About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

4 Replies to “Michael Coren & Ezra Levant on Omar Khadr”

  1. Good stuff, of that, there is no question. Now I’m waiting for George Snuffleoffagus (sic) from the CBC to invite Ezra on his show and talk about his book and that little terrorist. I’m holding my breath but I don’t know how long I’ll be able to . . .

  2. Mr. Levant’s description of the firefight involving Omar Khadr is entirely contradicted by an eye witness report from a soldier on the scene. (OC-1 CITF Witness Report)

    Formal charges were laid against Khadr near the end of 2005. Legal objections were raised in Canada and elsewhere because the charges were for war crimes that don’t exist, not because Harper was elected, and not because Khadr was 15. ( “A Court Without Jurisdiction – Omar Khadr – David Glazier”). Glazier is a former US naval commander, now a law professor and expert in laws of war.

    Killing an officer performing medical duties is a war crime under Geneva. Throwing a grenade in the direction of an advancing “assault element” of armed soldiers, one of whom is trained as a medic, is not a war crime, whoever does it, and whoever did it in this case. See Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute.

    The US government obviously recognized that this case was legally problematic. That’s why they have been pushing a plea bargain, under both Bush and Obama. It means no appeal, and it keeps the issue of invented war crimes away from the Supreme Court. There have only been a handful of these cases and all but one ended the same way.

    Khadr was essentially charged for fighting in the war while not being part of a uniformed military. He fought in the war because of where he was mainly raised and by whom. Technically, he could have been charged under domestic law, but even that would have been unusual, in the circumstances. Thousands of soldiers have been wounded or killed by such fighters in Afghanistan and Iraq and other wars before them including Vietnam. The charges against Khadr are unique, and clearly resulted from the special circumstances post 9/11. Even the original prosecutor now says that if another government treated an American the way Khadr was treated he hopes Americans would object, and they would. See many articles and interviews – Morris Davis on Omar Khadr.

    The “child soldier law” doesn’t prohibit prosecution. It does commit state parties to a very different approach for minors Khadr’s age. See Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on children in armed conflict. This was adopted into Canadian and US law. The Guantanamo judge ruled it was superseded by the Military Commission Act, passed four years after the US adopted the treaty, and Khadr was in the war. The MCA says nothing about age. He did not say Khadr wasn’t covered by the treaty. He said the decision to prosecute was made by others. See Military Commission web site – Child Soldier Protocol.

    Mr. Levant relies on the testimony of a Prosecution psychiatrist. The Defence psychiatrist, of course, had the opposite opinion. See Stephen Xenakis Omar Khadr – article in Haaretz.
    http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/week-s-end/first-do-no-harm-1.353473

    The Canadian Supreme Court essentially declared this trial illegal, basing themselves in part on US Supreme Courts and reports from Canadian intelligence officers.

    The case has been hopelessly politicized in Canada. It may be too late to ever release Khadr safely, but he deserves a chance, subject to tight security measures.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*