs going to Mexico to get her out of jail and got of scot free. Khadr will most likely be murdered by the US with Canada's silent consent.

Never mind if Khadr hasn't broken any Canadian laws; Byers thinks there would be unanimous agreement in the House to pass special laws designed to allow Khadr to be tried and imprisoned in Canada:

quote:

---

"If there was a legislative impediment or an absence of legislative basis for doing anything with regards to Khadr, that could very easily be fixed," he said.

"I don't anticipate that there would be any problem if the government wanted to ask for special legislation to accommodate his circumstances."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by damngrumpy:
...internationally, almost every country in the world would call that treason.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by M. Spector:
Climb down off the Michael Byers bandwagon, Fidel, long enough to ask yourself what kind of justice Byers is talking about when he says Khadr should be brought back to Canada and tried here for war crimes

---

Well for one thing, I don't think very many social workers would advise releasing Khadr back into the general population in haste. Those assholes at Gitmo and in Washington are not just regular run of the mill assholes - they're serious assholes. We're talking about decades of US taxpayer funded research into torture and mind control experimentation on a scale of the Manhatten Project. For all we know they've programmed him to run off and try to assassinate another Kennedy at first sight of the Queen of diamonds playing card, and then where would he be?

If and when he is released, Khadr will be one screwed up individual, and probably filled with hatred and anger right now. Byers thinks he's got the moxy and knowledge of international law to bring Khadr home. That would be a great start to the rest of Omar's life, imo. Byers says it's highly likely at that point that he would never spend a day in prison once home in Toronto.

quote:

---

I don't know how many of you have met torture victims. I'm always struck by the deadness in their eyes.

Torture -- the deliberate infliction of severe pain -- is a despicable and inhumane practice.

That's why torture is absolutely prohibited by a wide range of treaties. That's why every civilized country has committed itself to preventing and punishing torture wherever it's found.

---

Poor Omar. He should be studying or out chasing girls not sitting in an American gulag.

Jerry Fletcher: What's that?
Dr Jonas: It's gravy for the brain
Jerry Fletcher: No! Not Gravy! Nooooooo!

[ 16 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Byers is trying to help Khadr get removed from being tried by the USA military tribunal.

It's completely obvious to me that Khadr will remain in US custody as long as Liberals, or Conservatives, are taking up space in Parliament.

[ 16 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by NorthReport:
These inferences or suggestions that Byers thinks Khadr is a war criminal is a croc.

---

I never said he thinks Khadr is a war criminal. No doubt as a lawyer Byers understands the presumption of innocence.

What Byers wants to do, however, is bring Khadr back to Canada to stand trial here. What does he want to charge Khadr with? Murder? High treason (like our friend grumpysneezy)? He's not sure. But he says if we can't think of anything that's illegal now, we could pass a law that would give us the legal basis for putting Khadr on trial later. And such a law, he ventures to suggest, would be passed unanimously by Parliament!

What kind of stupid game is he playing?

The fact is that John McCain has already said that he would happily send Khadr back to Canada if Stephen Harper asked. Obama would probably do the same. The problem here is Harper, not the USians.

quote:

---

Originally posted by M. Spector:

If Byers wants to pass a law, how about one requiring Harper to ask for Khadr to be returned to Canada?

---

The NDP tried that years ago with Chretien and then with the Liberian steamships magnate in the PMO. Didn't work. What game is Byers suggesting Ottawa should play for Omar;s sake?. Do you really want to know?

What I found him to say is:

quote:

---

While both the Geneva Conventions and the Convention on the Rights of the Child do have provisions dealing with the prosecution of children older than 15, there has never before been a war crimes trial of someone younger than 18.

This is due to customary international law; in other words, how the conventions have been interpreted, argues Canadian international law professor Michael Byers. Because the conventions recognize child soldiers as under 18 and require they be given special protection, Byers says, keeping Khadr behind bars for five years and trying him for war crimes would violate those international treaties.

---

http://aprilreign.breadnroses.ca/2008/01/omar-khadr/

quote:

---

What's happening now with the deportation of Robin Long is entirely consistent with the Harper government's refusal to repatriate [Guantanamo Bay prisoner and Canadian citizen] Omar Khadr," Byer said Tuesday.

---

http://byers.typepad.com/

quote:

---

But that doesn't mean Khadr, who was 15 years old when he was captured by U.S. forces in Afghanistan, would be convicted or even held in custody.

"I think the fact that he was a juvenile is likely to exculpate him completely," Byers said.

---

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/07/20/khadr-legalexperts.html

Moreover, Byers has been actively involved in speaking out against Guantanamo since 2002

quote:

---

Six years of criticizing Guantanamo Bay
I've publicly opposed the Bush administration's policy on prisoners since January 2002, when I penned one of the first critical articles on Guantanamo Bay. Excerpt:

The rights of the detainees are our rights as well. Yet international law can be modified as a result of state behaviour. If we stand by while the rights of the detainees are undermined, we, as individuals, could lose.

---

quote:

---

demand Omar Khadr’s release from US custody at Guantanamo Bay to the custody of Canadian law enforcement officials as soon as practical.

· call on the Director of Public Prosecutions to investigate, and, if warranted, prosecute Omar Khadr for offences under Canadian law.

· take such measures as are necessary to ensure that possible security concerns are appropriately and adequately addressed upon the repatriation of Omar Khadr.

...

· call on the relevant Canadian authorities to ensure that an appropriate rehabilitation and reintegration program is developed for Omar Khadr, which takes into account legitimate security concerns. To the extent necessary, such a program could place judicially enforceable /conditions on Omar Khadr’s conduct.

---

You see, no law enforcement agency in Canada has charged, investigated, or even alleged any wrongdoing on Khadr's part in the past six years.

Khadr has been detained unlawfully and abused since 2002. He has been afforded no proper treatment by virtue of his Canadian citizenship, except to see his country's agents collaborating with his torturers and imprisoners. He must be repatriated, period.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
Are you trying manage some sort of message mspector? Where is the link to the quotes you have regarding Byer's statements? They are conspicuous in their abscence, as a matter of fact.

---

Fidel knows exactly what I am referring to, and my remarks were directed at him. Fidel himself linked to the article where we find the following:

quote:

---

Meanwhile, Byers argued that even if Khadr could not be tried under current Canadian law, the Conservative government cannot stand behind what he termed the "flimsy" excuse of an absence of legislation to warrant keeping Khadr in U.S. military custody.

"If there was a legislative impediment or an absence of legislative basis for doing anything with regards to Khadr, that could very easily be fixed," he said.

"I don't anticipate that there would be any problem if the government wanted to ask for special legislation to accommodate his circumstances."

---

Do you?

[ 16 August 2008: Message edited by: M. Spector ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
"if warranted" is the ticket, eh? Byers says not, and I concur both with his views, that I linked above and the NDP's statements, you linked to. Based upon the premise we know they are not warranted, and that full investigation must occur and it must start somewhere immediately.

---

If indeed that is what Byers wanted, was a kangaroo court, and he doesn't, I would not agree.

There ya go for what it is worth, as it is worth as much as the ill founded supposition, and red herring question, it was based upon. So you can ascribe the value, ok?

And indeed in the article Byer was making reference to the excuse Harper was using to keep Khadr there.

quote:

---

the "flimsy" excuse of an absence of legislation to warrant keeping Khadr in U.S. military custody.

---

Please do try selling your red herrings somewhere else. I know that people have overlooked Martin's flimsy contributions, and see the Liberal actions for what they are, but too bad, the stroy you are trying create is just not happening.

What about Canadians who oppose the "mission" but haven't thrown grenades - should they be investigated - for treason?

But how can such an inquiry start with Khadr being handed over to Canadian police and investigating to see whether he should be prosecuted!!??

Was Maher Arar handed over to police custody when he was returned from Syria??? Did anyone demand he be investigated and ("if warranted") prosecuted?

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
And indeed in the article Byer was making reference to the excuse Harper was using to keep Khadr there.

---

Byers is proposing to solve the problem for Harper by offering to agree to "special legislation" to "accommodate [Khadr's] circumstances" and allow him to be tried in Canada for something that he couldn't be tried for otherwise under current law.

Nor do I believe that Khadr and Arar can be conflated as being the same.

I'd be delighted if Byers and his NDP pals were calling for Khadr's unconditional repatriation - no strings attached. Nothing would make me happier. You could make my day if you could answer the question I posed in the other thread by showing me how Byers claims to have been misquoted in the Canoe article, and that he really does support the unconditional repatriation of Khadr and opposes any trial against him.

But don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining. I know what the NDP position is, and what Byers's position is, and I think it stinks. I'm allowed to have that opinion, even if you don't agree with it.

quote:

---

This is due to customary international law; in other words, how the conventions have been interpreted, argues Canadian international law professor Michael Byers. Because the conventions recognize child soldiers as under 18 and require they be given special protection, Byers says, keeping Khadr behind bars for five years and trying him for war crimes would violate those international treaties.

Like Crane, Byers argues that Canada's continued support for the trial damages the government's ability to push for human rights issues in the future. "For Canada to not step in in this instance and seek to repatriate someone, who in addition to being a Canadian citizen, was 15 at the time of the alleged offence, just makes a mockery of Canada's claim to be a country that stands for human rights," he said.

---

http://www.thestar.com/News/article/291579

quote:

---

Byers,...told the Straight that he agreed to speak at the rally because he feels very strongly that the Canadian government has let down a Canadian citizen.

“Every other Western democracy has repatriated its nationals from Guantanamo,” Byers noted.

In an interview with the Straight in June 2007, Byers argued that if Khadr is guilty of the crimes he stands accused of, he should be treated like a child soldier and therefore, as a victim who requires rehabilitation.

---

And if that is not enough here is Byer's opinion formalized in a legal document to the Government of Canada:

quote:

---

5. Summary and Conclusion
The duty of the government of Canada to secure the release and repatriation of Omar Khadr has been triggered by compelling evidence that Omar Khadr’s rights, protected by Canadian and international law, have been violated by the U.S. during the six years that he has been forcibly confined in the Guantánamo Bay prison. Recently released evidence indicates that Canadian officials have participated, by acts and omissions, in the systematic violation of Khadr’s rights.

The government of Canada also has a legal obligation to investigate U.S. and Canadian involvement in criminal violations of Mr. Khadr’s rights.
Canada has both the legal duty and capacity to uphold international law by preventing further injury to Omar Khadr, conducting investigations of acts committed against him and ensuring the appropriate civil and criminal remedies. There is no other state that has both the capacity and duty to do so.
Lawyers against the War and the undersigned call on the government of Canada to adhere to legal obligations and to secure the immediate release from Guantánamo Bay and repatriation to Canada of Omar Khadr.

Sinserely,
...Professor Marjorie Cohn, President for the National Lawyers Guild, San Diego CA
Marjorie Robertson, B.Sc.N. M.Ed., Retired Professor of Nursing, Ottawa, ON
Alma Norman - social activist, concerned citizen, retired teacher, Ottawa ON
David Norman - Physician, concerned citizen, Ottawa, ON
Stewart Seidel, Systems Analyst and Concerned Citizen, Vancouver, BC
Rula Odeh, Concerned citizen, Montreal, Quebec
Florence Stratton, Regina Saskatchewan
Michael Byers, Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law, UBC...

---

Lawyers Against the War letter July 30, 2008

quote:

---

Originally posted by damngrumpy:
First of all cueball, we are part of a coalition, a NATO administered operation with the recognition of the UN. If you are in conflict with the coalition that contains the home nation, it would stand to reason that you have indeed participated in an act against this country. Age means little, unless they can prove he was abducted and forced to fight for the insergents, and that will be tough when you look at the family history here. The Khadr family is not know to be very pro Canadian by their own actions.
As a youth this young my personal view is that he should be returned to this country, formally charged and let off lightly. I believe we as a country are making the mistake of making a harsh example out of a kid, who was in a war zone, and people kill each other in war zones. My issue with this kid is that he acted in a manner that is not in keeping with Canadian law

---

I seem to remember that at one time we were part of a coalition called the Commonwealth. When the Germans invaded Poland on September 1st 1939, Mackenzie King deemed it necessary, in fact made it a point of national pride, to make an independent declaration of war against Germany on September 10th, 9 days after the coalition was at war.

This moment in history is regarded by many as the defining point of Canada's nationhood seperate from the empire.

I guess being seen as independent of the empire meant something back then. It also meant something about democracy, because the Canadian government acted to confirm its declaration of war against Germany by a vote in parliment. It means something to me. Sorry it seems to mean so little to you. Regardless, none of that had anything to do with Omar Khadr. It was the Canadian government that brought Khadr into conflict with the Canadian government by executive order, not Khadr. He made no choices. Jean Chretian however did.

Furthermore there is no evidence that he fought anyone. He was shot in the back, while sitting down, and was not armed. No one saw him engage in combat of any kind, according to the after action report of the person who shot him.

[ 16 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
Nor do I believe that Khadr and Arar can be conflated as being the same.

---

But unionist suggested they should both be treated the same way on their repatriation to Canada. Do you disagree with unionist's suggestion? Or if you agree, why did you respond by saying they aren't "the same"?

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
Moreover, I am sure if he joined the Liberal Party instead of the NDP, there would be very little putting forth of empty words against his position.

---

As it is Khader was unarmed and shot in the back while sitting down in a combat zone, and was not seen to engage in any combat activities. That is what the after action report of the person who shot him states.

So far there is no information on hand that indicates that Khadr was doing any fighting whatsoever. The US investigation process has absolutely no credibility. There is no reason to suggest that anything uncovered by the kangaroo courts and prosecution in Gitmo have any legal validity under the Canadian legal system. There is no reason to change laws to fit one specific case.

If Khadr is legally culpable for murder or treason or whatever, those are charges already existant under Canadian law, and there is no reason to append or ammend any laws to make prosecution possible just to fit this one specific case.

The whole idea that Canadian law should be ammended to allow for the prosecution of one individual is overtly prejudicial. What next, ask parliment to create a specific law so that we can execute Cliford Olson just because we don't like him especially?

The fact that the law would have to be ammended to fit one specific case, says everything about the morality of this idea being forwarded by the NDP. The law is supposed to be made to apply equally to all, not made up as we go along. This principle is the very essence of the principles of a fair judiciary.

[ 16 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

What if I were to suggest that babble policy be changed just to single out your opinions, so that you could be sanctioned for having those opinions? Would that be a fair principle on which to administer board policy?

If the Liberals were to call for an independent investigation of Khadr's actions, with the goal of discovering wether or not Khadr's actions amounted to crimes that could be prosecuted under Canadian law, as part of a deal to repatriate him to Canada. I would be all for it. You on the other hand will suck up whatever bullshit your party tells you to swallow.

Have some koolaid with your popcorn, while you are at it.

[ 16 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
...your suppositions about Byers have been proven false...

---

In the first place, those older Byers quotations you dug up are all fine arguments against the existing US military commissions process being permitted to continue. But they do not deal with what Canada could do with Khadr if he is repatriated - which is exactly what the subject of the Canoe article was, and what Byers's words that I quoted were directed to.

In the second place, none of those quotations (or paraphrases of Byers's position) are incompatible with or contradictory of his statements that I quoted. They do not erase, outweigh, or negate what he said in the Canoe article.

In the third place, even if, despite what he said to the Canoe reporter, Byers's position were actually that Khadr should be brought to Canada and released without charges, it would be at variance with the line being carried by NDP MP's, as unionist has pointed out. I believe that Byers's recent decision to run as an NDP candidate has led him to adopt that position as his own.

quote:

---

5. Summary and Conclusion
The duty of the government of Canada to secure the release and repatriation of Omar Khadr has been triggered by compelling evidence that Omar Khadr’s rights, protected by Canadian and international law, have been violated by the U.S. during the six years that he has been forcibly confined in the Guantánamo Bay prison. Recently released evidence indicates that Canadian officials have participated, by acts and omissions, in the systematic violation of Khadr’s rights.
The government of Canada also has a legal obligation to investigate U.S. and Canadian involvement in criminal violations of Mr. Khadr’s rights.
Canada has both the legal duty and capacity to uphold international law by preventing further injury to Omar Khadr, conducting investigations of acts committed against him and ensuring the appropriate civil and criminal remedies. There is no other state that has both the capacity and duty to do so.
Lawyers against the War and the undersigned call on the government of Canada to adhere to legal obligations and to secure the immediate release from Guantánamo Bay and repatriation to Canada of Omar Khadr.

Sinserely,
...Professor Marjorie Cohn, President for the National Lawyers Guild, San Diego CA
Marjorie Robertson, B.Sc.N. M.Ed., Retired Professor of Nursing, Ottawa, ON
Alma Norman - social activist, concerned citizen, retired teacher, Ottawa ON
David Norman - Physician, concerned citizen, Ottawa, ON
Stewart Seidel, Systems Analyst and Concerned Citizen, Vancouver, BC
Rula Odeh, Concerned citizen, Montreal, Quebec
Florence Stratton, Regina Saskatchewan
Michael Byers, Canada Research Chair in Global Politics and International Law, UBC...

---

And boy, some people sure don't like it when you deconstruct their little managing the message, and illuminate an attempted destruction of someone's credbility, who is actually doing something for Khadr, and has been trying since 2002, like Byer.

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:

Perhaps I should go find some threads here where people were singing Byer's praises regarding Khadr, when they thought he would join the Liberals?

---

I really have no idea why you are talking up this bullshit about the Liberals. They are almost as irrelevant as the NDP, and the only reason they might be an itty-bitty bit more relevant is because they actually might be able to prevent the extreme right taking control of the country. Other than that the two parties are indistinguishable.

I looked through Byers document. Apparently these lawyers were not willing to buy into Byers bright idea that the laws should be changed so that Khadr could be charged in Canada, in order to satisfy the NDP perceptions of what would be acceptable to the USA. Perhaps I just missed it.

Good on them, if that is the case. Regardless, Byers has gone on record as recomending a law being neacted in parliment that would allow for Khadr to be charged in Canada, apparently with the same crimes as he is charged with in Guantanamp. He was not that specific about it but the gyst of it was that Khadr deseerved laws specially for him.

Nice!

Of course it is highly doubtful that a new US administration would hold on to him. As Spector says, it is Harper that is the problem, not the US, as elequent as this letter is about the illegality of the Khadr detention.

The question is when Harper going demand the unconditional return of our citizen, who has been charged illegally, and is being tried illegally in a kangaroo court, and when is the NDP going to get to the point of that, as opposed to shilly-shallying about adjusting Canada changing its legal codes to suit the US purposes in the "war on terror"?

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

and the only reason they might be an itty-bitty bit more relevant is because they actually might be able to prevent the extreme right taking control of the country. Other than that the two parties are indistinguishable.

---

I agree. The Liberals and Conservatives are two wings of the same buzzard(Coragyps atratus) Liberals lied to Sven Robinson and the NDP when Bill Graham said Libranos would look into it right after they pilfered some more money from taxpayers. Unfortunately, they never got back to the NDP on Khadr's situation due to some sticky finger business.

quote:

---

and when is the NDP going to get to the point of that, as opposed to shilly-shallying about adjusting Canada changing its legal codes to suit the US purposes in the "war on terror"?

---

The Yanks will no longer even consider treating Khadr as a juvenile or child soldier. And that's the problem - federal Liberals didn't get Khadr from Gitmo when the gettin' was good. Now Omar is an "illegal enemy combatant" as in not a legal enemy combatant.

Liberals neglected to fight for his rights under Geneva conventions as well as his internationally agreed upon child rights.

Libranos neglected to have him repatriated at a time when federal lawyers from three other countries drew into question the legitimacy of legal framework at Gitmo Bay torture gulag.

Liberals, and not the NDP, screwed up Khadr's real possibility for early release. When the chips were down for Omar, Liberal MP John Cannis actually wanted to charge Khadr's family with aiding and abetting terrorism or some such.

Today it's the NDP, and not the Liberals, who are being realistic about what it will take to bring Khadr home ASAP and not when the wind and temperature and mood among Liberals is right. Liberals are off in a cloud of shit about carbon taxes and appeasing fossil fuel fascists from some other prone position. Liberals are incompetent boobs, and if that's who's in power after the next election, God help Omar Khadr.

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Canada has neglected its own child soldier

quote:

---

This, however, may be where the story ends. Omar Khadr, Guantánamo detainee #766, a prisoner since he was 15, denied a trial and held behind razor wire and blacked-out goggles for five years now, may emerge as a true product of the system that has held him: a child borne of the "war on terror". It is Byers and Khadr's supporters' worst fear.

Ahmad, as Khadr's former lawyer, is slightly more optimistic, though still sees a grim future for the boy. "I think that if he is released he will lead a very, very quiet life. I think he'll spend a lot of time trying to recover from the trauma of Guantánamo.…I think that all he wants to do is to live in peace and let others live in peace."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
How many Liberal MP's are there in Ottawa today? By crikey there's a lot of them on the public payroll and taking up space in the Commons.

---

As I said there is no qualative distinction between the Liberals and the NDP on this issue. The NDP has been silent for many years on the abuse of young Mr. Khadr's rights since the issue became known in parliment in 2002. Since then the NDP issued no statements on the issue until about the same time as the Liberals did so.

Bob Rae, not Jack Layton and the NDP made this a tractionable political issue in Canada. How the NDP allowed this hot potato to slip through its hands for so long is beyond me. The fact that the Liberals can now hypocritically rewrite history, and absolve themselves of responsibility is entirely the fault of the morally and poltically moribund NDP that can not even sieze the intitiative on clear political principles based in the rights of individuals, such as are evident in the case of Omar Khadr.

The infirngement of Khadr's rights as an individual have been clear and obvious since he was first incarcerated in Guantanamo bay. It did not suddenly become apparent in 2007.

Furthermore, the statement made by Byers is not and NDP statement, even though it may be a statement that Byers as an individual NDP member and possible future candidate, it does not amount to a statement from the NDP.

Let me know when Jack Layton signs that document and posts it on the web site... thanks!

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Others keep repeating that the Liberals should have taken a stronger stand.

All this talk of him being a "child soldier" and needing to be "rehabilitated" is based on the premise of his presumed guilt, which has not been proved, at all by anyone, and in fact the direct evidence of the person who shot him and captured him indicates that the case that he was even a "combatant" of any kind is very flimsy indeed.

No one saw Khadr throw a grenade. No one saw him carrying a weapon. He was shot in the back, while sitting down, unarmed.

The only "rehabilitiation" that might be due Khadr is that which will be necessary to help him recover from having his youth ripped out of his life by the Bush administration, and the abuse he has suffered at the hands of an illegal jusdicial system, which has summarilly removed his rights, and tortured and abused him for 7 years.

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
Since then the NDP issued no statements on the issue until about the same time as the Liberals did so.

---

Not true, and you could not prove it in even a kangaroo court of law. Svend Robinson was the first NDP MP to interrogate Chretien's Liberals over what they were doing for Khadr. The NDP brought up the matter several times since.

It is the Liberal Party of Canada that has suddenly taken an interest in Khadr's case since a Liberal government MP suggested Omar Khadr's family should be charged with aiding and abetting a terrorist. Although, the NDP has admitted that all political parties in Ottawa are at fault for letting Khadr down in his time of need. But that's the NDP being diplomatic about and trying to garner support from the Liberals in doing something this time so late in the game for Omar. I don't have to be as diplomatic because I realize the Liberals aren't worth dealing with anymore after twelve years of rightwing agendas and basically governing as far and further to the right than conservatives normally do.

quote:

---

Furthermore, the statement made by Byers is not and NDP statement, even though it may be a statement that Byers as an individual NDP member and possible future candidate, it does not amount to a statement from the NDP.

---

Wow, did I say it was? Your critical opinion of an expert on international law, even before he becomes an NDP MP, is duly noted. However, I am glad that Liberals appear to be interested in Khadr's situation after all these years. I just hope they don't revert to their previous pro-USA and anti-Canadian stance on Khadr if elected.

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Byers does not sympathize with what the Toronto-born teen is alleged to have done, but instead of vilifying Khadr he blames the circumstances in which he was placed. "The normal situation you would get out of this is to regard Omar Khadr as a victim.…If he was on the battlefield, if he had been indoctrinated, the people responsible for his actions are the people who put him there."

---

The new NDP seems more than happy to play into the racist biases of the mainstream media, and the media hatchet job done on the Khadr family. Indeed who does Byers want to convict for Khadr being guilty of being shot in the back while unarmed in a combat zone in Afghanistan? Why it must be his mother.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
It also bares repeating that Khadr is not a "child soldier", as Byers suggests. It has not been established at all that young Khadr, did any fighting.

---

It's also worth nothing that Byers and others have said Khadr should have been brought home years ago when U.S. military law concerning Gitmo was found to have gaping holes. Three other countries were able to repatrate their citizens held at Gitmo ... because they acted at the time. Our Liberals wanted to charge Khadr's family with terrorizing American soldiers.

Byers(not an NDP MP... yet) says Harper is hiding behind the fact that there is no Canadian law to deal with Khadr if returned. And I suspect that he says that because the U.S. won't release Khadr unless Canada does have legal framework in place. Byers says an all-party comittee could easily draft a law or even use existing legal Acts in dealing with Khadr.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

Byers(not an NDP MP... yet) says Harper is hiding behind the fact that there is no Canadian law to deal with Khadr if returned. And I suspect that he says that because the U.S. won't release Khadr unless Canada does have legal framework in place. Byers says an all-party comittee could easily draft a law or even use existing legal Acts in dealing with Khadr.

---

Thank you again!

Precisely the point Spector and I have been making. Byers wants to rewrite Canadian law to satsify percieved US interests, for the sake of being able to make a trial for one individual. The idea of creating special laws to fit the case of one individual, especially in the case were it is being done to satisfy percieved foreign demands is the most scurilously immoral idiocy I have read coming from the NDP in sometime!

This is what you are saying: rewrite Canadian law to fit US interests for the the sake of prosecuting a single Canadian citizen. What is not disgustingly callow about that?

Rewrite Canadian law because the US would want that? They have not even asked for that. but Byers is willing to cave in on issues of Canadian sovereignty, even though no Canadian government has even asked for Khadr to be returned, let alone inquired as to what conditions the US would require.

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

Byers also says Khadr's case could have been dealt with by any number of international laws for repatriation to Canada. The bottom line is, Chretien's and Martin's Libranos screwed Khadr's chances for early release by their pro-USA pro-Gitmo stance taken in 2002.

I'm sorry that the Yanks have now tightened their grip on Khadr since the Liberals gave Bush's lawyers copious amounts of time to redefine Omar's US military legal status.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
However, I am glad that Liberals appear to be interested in Khadr's situation after all these years.

---

The Liberals obviously are hypocrites who couldn't care less if Omar Khadr lives or dies. Their decision to involve Canada in the war of aggression against the Afghan people, and their complicity with the U.S. in the detention and mistreatment of Khadr, can't be wiped away by a sudden opportune "awakening". The more people who support the repatriation of Khadr, the better - but we're not easily fooled.

quote:

---

I just hope they don't revert to their previous pro-USA and anti-Canadian stance on Khadr if elected.

---

You mean, you don't want them to act like the Manitoba NDP government??

quote:

---

Open Letter to Gary Doer: Stop supporting the war in Afghanistan

Dear Premier Doer,

We write to ask you to remove the “Yellow Ribbon Garden” from the grounds of the Manitoba Legislature and to refrain from lending provincial support to the “Red Shirt Rally” planned for August 15, 2008 on the grounds of the Manitoba Legislature.

We do so because the “Yellow Ribbon” and “Red Friday” campaigns in Canada signify support for militarism and war. They do so under the guise of caring and compassion for “our troops.” But in reality, these campaigns are code for supporting a war of aggression being carried on in the name of, and against the will of, the majority of Canadian people. (A June 2008 poll suggests that only 36 per cent of Canadians agree with Parliament’s decision to extend Canada’s military intervention in Afghanistan through 2011. That is down from 41 per cent in a similar poll done in May, according to Angus Reid Strategies. )

We object strenuously to the war in Afghanistan and to the use of Canadian soldiers in that war. In no way is the participation of Canadians in the ongoing carnage in Afghanistan supportable by informed people of conscience.

In March, you announced provincial support for the Yellow Ribbon Campaign. You followed this up with the planting of the “Yellow Ribbon Garden” in the front of the Legislature. Most recently, you agreed to host a “Red Shirt Rally” with MLA, Bonnie Korzeniowski, Special Envoy for Military Affairs as one of the featured speakers. While you are entitled to express your personal opinion about the war (one which is diametrically opposed by the federal New Democratic Party), you do not have the right to use provincial resources to promote it.

---

It's a lengthy letter, available at the link, and worth reading.

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]

I think the federal NDP isn't interested in politicking with Liberals over whether or not they are truly interested in bringing Khadr home.

SPP is built around secrecy and US military command Michael Byers

quote:

---

David O'Brien, the CEO of Canadian Pacific and now Chairman of the Board of Royal Bank of Canada, argued Canada would have to adopt US-style immigration policies to keep the border open. He said that we have to make North Americans secure from the outside. 'We're going to lose increasingly our sovereignty but it's necessarily so.' Mr. O'Brien is an influential man. Within months, the Canadian government had signed the Safe Third Country agreement with the United States whereby Canadian refugee policy was essentially assimilated into the refugee policy of the United States. The rights of human beings to asylum when they're being persecuted for their religious or political opinions or ethnic identities is one of the most fundamental rights of all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
A lot of conservative party supporters live in Manitoba, too. Doer could be guilty of politicking, but at the same time Doer also realizes that whatever he says, he has no pull with federal NDP and their federal level policy on Afghanistan, which is the one that would affect Canadian policy if elected.ence.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
Doer could be guilty of politicking, but at the same time Doer also realizes that whatever he says, he has no pull with federal NDP and their federal level policy on Afghanistan, which is the one that would affect Canadian policy if elected.

---

So, Canadians are not supposed to look at what the NDP does when in power - only what they say they will do?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

Al of concervative people live in the USA too, so I guess George Bush's policies are AOK.

---

So it seems that the little guy from Shawinigan was so afraid of democracy in Canada that his government went behind everyone's back to begin dismantling Canada's sovereignty. From Chossudovsky's 2004 article:

quote:

---

In December 2001, in response to the 9/11 attacks, the Canadian government reached an agreement with the Head of Homeland Security Tom Ridge, entitled the "Canada-US Smart Border Declaration." Shrouded in secrecy, this agreement essentially hands over to the Homeland Security Department, confidential information on Canadian citizens and residents. It also provides US authorities with access to the tax records of Canadians.

What these developments suggest is that the process of "binational integration" is not only occurring in the military command structures but also in the areas of immigration, police and intelligence. The question is what will be left over within Canada's jurisdiction as a sovereign nation, once this ongoing process of binational integration, including the sharing and/or merger of data banks, is completed?

---

6 years as a POW/detainee is a long time. Bring him home now and hopefully he will correct the mistakes of his past.

And thank goodness for Khadr's US military lawyers, who in July said they would file a new motion in Khadr's defence claiming:

quote:

---

that Canadian [Liberal] government acted illegally by sending its counsel and CSIS agents to Guantanamo Bay to interrogate Khadr, and then turned their findings over to the military tribunal prosecutors to help convict Khadr.

---

Any ideas why Khadr deserves such special treatment, and needs a parlimentary committee to be struck in order to try him?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
No. He is offering to change Canadian law in order to make Khadr prosecutable under Canadian law, thus bringing Canada's laws into line with what is needed to satisfy the requirements of the US security aparatus.

---

Where does he suggest doing that?

The Liberals already wangled backroom deals with the US military on immigration, military, and border security with Bush's people at start of the decade.

The Liberals are guilty of violating Khadr's child rights and international laws by sending lawyers and CSIS agents to Gitmo to interrogate him. And then they handed the evidence from that interrogation to the U.S. military to use in prosecuting Khadr.

Liberals suck!

quote:

---

Khadr, the only westerner being held at Guantanamo Bay, could be tried under Canada's War Crimes Act, Byers argues.

"I think the fact that he was a juvenile is likely to exculpate him completely," Byers said. July 20, 2008

---

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by unionist:
Some of us keep advising the NDP to take a strong stand on this issue.

Others keep repeating that the Liberals should have taken a stronger stand.

Puzzle: Who is a better supporter of the NDP?

---

Who is responsible for Khadr not being returned to Canada?

A] The Conservatives (the present government)

C] The Liberals (the previous government)

C] Liberals and Conservatives equally

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: NorthReport ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
Where does he suggest doing that?

---

And of course they would do anything at the moment to shift focus away from their resigning Sask MP, who has been temporarily barred from practising law in Sask, pending the further investigation of his allegedly forging a signature.

Knew what this thread was about the minute I saw the alliteration of KKK in the thread title.

quote:

---

Originally posted by NorthReport:

Who is responsible for Khadr not being returned to Canada?

A] The Conservatives (the present government)

C] The Liberals (the previous government)

C] Liberals and Conservatives equally

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: NorthReport ]

---

No the US is responsible for incarcerating Khadr. The Canadian government, of both kinds is responsible for not asking for him to be released into Canadian custody.

Just let me know when I can see the NDP press release on the demand or a statement in the "issues" section relating to Khadr. Right now, Byers seems to be the point man on this issue, and he thinks Khadr is guilty and wants him rehabilitated, after he is charged through special "Khadr" laws once they are implimented in Canada. True enough he isnt even officially a candidate yet, or an MP.

If the best you guys can do for a statement on the issue is the musings of an unelected possible future candidate for a source of NDP policy, which it is not, then that about sums up the NDP position on Khadr.

So, looking ofrward to Jacks statement. Checked again, by the way, and searched the word "Khadr" on the NDP web site and got no results, it asked me to "try to produce less restrictive search query".

For some reason I find that response amusing.

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:

He doesn't, but what the heck, the Liberals do not care what fabrications they make up, in order to try to discredit anyone who is a threat to them, and they are especially focused in this case, as they are suffering from residual bitterness after being rejected by him.

---

Of course he does. He wants to convene a parlimentary committee, which will recommend changes to Canadian law so that Khadr can be tried in Canada, to appease what he percieves to be American demands... even though they have made no such demands.

quote:

---

Originally posted by remind:
Cue, you can say it a 1000 times, and it still won't make it the truth.

---

I didn't say it. He did, here:

quote:

---

Meanwhile, Byers argued that even if Khadr could not be tried under current Canadian law, the Conservative government cannot stand behind what he termed the "flimsy" excuse of an absence of legislation to warrant keeping Khadr in U.S. military custody.

"If there was a legislative impediment or an absence of legislative basis for doing anything with regards to Khadr, that could very easily be fixed," he said.

"I don't anticipate that there would be any problem if the government wanted to ask for special legislation to accommodate his circumstances."

With so many questions surrounding detainees at Guantanamo Bay and Khadr's legal status in limbo, it's uncertain where his case will end up, the legal experts said.

---

Khadr wouldn't be convicted in Canada: legal experts

Yup! No problem at all. Just change Canadian law so we can prosecute him here, with special legisislation.

As I said before, lets impliment a law so we can execute Cliford Olsen. Capital punishment, just this once. Do you think Harper would object?

[ 17 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

To date, the [military] commissions have prosecuted only two people: a driver and a former kangaroo-skinner. Both were clearly not dangerous terrorists, at least in the view of the people charged with deciding their fates, and both received light sentences....

To date, the US government has announced charges against 19 other men, including seven cases in which prosecutors are seeking the death penalty. While a number of these cases involve minor defendants like Hamdan, the seven death penalty prosecutions do not....

Only one more trial - that of Omar Khadr - is scheduled to take place before the November 4 presidential elections....

Khadr's case is currently scheduled to go to trial on October 8. A few other cases-including those of Mohammed Jawad (who was only 17 years old when he was arrested), Ahmed Mohammed Ahmed al-Darbi, Mohammed Kamin, and Ali Hamza Ahmad Suliman al-Bahlul-have also made forward progress. It is possible that one or more of these cases may go to trial by next January.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

No the US is responsible for incarcerating Khadr. The Canadian government, of both kinds is responsible for not asking for him to be released into Canadian custody.

---

The Liberals sent CSIS agents to interrogate Khadr, and then handed whatever it was they extracted from Khadr over to US feds to use in prosecuting Khadr.

And then they left him there. At Gitmo. For Gitmo military "law" to decide his fate.

Young Omar Khadr is still there in an American gulag for torture and basic human rights violations as a result of the Libranos abandoning him to his own devices at the tender age of 15!

[ 22 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
if one were really interested in finding people capable of properly executing the right wing agenda one would have to vote Liberal or Conservative,

---

Exactly!

quote:

---

but since they are insisting on following the Liberal leed, so it is not surprising that they have no traction in the polls.

---

Let's be even clearer. Leeds is a city in Yorkshire England.

Jean Chretien's Liberals failed to uphold international law in betraying Omar Khadr's child rights to the vicious empire and kissing Uncle Sam's fat and sweaty derriere in the process.

The NDP currently leads the real and effective opposition to the right-wing agenda in Ottawa.

Harper's conservative agenda is Dion's Liberal agenda, and always the twains shall meet in good company.

Liberals suck twice as bad as they did before your last mealy-mouthed post

[ 22 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:
The NDP currently leads the real and effective opposition to the right-wing agenda in Ottawa.

---

Excelent, then you will be happy to link me to the statement regarding this issue on the NDP website. The last time I checked I used the website serach engine for the word "Khadr" and came up with nothing.

Years went by ...

NDP calls for action on Omar Khadr case June 2007

Why are the Liberals interested in Omar Khadr after abandoning the 15 year-old to an illegal American gulag at Gitmo all those years ago?

Prime Minister must demand repatriation for Khadr

Which reads in part:

quote:

---

OTTAWA – Prime Minister Stephen Harper must demand the United States government repatriate Guantanamo Bay detainee Omar Khadr to Canada to ensure his rights as a Canadian citizen are protected, Liberal Foreign Affairs Critic Bob Rae said today.

---

In other words, if I were looking for signs of leadership on this issue from among the parties of the Canadian opposition and did a comparison check of their official web organs, I would think that it is LPC or the Bloc Quebscois which is leading "the real and effective opposition to the right-wing agenda", on this issue.

Notably, the BQ web site has 5 seperate pages on this issue, as can be seen by the search results:

Résultats de la recherche , including this video: Des étudiants de Joliette manifestent à Ottawa pour Omar Khadr

Bloc: 5
Liberals: 1
NDP: 0

Fidel's dissembling: priceless.

[ 22 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

BLOC QUÉBÉCOIS LAUNCHES PETITION URGING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO REPATRIATE OMAR KHADR

[ 22 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

On the very same day as the Bloc's petition for Omar was announced, NDP MP Wayne Marston calls on Conservatives to fight for Omar Khadr's rights

Because years ago when other western countries were fighting for and having their citizens repatriated home from Gitmo, the Liberals abandoned Khadr and screwed up his chances for early release.

You got shit. The NDP cares so much they can't even bother to copy and paste Saskay's statement and add it to the Federal NDP website, let alone do something as productive as work with community groups to make a public petition.

[ 22 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Apart from a CIA minder, the participants are our own people – . . .

The Liberal government of the day failed to protect Khadr in 2003. How much longer can Prime Minister Stephen Harper defend this discredited line when even the American presidential candidates have disavowed Gitmo. Every other Western national in Gitmo has been repatriated at his government's insistence. Why not Khadr?

---

Because Conservatives and Liberals ARE TWO WINGS OF THE EXACT SAME PARTY!

The Liberals let it happen, and their cousins in the Conservative party refuse to bring it to an end. And the Liberals have refused to oppose Harper while he implements his right-wing agenda.

Liberals = Conservatives = Conservaberals

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fidel:

Liberals = Conservatives = Conservaberals

Liberals suck SIX TIMES as bad as they did during your last mealy-mouthed post.

---

Better not bring up Svend Robinson so much too, since of course he was set upon and devoured by the NDP party for taking a stand on issues of principle, such as the Khadr case. All you are doing is exposing what the NDP was, in comparison to what it is now: chickenshit.

Can't say that the BQ are the greatest party on earth but obviously they can see a potentially popular issue when it hit them in the face. Never mind that the word Khadr does not appear anywhere on the Federal NDP web site.

And if you are wondering why I am bothering to respond to you, your emptiness, it really is because I want to see how many times I can get you to repeat the same not so witty and meaningless slogan, and the same contentless personal abuse on the same thread. Kind of like being obsessed about a rerun of the "gong Show".

[ 22 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:

Better not bring up Svend Robinson so much too, since of course he was set upon and devoured by the NDP party for taking a stand on issues of principle, such as the Khadr case.

---

Wrong again. Robinson ran for election in 2006 and lost after a smear campaign by MacLean's Ragazine urged people not to vote for him, and by the Libranos, if we can imagine those long-time crooks appealing to anyone with more than half a wet noodle.

quote:

---

Never mind that the word Khadr does not appear anywhere on the Federal NDP web site.

---

I wonder which party's site "Khadr's name" does appear numerous times since that party abandoned him to his American torturers? Oh ya, that would be the snivelling slimeball Liberals who refused to stand up for his basic rights as a citizen of Canada as well as his internationally-agreed upon child rights in the first place!

Oh ya, I almost forgot. And the Liberals suck SEVEN TIMES as much as they did since you actually took the time to compose your last mealy-mouthed post

[ 23 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

quote:

---

I wonder which party's site "Khadr's name" does appear numerous times since that party abandoned him to his American torturers? Oh ya, that would be the snivelling slimeball Liberals who refused to stand up for his basic rights as a citizen of Canada as well as his internationally-agreed upon child rights in the first place!

---

The BQ site. Try reading for content, I hate having to repeat myself, over and over again. And they had nothing to do with Khadr's arrest, or propping up the Liberals. On the BQ site Khadr's name appears on at least five different web pages. Try reading the source material I have provided it will help you look less ridiculous. And being a less ridiculous NDP supporter will make the NDP look less ridiculous.

Just a friendly piece of advice.

However, it is true that the NDP was totally silent on this issue when it was making parliment work for people" other than Omar Khadr, by propping up the Liberal minority government, voting in favour of its budget, and helping them disown Kyoto, etc. etc.

[ 23 August 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cueball:
The BQ site. Try reading for content, I hate having to repeat myself, over and over again

---

The search term "Khadr" appears a grand total of 27 times more on the Bloc site compared to the slime mold Librano site.

And we NDPers already know Khadr's story since Chretien's Liberals refused to protect Khadr's internationally-agreed upon child rights as well as his rights as a Canadian citizen. Perhaps you yourself will want to bone up on the facts surrounding Khadr.

After you wise up you can go tutor senior Liberals on how their own party betrayed a 15 year-old Canadian to Yanquis imperialists in a most shameful manner, and how Canadian taxpayers will have to foot the bill for that supreme Liberal government fuckup after Khadr's lawyers sue Ottawa.

eta: LIBERALS SUCK TO THE OTHER SIDE OF INFINITY!

[ 23 August 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]

Most parties recognize that getting elected requires involving people who are not part of the elite club of those who know. That said, if someone were interested in finding out more about the Khadr issue, and where not part of club, they would not find any information at your website.

Khadr is the only westerner still there at Gitmo because Liberals were busy sucking up to Crazy George's Republican conservatives in 2003. Liberals know no national boundaries when it comes to supporting political conservatives and their fascist agendas.

quote:

---

Guantanamo – Canadian Omar Khadr was among the first group of Guantanamo Bay prisoners charged with war crimes only because his case was "sexy" and senior U.S. administration officials believed charging Khadr would help whip up support for the controversial military commissions set up by the U.S. Congress to try terrorism suspects, a court here was told Wednesday.

Col. Morris Davis, the former chief prosecutor for all military commission trials, testified that there was a sense of urgency within the Bush administration and in senior ranks of the U.S. military justice system to get some star trials started before the end of Bush's term this year, on fears that the next president could end the commissions.

"If we didn't get (the military commission) up and running and get the public behind it, it would implode. Cases like Khadr's were going to bring political support and make it harder for the next commander-in-chief to stop the process," said Davis, who describing the Khadr case as "sexy" in his testimony….

In court Wednesday, military commission judge Col. Patrick Parrish heard a remarkable series of exchanges in which Davis testified that his boss, Brig.-Gen. Thomas Hartman, and senior officials of the Bush administration pressured him to charge Khadr before prosecutors working under him felt they were able to proceed….

Davis, giving testimony by video conference from Washington, said that Hartman "liked the Khadr case." Davis said Hartman described it as "the kind of case the public's going to get energized about."

---

He remembers seeing Omar Khadr after his arrest:

quote:

---

He had only just turned fifteen when he was first brought into the Bagram Airbase detention facility, horribly wounded. That is where I first met him.

Chunks of his chest and shoulder had been blown out - or so I'd assumed; he was also unable to see through one of his eyes because of the injuries sustained in an attack by US troops. His chest looked like he'd just had a post mortem operation performed on him - alive. He was emaciated, fragile and silent. But the rumour spread around about him claimed that he'd launched a grenade-attack on unsuspecting soldiers. Consequently, the military police units guarding us all treated Omar with open contempt and hostility. He was sometimes screamed at all night long; made to stack up crates of water bottles which were thrown down again; a hood placed over his head whilst his wrists were shackled to the ceiling. The soldiers used to call him 'Buckshot Bob' but I never really understood why as his wounds didn't seem like those from a shotgun. Only now, three years after my release have I understood the logic behind this name - after having seen newly released photos of Omar when he was captured: the missing chunks of flesh were exit wounds. It is now clear that Omar had been shot in the back.

Many weeks passed during which I managed to have some whispered conversations with Omar but, just like me, he knew his ordeal had only begun. (I witnessed two separate killings in Bagram by American soldiers before I too was sent to Guantanamo. These killings are the subject of this year's Oscar-winning documentary, Taxi to the Dark Side).

Omar was later accused of causing the death of a US Special Forces operative with a grenade. Yet a report given by the soldier who shot him says that not only was Mr. Khadr alive there, an adult man was also alive at the time he, the U.S. soldier, rushed in shooting. This contradicts the testimony of another solider who said that only Mr. Khadr was alive at the time.

Whatever the case may be, Omar will soon be approaching the seventh year of his detention in Guantanamo. And his government, which accepts that abuses faced by others at such places are very real, will do nothing for its own citizen, who was bought there in chains as a child.

---

quote:

---

In his ruling, Army Col. Patrick J. Parrish did not stop the Oct. 8 terror trial of Omar Khadr....

But the judge said Air Force Brig. Gen. Thomas W. Hartmann appears to have lost his neutrality in his role as the Pentagon's legal advisor to military commissions.

Parrish becomes the third judge to disqualify Hartmann from a role at the trials. He still has legal advisor status in 14 other cases, although defense lawyers have filed other so-called "unlawful influence" motions seeking his disqualification in several others.

Hartmann took charge of the system a little over a year ago and has emerged a relentless, aggressive champion who has said his behavior was necessary to kick-start a sputtering legal system.

---