 |
| |
|
|
St Leo
|
 |
Member of the Apolyton Social Democratic Party
Jul 2005
time: 00:24
|
|
quote:
And he walked in all the sins of his father
If a 14-year-old Canadian boy got his hands on a grenade and lobbed it into the crowd at, say, the Calgary Stampede, he'd have a very real possibility of being out of custody before his 21st birthday. It's a source of endless debate, but the basic principle is mostly accepted in western societies: children should be, and are, treated differently than adults when they break the law. The capacity for mercy is greater, rehabilitation is given preference over punishment, and "root causes" are examined more closely — an extraordinarily abusive upbringing, for instance, would almost certainly factor into sentencing.
Omar Khadr did not lob his grenade at the Calgary Stampede. Of this I am aware. His upbringing taught him that, if imprisoned by infidels, he should tell stories about being tortured whether or not they're true. Of this I am also aware. But Omar's upbringing is a rather crucial point that's being ignored in all this, I think. "All of those persons who have been in positions of authority over him have abused him and his trust, for their own purposes," wrote a Foreign Affairs official. "In this group can be included his parents and grandparents, his associates in Afghanistan, and fellow detainees in Camp Delta."
This kid has had it world-class bad from day one, basically. It doesn't matter to me as far as his indefinite imprisonment goes whether or not he did in fact throw the grenade that killed Sgt First Class Christopher Speer. I think children deserve mercy before the justice system, and thus his treatment — even the official version of his treatment — offends me. The fact that Omar's parents are/were world class *******s doesn't lessen my anger. Quite the contrary, they are solely responsible for turning their four sons into terrorists and/or putting them in the line of fire of those fighting terrorists. (What the hell ever happened to that child abuse investigation? You know, the one that was obviously a slam-dunk?)
Yet Omar's last name obviously does matter, hence the deafening silence in response to his mistreatment — and again, I call even the American version of events (or lack thereof) mistreatment. Since his 15th birthday, he has been held, treated and interrogated in just the same way as men 30 years his senior — men who made their own choices, who had chances to turn away from their pathetic terrorist lives and didn't. From the sounds of it, Omar is not someone we want walking around on Canadian streets — the aforementioned Foreign Affairs official described him, not surprisingly, as "thoroughly screwed up" — but surely anti-terrorist sentiments can be combined with a modicum of compassion. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Admiral
|
 |
of the peace and coexistance movement
Feb 2001
time: 00:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Last Conformist, the duration of the conflict. Yes. The goal is not to punish, but to confine. |
The problem with this argument is that the conflict is not clearly defined. We've declared war on terrorism, but only islamic terrorism. Moreover, our enemy(s) are not confined to states, and it is unclear when we have "won." There will always be terrorism, so essentially, by holding people for the duration of the conflict, the government allows themselves to hold people indefinitely. And that is not acceptable, non-Constitutional, and this should worry you. What does it say about a goverment when it wants the ability to hold people in legal limbo indefinitely?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ned
Really?
Endless war for unending peace, and all that kind of thing ala Pat Buchanan?
The war continues until the nations of Islam are democratic. |
Really? So the Philippines, which is democratic, has no terrorism? Ditto India, or Pakistan pre-Musharaff?
Or did I just miss when the "war on terrorism" became more clearly defined as the "war against non-democratic states that are predominantly Muslim"?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Oerdin
|
 |
of Internet Music.
Sep 2001
time: 21:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Also, IIRC, the 4th Geneva Convention applies to all combatants (legal and not) and mandates humane treatement. If this guy was subject to the same conditions as those at Abu Ghraib, it can easily be said that the US violated the 4th Geneva Convention. |
Everyone has acknowledged that to be unlawful and the people responsible have been tried and jailed. There is zero evidence that anything like that has happened here.
Last edited by Oerdin on 17-02-2005 at 06:49
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-02-2005 18:54
.
|