*sigh* Humanization of people who care nothing for humanity.

[Burris]

A videotape of a detainee being questioned at the US prison camp in Guantanamo Bay has been released for the first time.
It shows 16-year-old Omar Khadr being asked by Canadian officials in 2003 about events leading up to his capture by US forces, Canadian media have said.
The Canadian citizen is accused of throwing a grenade that killed a US soldier in Afghanistan in 2002.
He is seen in a distressed state and complaining about the medical care.
The footage was made public by Mr Khadr's lawyers following a Supreme Court ruling in May that the Canadian authorities had to hand over key evidence against him to allow a full defence of the charges he is facing.
'Help me'
Mr Khadr, the only Westerner still held at the jail, was 15 when he was captured by US forces during a gun battle at a suspected al-Qaeda camp in Afghanistan.
During the 10-minute video of his questioning in Guantanamo a year later, he can be seen crying, his face buried in his hands, and pulling at his hair. He can be heard repeatedly chanting: "Help me."

I hope Canadians will be outraged to see the callous and disgraceful treatment of a Canadian youth
Dennis Edney
Lawyer for Omar Khadr

At one point he lifts his orange shirt to show the foreign ministry official and agents from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) wounds on his back and stomach which he says he sustained in Afghanistan.
"I'm not a doctor, but I think you're getting good medical care," one of the officials responds.
Mr Khadr says: "No I'm not. You're not here... I lost my eyes. I lost my feet. Everything!" in reference to how his vision and physical health were affected.
"No, you still have your eyes and your feet are still at the end of your legs, you know," a man says.
Sobbing uncontrollably, Mr Khadr tells the officials several times: "You don't care about me."
In an accompanying classified document describing the interrogation, Mr Khadr also says he was tortured while being held at the US military detention centre at Bagram air base in Afghanistan.
Public outcry?
The White House maintains that the US has treated all detainees held at Guantanamo in a humane way.

Mr Khadr was 15 when he was captured by US forces
The Bush administration argues that it needs flexibility and those it calls terrorists cannot be treated as if they are simply criminal defendants.
But one of Mr Khadr's lawyers, Dennis Edney, said he hoped the video would cause an outcry in Canada and pressure Prime Minister Stephen Harper to demand that the US does not prosecute their client.
"I hope Canadians will be outraged to see the callous and disgraceful treatment of a Canadian youth," Mr Edney told the Toronto Star.
"Canadians should demand to know why they've been lied to."
Mr Harper reiterated last week that he would not interfere in Mr Khadr's military tribunal, due to begin at Guantanamo on 8 October.
Mr Khadr, now 21, faces multiple terrorism-related charges, the most serious of which is murder. He faces up to life in prison if convicted.

You throw a grenade at one of our soldiers, you should rot in jail. I have no sympathy for you scum bag.

[President Shrub]

As a 15 yr old, Khadr was brought into ranks of the terrorists/insurgency by his father. Thus it is a difficult position for those prosecuting him, as well as for the sake of Canadian-US relations, due to the fact that it can be interpreted that Khadr had no choice and was conditioned/"brainwashed" for battle, or that he fought on his own accord. Also, the records of the battle are sketchy as well, with soldiers' accounts differing as to who actually threw the grenade, and when Khadr was shot in the back.

Think of it this way. If you're a 15 yr old kid, and your dad is a high-ranking terrorist, can you really say no? After that? do you run away or something?

It doesn't really matter though. He'll be released. The guys at guantanamo have no use of him after 3 years of interrogation.

[Dr. Crawford]

for once i agree with burris

[Penguin]

Sucks to be him.


As a 15 yr old, Khadr was brought into ranks of the terrorists/insurgency by his father. Thus it is a difficult position for those prosecuting him, as well as for the sake of Canadian-US relations, due to the fact that it can be interpreted that Khadr had no choice and was conditioned/"brainwashed" for battle, or that he fought on his own accord. Also, the records of the battle are sketchy as well, with soldiers' accounts differing as to who actually threw the grenade, and when Khadr was shot in the back.

Think of it this way. If you're a 15 yr old kid, and your dad is a high-ranking terrorist, can you really say no? After that? do you run away or something?

Legally, coercion is not an excuse for murder.


It doesn't really matter though. He'll be released. The guys at guantanamo have no use of him after 3 years of interrogation.
Gitmo's not just about interrogation, you know.

[Bismarck]

So, if people who throw grenades at American soldiers deserve to spend the rest of their lives in jail, what's up with all these elderly German, Italian and Japanese fellows up and walking about, all free and shit?

Why are American soldiers sacred cattle? Are American soldiers allowed to throw grenades at other people and not go to jail forever?

And you're complaining about humanizing "the enemy"? Christ have mercy on us.

It seems to me that once, I believe America stood for a cause, a more just and free society which regarded all humanity as having been made by their Creator with certain inherent dignities and rights. This is what our first army fought and bled for after all, these words written on paper. But failing to even show the respect to our enemy that was shown by Erwin Rommel - who fought under Hitler's orders of all people - has made that ideal buried under miles of childish vengeance seeking and nationalist chest-thumping.

On Judgement Day, when all men are equal, then the truth will be seen and known.

[Penguin]

Say what you want about the Axis powers, at least they had the decency to put on a uniform.

[Burris]

German soldiers were part of a war. Al Qaeda is a multi-national entity with no sovereignty. If someone in FARC killed a Colombian, I'd say I wanted them to rot in jail as well. But just because Al Qaeda is the enemy (I like how you used quotations.... wow) I'm supposed to be okay with this?

This isn't the 1940s, and this isn't the cold war. Those situations are far different than what the US faces today. :rolleyes:

I love how the more these things drag on it goes from killing them, to putting them in jail for life, to now even that being too inhumane.

[Bismarck]

Say what you want about the Axis powers, at least they had the decency to put on a uniform.

Fuck those American minutemen then who dared raise their muskets against the British while wearing their own linens.

[Burris]

Once again, the Americans didn't run on to the boats in Boston Harbour and slit all the throats of the people on board, and were fighting for a defacto sovereign nation...

Using situations form the past doesn't work with modern Terrorism, especially when the idea has been around just a little over a century....

[Bismarck]

German soldiers were part of a war. Al Qaeda is a multi-national entity with no sovereignty. If someone in FARC killed a Colombian, I'd say I wanted them to rot in jail as well. But just because Al Qaeda is the enemy (I like how you used quotations.... wow) I'm supposed to be okay with this?

This isn't the 1940s, and this isn't the cold war. Those situations are far different than what the US faces today. :rolleyes:

I love how the more these things drag on it goes from killing them, to putting them in jail for life, to now even that being too inhumane.

People have rights, Burris. Inherently. That's what this country is supposed to stand for. You can deal with the enemy without feeling the need to dehumanize them as "scum bags."

Because somewhere in the world, to someone else, YOU are that scum bag. And you wouldn't want to be treated a certain way just because they're angry at you.

[Burris]

Throwing him in jail is inhumane? I'm supposed to feel sorry for him because he was 16? I dont feel sorry for 16 year olds here that get people pregnant, or get thrown in jail for murder, but because this guy is the "MISUNDERSTOOD ENEMY!" I'm supposed to have sympathy, so if by some chance I end up in Turkmenistan I don't get thrown in jail for killing one of their soldiers?

The problem with that is I don't go to some place and seek to kill other peoples soldiers. I have no reason to go to a place like China, and kill one of their soldiers becuase I don't like how they operate.

[Bismarck]

The problem with that is I don't go to some place and seek to kill other peoples soldiers. I have no reason to go to a place like China, and kill one of their soldiers becuase I don't like how they operate.

And what if the Chinese soldiers were already there, in your neighborhood?

[Burris]

His neighborhood was in a country he wasn't from?

[Penguin]

Say what you want about the Axis powers, at least they had the decency to put on a uniform.

Fuck those American minutemen then who dared raise their muskets against the British while wearing their own linens.
You think the Brits showed them any mercy?

Hell, the American revolutionaries were actually a conventional force, albeit with terrible discipline at first. Once they got going they were able to adopt uniforms anyway. Al Qaeda and the Taliban have no wish to do either.

[Bismarck]

His neighborhood was in a country he wasn't from?

Look, more than anything, what I really took umbrage at is how you oh so wearily sighed at the idea of "humanization" of a guy who was at the time this took place, a 16 year old kid.

There is way too much attitude these days about how the people we fight are scum simply because we fight them.

[Bismarck]

Say what you want about the Axis powers, at least they had the decency to put on a uniform.

Fuck those American minutemen then who dared raise their muskets against the British while wearing their own linens.
You think the Brits showed them any mercy?

That's irrelevent. Did they deserve not to be shown mercy?

[Burris]

I don't consider the personal woes of a murderer and a terrorist to be important. Give him his day in court but he'll never be a human to me.

[Bismarck]

I don't consider the personal woes of a murderer and a terrorist to be important. Give him his day in court but he'll never be a human to me.

Then that's just pathetic.

[Penguin]

http://img50.imageshack.us/img50/280/afblueshowdoyoufeelnk1.jpg (http://www.afblues.com/?p=267)

That's irrelevent. Did they deserve not to be shown mercy?
No, they did. So does this guy. Thing is, he's getting it. Under international law it would be perfectly justifiable to execute him. His wounds were treated. Guess what, sometimes you don't get fully restored from combat injuries. In fact, most don't. This guy should see the Walter Reed burn ward some time.

[Burris]

I don't consider the personal woes of a murderer and a terrorist to be important. Give him his day in court but he'll never be a human to me.

Then that's just pathetic.

Haha okay buddy. I happen to find your defense of the indefensible rather pathetic and Darrow like. But what the hell, I wasn't gonna go there.

[Bismarck]

I don't consider the personal woes of a murderer and a terrorist to be important. Give him his day in court but he'll never be a human to me.

Then that's just pathetic.

Haha okay buddy. I happen to find your defense of the indefensible rather pathetic and Darrow like. But what the hell, I wasn't gonna go there.

Indefensible is a pretty subjective term.

And I find your contempt rather fortifying.

[Burris]

I find your use of the thesaurus rather banal my good sir.

[Bismarck]

I find your use of the thesaurus rather banal my good sir.

Cute.

[Cheeto]

I think what you guys are skipping over here is the notion of what seperates a soldier from a murderer.

Obviously someone will always consider a soldier a murderer, but there is a big damn difference between someone who kills an enemy with a gun versus blowing up a civilian.

A guerilla fighter who isn't blowing up civvies should be afforded the same legal protections as a soldier in a uniform who isn't blowing up civvies. That is: they shouldn't be prosecuted for assault or murder of the enemy.

I know I know, how would I feel if one of my loved ones was killed by the enemy side in a war. Well I'd feel pretty bad. But that doesn't change the fact that the JOB of soldiers is to kill. Again, guerillas are included in this. It is possible to fight as a guerilla fighter without using bombs strapped to school children blowing up a shopping mall. Ask the US Special Forces sometime, they know all about it. Hell, ask the Colonial Army (no BSG jokes) circa 1776.

Now, regardless of whether or not you have a uniform, if you start blowing up civvies for fun and profit because you think it's a legitmate wartime tactic, then you need to go back to the dark ages or be prosecuted for war crimes the same as any other terrorist, irregardless of whether or not you have a uniform. You will be afforded the same basic human rights as any other criminal, but you do not get the protection of killing during war time.

"War is terrible by nature and necessity, but in this modern age where man likes to claim he is enlightened and compassionate, war is also the mocking joke of his claim."

[Puddle]

we realy don't know if this guy was brainwashed or not. Personally If he's affiliated with any terrorist group, he deservers to be where he is. These people have no regard for human life. They strap bombs on mentaly handicaped people. Maniputlate and torture people to follow them.
Could you imagine standing in line at an employment office or even a market. Only to have someone blow themselves and you up? And for what? Even if they believe in the same religion, you are an enemy simply because you are looking for a job or trying to buy food.

Bullshit.
Shoot them all.

[Guy Montag]

Haha, Bismarck is as dramatic as ever.

[jow]

I fucking love Bismarck. Reps. ha ha.

[Rob]

Wow. People rooting for the mental and quite possibly physical abuse of someone who (at the time) was legally still a child. The lows some people are capable of still manage to astonish me pretty regularly.

[jow]

Idunno, check it out. There's no proof. Here's the facts:

A kid got arrested by US forces in Afghanistan for allegedly "throwing a grenade at US soldiers."

Here's the conjecture:

-He threw a grenade.
-He was tortured.
-He was refused proper medical treatment.

I see no reason to get emotional over this story on either side of the argument. What if he didn't get tortured and he's a lying rat fuck America-hating murderer that was trying to kill our guys?

What if he didn't throw a grenade at all, he was picked up for some bullshit and put through hell for no fucking reason?

What if etc etc..

Nobody on either side really has any cold facts. I don't understand the need to get upset or passionate about it without knowing what the fuck actually happened.

[Rob]

I see no reason to get emotional over this story on either side of the argument. What if he didn't get tortured and he's a lying rat fuck America-hating murderer that was trying to kill our guys?

What if he didn't throw a grenade at all, he was picked up for some bullshit and put through hell for no fucking reason?

What if etc etc..

Nobody on either side really has any cold facts. I don't understand the need to get upset or passionate about it without knowing what the fuck actually happened.
A child (at time of "arrest") has been subjected to mental abuse at the very least and detained without trial for five years, in a prison that doesn't allow international human rights observers, and nobody should be upset? Even if he did toss a grenade at a soldier, which has yet to be proven, that's wrong and there's just no two-ways about it.

This kid's detention is an unspeakable crime, that both the US and Canadian governments deserve the deepest condemnation for.

[Penguin]

A child (at time of "arrest")
15 ain't a child.

[Rob]

Yes, it is.

[Cheeto]

Yes, it is.
By Canada and the US' definition, and probably most of the western world. But for most of history and still most of the world, 15 is old enough to be considered a man.

Bear in mind I stand by what I said before, just playing devil's advocate here.

[President Shrub]

There have been older child soldiers (at the time) in Africa who have been driven to do unspeakable things (either by coercion, drugs, brainwashing, etc.) against their own countrymen and yet as we speak they are being re-integrated into society, rather than being prosecuted with genocide or other charges. They even share the same classroom with their former victims.

If it is that easy for militiamen driven by racial hatred to turn children/teens into "murderers", so to speak, then isn't it more than easy for a high-ranking financier for Al-Qaeda to turn his own son into a murderer as well? This kid (well now an adult) shouldn't bear the sins of his father and his reintegration into Canadian society should be made a priority over his detention.

/dramatic

I guess it doesn't help if his surviving family in Canada has made anti-western/canadian rhetoric during his stay in gitmo..

[Burris]

Wow. People rooting for the mental and quite possibly physical abuse of someone who (at the time) was legally still a child. The lows some people are capable of still manage to astonish me pretty regularly.

A child? How in the world do you consider a 15 year old a child? He's accused of murder and you talk of him as if he's some kind of messiah or misunderstood youth. THIS ISN'T THE SAME AS PETTY THEFT OR SOME OTHER STUPID THING KIDS DO. No matter what his father told him to do, it doesn't make it acceptable, it doesn't earn him the sorrow and pity he gets. He should be condemned not painted as a misunderstood youth. If you can't see why this is wrong then you probably can't even see why we're in AFG...

[Rob]

The majority of the Western world in addition to the UN define a child as being someone under 18 years of age--21 in some places. And on a less rigid note, how many 15 year olds have you ever met that are together enough to have a clue what life is all about?

15 years old is a child in every conceivable way, and what our governments have done to him is also a horrific crime no matter what he himself may or may not be guilty of.

[Puddle]

We have 15 year olds that lynch and beat people to death.
We have 15 year olds that curb stomp a preson to death outside a convenience store.
We have 15 year olds that kill people for clothes.
We have 15 year olds that beat homless people to death.
We have 15 year olds that commit unspeakable acts of rape and kidnaping.

That's here in canada.

The age of this fellow should not be taken in stride here. I for one can not find a proper account of guilt by searching the internet. However I for one have Very littly sympathy for a sobing kid that is now wollowing in his own pit of torment. I see these pieces of crap all the time. They love the power and thrill of a good kil.

But cry like a baby when caught.

Is he any different?

[Burris]

The majority of the Western world in addition to the UN define a child as being someone under 18 years of age--21 in some places. And on a less rigid note, how many 15 year olds have you ever met that are together enough to have a clue what life is all about?

15 years old is a child in every conceivable way, and what our governments have done to him is also a horrific crime no matter what he himself may or may not be guilty of.

If someone was 15 and killed my family I wouldn't say "Oh he doesn't understand what life is about" It doesn't matter what his life view is. WHEN YOU KILL SOMEONE WHAT YOU KNOW DOESN'T MATTER. I'm afraid you just don't get it if you're sitting here defending a 15 year old who's accused of murdering someone by saying "Have you ever met a 15 year old who has a clue what life is about" Yeah well, Rob, I've never met a 15 year old who's killed someone.

I'D WANT HIM IN JAIL.

[Penguin]

The majority of the Western world in addition to the UN define a child as being someone under 18 years of age--21 in some places. And on a less rigid note, how many 15 year olds have you ever met that are together enough to have a clue what life is all about?
How many major revelations about how the world works did you have between 15 and 18? Did you not figure out by 15 that murder is wrong?


15 years old is a child in every conceivable way, and what our governments have done to him is also a horrific crime no matter what he himself may or may not be guilty of.
Oh, nonsense. Look, people keep juggling their rhetoric about what teenagers are to suit whatever they're selling. Criminy, by the time I was 12 depending on what they were trying to say, teachers would give me that "kid/young adult" BS.

What a 15 year old is is a legal minor, but not a "child" and certainly not in "every conceivable way." There are massive levels of difference in experience, maturity, physical development and understanding between a 15 year old and an 8 year old, or even a 15 year old and a 10 year old.

[Guy Montag]

I bet he wasn't the only combatant who was 15 or younger, at any rate.

[CrazyTalk]

my friend at 14 years old shot up my school when i was a freshman and he was sentenced as an adult. don't do the crime if you can't do the time no matter what your age is