Too Clever By Half

When last we visited Stephen Taylor, he was telling us a pleasing tale about the cold, unemotional logic of right-wingers that unfortunately was dogged by one pesky little flaw — it was completely and utterly false.

Never mind. Taylor now moves on from polishing old chestnuts to consider the Khadr issue “through a logical lens” in a manner that will be “true to our cold sense of objectivity and in harmony with our values as but one element of modern Western civilization.” Yes, he really wrote that pretentious drivel.

Taylor sets the stage by fairly laying out some “indisputable facts” that needn’t be repeated here, followed by his concluding argument, that we’ll get to in a moment. For now, let’s jump ahead to the “first principles” that his position are evidently based upon.

Omar Khadr doesn’t himself deserve to released from jihadi limbo at Gitmo and tried before an American court. However, as individuals who are defending a society based upon key values such a due process, presumption of innocence, and the rule of law, we deserve it. Khadr’s present threat does not manifest itself in his illiberal hatred of our culture, it rests instead in the extent to which we are to make our own values malleable in order rationalize our understandable but illogical emotion.

That’s quite a contradictory muddle, I say. And little wonder, given that it’s premised on the puzzling contention that “Khadr doesn’t himself (emphasis added) deserve to [be] released” from Guantanamo.” Look high and low through that article for a reason why this is so and you won’t find one. In fact, it baldly contradicts one of the “indisputable facts” previously outlined; that is, “Every single person held in custody ought to be afforded the due process of law.” One assumes this odd rhetorical construction may simply be away of deflecting any imagined criticism for taking what some might regard as an overly “soft” stance towards Khadr by indicating that his right to a trial is more for our benefit rather than it is for Khadr’s. But I’m just guessing as to the machinations of Taylor’s “logic” here which seems to be wobbling quite badly under the strain of his “understandable” but wholly irrational emotion.

So, to what extent are so-called right-wingers willing to make their own values (i.e., due process and the rule of law) “malleable” in order to “rationalize” this emotion? A rather less than satisfying answer to this question is provided in the conclusion that we bypassed earlier:

Omar Khadr ought to face justice against his American accusers and stand trial before an American court. Guantanamo Bay cannot provide the justice that Americans deserve as Gitmo itself robs that society of two of its fundamental values: due process and the rule of law.

This proposal, Taylor daftly claims, “will lead to some uncharacteristic emotional outcry from conservatives.” Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Uncharacteristic… Oh boy, that was a good one!

Well, let’s admit that Taylor is half right in his admission that the military commission won’t render a fair trial for Khadr. A problem though arises from Taylor stubbornly refusing to accept the inconvenient fact that the Bush administration is moving full steam ahead with a trial before a reconstituted military commission rather than a civilian criminal court. This makes his proposed course of action both remarkably dense and completely unrealistic:

Khadr should not be returned to Canada, as we do not simply return Canadian citizens to Canada when they run afoul of the law in the United States. However, to complete this logical loop, Khadr must face the law in an American court. With both US Presidential candidates calling for the closure of Guantanamo, Prime Minister Harper would be wise to call for Khadr to face American due process.

It would truly be a stupendous reach to imagine Harper intervening simply for the purpose of asking that it be moved to a civilian court. Such a move by a foreign leader — even one as cozy with the Bush administration as Harper is — would doubtless be viewed by Washington as a highly unwelcome and meddlesome bit of interference, to say the least. Moreover, it’s not Harper’s place to presume to tell the Americans how to run their affairs.

On the other hand, he most certainly can and should quite properly be expected to call for the repatriation of a citizen to face justice in this country if it’s felt that fair trial won’t be possible under the circumstances abroad. Unfortunately, our apparently “malleable” prime minister seems quite willing to accept what he laughably refers to as the “legal process in the United States” to deal with matters.

If this sort of insipid claptrap and cracker barrel advice to the prime minister is the product of Taylor’s “cold logical reason” we can’t say there’s much to recommend it. But of course, it’s actually nothing of the sort. In point of fact, throughout his article, Taylor flouts every tenet of his bogus premise about the purported intellectual superiority of so-called right-wingers. To the contrary, it’s logically flawed, deeply contradictory, laughably simplistic and worst of all, obdurately blind to reality.

Maybe if Taylor was less concerned about pandering to the conceits of his flock, he might honest enough to admit that not only is Harper’s current position wrong, but those calling for Khadr’s return are actually the ones far less “malleable” when it comes compromising on “key values such a due process, presumption of innocence, and the rule of law.” Heck, some liberals are even known to get quite emotional in defense of these principles. On the other hand, many so-called right-wingers seem more concerned about finding clever new ways of circumventing, corrupting and bypassing them altogether — like say, Messrs. Bush and Harper.

61 Replies to “Too Clever By Half”

  1. As for the poppycock idea that “the best political actions are incremental” — this is the usual conservative ideology and a silly idea in America given that we came into existence as the result of a sudden revolution. As was said years ago by Jean-Francois Revel, what America is all about is a continuing revolution without Marx or Jesus. America is a revolution in progress, but a revolution without any dominating ideology. If any idea drives us in our continual movement forward, it’s the idea of simple pragmatism. Conservatives may hate the reality, but we will indeed move forward, and we will keep looking forward rather than backward.

    The Republican Party is now America’s conservative party. If Republicans are wiped out as a political party this November, they can lay the blame at the feet of its current conservative ideologues — the people who promote the idea of limits to knowledge, who promote the idea that social intervention is futile, and who turn their backs on the future. That’s the Republican albatross.

    …by Dan Agin

  2. I’ve seen teacups that have more intellectual depth than Stephan Taylor.
    He’s a sycophant and a liar and whose an apologist – he deserves rendition for being profoundly stupid.

  3. RT — game, set, match.

    I think (and hope) when history is written, the whole Guantanamo Bay business will be exposed for what it is. A shameless abuse of power — a shameless exercise in everything the Constitution sought to prevent, rights-wise — a glaring example of institutional hypocrisy.

    Hat is off.

  4. The simple fact that Taylor refers to Khadr’s “illiberal hatred” of “our values” says it all. By adhering to such typical neocon/rightwing talking point/fearmongering nonesense, he of course would seek to convolute, meander, obfuscate and dissemble all about in order to get our Mini Leader off the hook on this matter.

    No surprise there …

  5. CWTF wrote:

    “He’s a sycophant and a liar” (with respect to Steven Taylor).

    Not quite. He admitted to me at his Blog tonight that he is not really a conservative, but a “classical liberal.”

    At least I can sleep tonight. Chalk one up for me.

    Now off to bed, and dreams of joining my “Band of Brothers” at Agincourt … (not kidding btw)

    As well, the American spell-checker on Google does not recognise “Agincourt.” Surprise, surprise.)

  6. “Not quite. He admitted to me at his Blog tonight that he is not really a conservative, but a “classical liberal.”
    By stating that, I guess you are correct. It not only makes him a sycophant and a liar but incredibly ignorant, stupid and delusional.

    Classical Liberals stress the importance of civil liberties. None of teh Boring Tories, Conservatives (and many of the Liberals) seem to give a fuck about those.
    One gets the feeling that Mr. Taylor read the Cliff notes on “Classical liberalism” without really understanding the meaning.

    Taylor is a neocon goofball.

  7. I don’t care for the Khadr family. That being mentioned, I do care about the rule of law, not the rule of a despot. Omar Khadr is a prisoner at Guantanamo because George W. Bush has imprisoned him and found him guilty. Khadr is facing a Cardassian court which will confirm his guilt.

    The Canadian government needs to do what it can to bring Omar Khadr back to Canada–not for Khadr’s sake, but for the sake of all Canadians who cherish liberties, laws based on democratic governance, and a judicial system that interprets those laws fairly.

  8. If we have such treaties with the American (repatriation, extradition) we should seek to initiate and use them.

    This case is complex. Khadr left Canada and was seemingly a member/supporter of an Islamist Terror Group; having said that, he was a minor.

    Our laws as they relate to minors and informed consent/age of majority should apply to Canadian citizens held abroad in Nations where we have extradition treaties.

    At the end of the day, hoping for extradition given the nature of the allegations might be politically untenable. The Government should at least be trying to ensure that he has reasonable access to due process. This, they have not done.

    In the final analysis, the parents should be held accountable for the brainwashing of this young man. I do think that the Mother and the Daughter should eventually be deported. They have lost their rights to Citizenship.

    Maintaining Civil Rights and access to due process is critical to the existence of a free and ordered society. However, Citizenship is NOT a right. If you advocate violent and treasonous behaviour counter to the laws and conventions of Canadian society, the your Citizenship should be revoked.

    We cannot debase Citizenship in the interest of Rights (in every instance). There must be a balance.

  9. Aeneas, I’m not quite sure why you are trying to complicate this situation unless a certain dogma is clouding your judgement.

    We often accuse the frightwingers of moral relativism and in the case of Khadr, you seem quite content to embark on it.

    The outrage should be that a Canadian citizen is that there is a betrayal of human rights, international law and civil liberties.

    Canada and the U.S. are signatory parties to some of these treaties that are being usurped in the name of the “war on terror”.

    You state that citizenship is not absolute and talk about “due process” (god you sound like Harper)….

    The US with Gitmo is acting outside of any law and convention and it a rogue state. How can there be any “due process” to a set up that is not based on any International standard. The whole “process” is a farce and laughable. Canada, by not decrying the illegal and immoral actions of the U.S. has credence and has tarnished our reputation.

    We are taking about humans that have been imprisoned, tortured and subjected to atrocities since capture in a war zone. Khadr was a child soldier and not some terrorist like you seem to inflect.

    His treatment is not one that reflects how child soldiers are treated by international law. As a close Allie of the U.S., we should be in a position to diplomatically point this out to the U.S. – instead our politicians are bending over and getting ramroded by this.

    You maintain that “civil rights” and “due process” as being critical to a free and ordered society – the whole process of his trial is geared towards a conviction. How can you even maintain your statements? So far, the main judge has been removed because he was (shock of shocks) doing his job. The charges make no sense in a theatre of war. Whatever veneer of legitimacy you try to associate to this make no sense to critical analysis.

    Our government, by not speaking HAS debased Citizenship in the name of “the war on terrorism”.

    “In the final analysis” when it comes to brainwashing, Harper and the conservatives would with their blatant lies and other mismanaging of Canada be traitors. I don’t see you decrying that. One only has to look to see how Harper has bullied institutions to see that his behaviour is “treasonous behaviour counter to the laws and conventions of Canadian society”.

    If one even accept the premise of Guantanamo Bay and looks at the “war crime” charge against Kahdr the only “proof” that is there is that he was present. Documents show that it was another fighter that has thrown the grenade. Due process? With a kangaroo court, that seem impossible.

    One withness (Morris) has given conflicting (aka he’s liying) stories.
    The wounded Omar was almost executed (wonder if that would have been considered a war crime?).

    After capture, while at Bagram, Khadr was denied basic medical treatment as a form of punishment (so much for Geneva, right?). Not only that, he was tortured. Remember this is a kid that we are talking, not much older than Harper’s oldest son.

    Canada did ask for special treatment for Khadr due to his age – I guess some civil servant was doing his job. That letter stated that “various laws of Canada and the United States” should be respected.

    I could likely draw up a long list of torture and malfeasance that he suffered, but I suspect that you don’t really care about humanity Aeneas.

    If anyone should be labeled and deported for treason, it would be all that have failed to stand up for what is right. Those that have diminished and devalued what Canada used to represent in term of values.

    In a sense, Aeneas, your rationalization diminishes what it means to be a Canadian by your lazy and pathetic excuses and diatribes on “treason” and “citizenship”. You sir, are a poor excuse of a Canadian citizen. I’m ashamed to be sharing my citizenship with someone who tries to rationalize torture, abuse of human rights and your shallow thinking.

  10. “However, Citizenship is NOT a right. If you advocate violent and treasonous behaviour counter to the laws and conventions of Canadian society, the your Citizenship should be revoked.”

    does this apply for all who violate canadian law, or just those who have funny accents? either way, strikes me as a convenient way to circumvent due process.

    “We cannot debase Citizenship in the interest of Rights (in every instance). There must be a balance.”

    one would think the rights of citizenship are integral to defining that citizenship.

    KEvron

  11. “However, Citizenship is NOT a right.”

    including your own?

    KEvron, descended from immagrants, like almost everyone else he knows

  12. CWTF wrote”

    “You sir, are a poor excuse of a Canadian citizen. I’m ashamed to be sharing my citizenship with someone who tries to rationalize torture, abuse of human rights and your shallow thinking.”

    CWTF: Boy, you are pretty stupid aren’t you?

    I was criticising the Harper Government. I was pointing out however, that this case required a balanced hand – which is not what Harper had done. Instead he has laid prostate in front of the US Government. I condemn the government for its handling of this file.

    What makes me ashamed is dullards like you making assumptions based on what was not written. At the very least, you have a comprehension problem. At most, you have lost your mind here.

    I have suggested two possibly controversial opinions only here:

    (1) I have suggested that Khadr be considered a minor in the course of any investigations and trials, and I have posited that the Canadian Government should be his advocate in this regard;

    (2) I have also suggested that once this sad escapade is over – no matter what happens, that the Mother and Daughter should be deported. They have proven to be either explicit or implicit supporters of Al Qaeda. There is NO PLACE for this activity in Canada.

    For the record – again – I support the Operations in Afghanistan and I have stood AGAINST the illegal US action in Iraq since day one.

    Stereotype that.

  13. Yeah, I’m evil for defending a balanced approach.

    Read what was written people. Consider the facts here. I never said HE should be stripped of Canadian Citizenship. Read more closely next time.

  14. just want to make this point to you conservatives out there: due process is not a loophole. there can be no proper conviction nor acquittal without due process.

    KEvron

  15. “I never said HE should be stripped of Canadian Citizenship.”

    may bad; i let the actual subject matter of the discussion at hand confuse me….

    KEvron

  16. “Then why won’t the US Government give him some?”

    because, sadly, they’ve already gone where yours is blindly headed. as they’re unwilling to relent, it is incumbent upon khadr’s fellow canadians to insist on extradition.

    KEvron

  17. btw, aty:

    “Then why won’t the US Government give him some?”

    you seem to be defering to american due process (or the lack thereof) in lieu of canadian. poor form.

    KEvron

  18. Canada has a long history of deporting Landed “Citizens” who prove to be disloyal Canadians, such as Michael Seifert.

    Nazis, Al Qaeda, Communists: I could care less. If you advocate treason, incite violence, or make war against Canada, you should be prepared to be sent back from whence you came.

    * Note to those who cannot read: I never said Omar Khadr should be deported. Further, now that I recall that all the children were born in Canada, I suggest only the Mother be sent back to Egypt.

  19. THERE IT IS …

    ATY wrote in post #10 on this thread:

    “If we have such treaties with the American (repatriation, extradition) we should seek to initiate and use them.”

  20. “DIDN’T I ADVOCATE THIS A FEW POSTS BACK?”

    nice caps. now, if i may quote you: “read what was written.”

    KEvron

  21. “Canada has a long history of deporting Landed ‘Citizens'”

    it’s my understanding that khadr was born in toronto. does his qualify as “landed” citizenship?

    KEvron

  22. KEvron,

    You said:

    “…it is incumbent upon khadr’s fellow canadians to insist on extradition.”

    Right. I’m glad that you have decided on behalf of all of us that Omar Khadr needs to come home. I for one disagree. I think there may be others that disagree too.

    In fact, doesn’t our Prime Minister disagree?

    KEvron, what do you propose we do with him? And why bring him home? Do you have evidence that he is being mistreated (since 2006) at Gitmo?

    Your plans are to put him on the street? Put him on trial for “what” specifically? Who pays for his lawyers? Have you thought this through?

    …I didn’t think so.

  23. “I for one disagree.”

    me, too.

    “I think there may be others that disagree too.”

    me, too.

    “KEvron, what do you propose we do with him?”

    bring him home.

    “And why bring him home?”

    because he is a canadian citizen.

    “Do you have evidence that he is being mistreated (since 2006) at Gitmo?”

    do you?

    “Your plans are to put him on the street?”

    who squealed?!

    “Put him on trial for ‘what’ specifically?”

    for being so irresistably cute!

    “Who pays for his lawyers?”

    george soros?

    “Have you thought this through?”

    i let you do it for me.

    “…I didn’t think”

    do you ever?

    ” so.”

    buttons.

    KEvron

  24. KE,

    1056h.

    You said:

    “…because, sadly, they’ve already gone where yours is blindly headed. as they’re unwilling to relent, it is incumbent upon khadr’s fellow canadians to insist on extradition.

    KEvron”

    I don’t think I misread…Did I misinterpret?

  25. “Mother – Yes, Son – No.”

    yes, i saw that. the rationale was “If you advocate treason, incite violence, or make war against Canada, you should be prepared to be sent back from whence you came.” hmmm….

    KEvron

  26. KEvron,

    You can’t propel foreign policy based on wether people are cute or not. (irresistable or not)

    With that kind of reasoning we would protect cute animals and leave non-cute animals to fend for themselves.

    By that kind of reasoning we would be spend more time wooing cute countries and leave non-cute countries alone.

    What if Khadr wasn’t cute?

    But you might be right about Soros though.

    Check into it. If this guy isn’t going to be a permanent drain on the Canadian taxpayer than perhaps we should bring him back, he’s still young, perhaps apprentice him into welding or something. They are looking for welders at the Tar Sands.

  27. She is an Al Qaeda sympathiser and suspected supporter.
    Guilty until proven innocent, right Aeneas?

    Has she ever carried out a terrorist act in Canada or elsewhere? And yet, you’d have her deported for her beliefs. So basically your argument is that we should all think like you.

  28. I have suggested two possibly controversial opinions only here:

    (1) I have suggested that Khadr be considered a minor in the course of any investigations and trials, and I have posited that the Canadian Government should be his advocate in this regard;
    How convenient. Canada usually treats other child soldiers with greater human rights.
    Khadr was a child soldier at the time coupled with the fact that the accusations against him go contrary to international law, you still support this charade. You base your assumption on false premises and continue on. Shameful on your part.


    (2) I have also suggested that once this sad escapade is over – no matter what happens, that the Mother and Daughter should be deported. They have proven to be either explicit or implicit supporters of Al Qaeda. There is NO PLACE for this activity in Canada.

    I support Hamas. Should I be deported?
    Instead, you’d have them deported because of their beliefs. Have they done anything illegal in Canada?

  29. Is everyone here drunk or high today?
    I’d say that you are terminally stupid today. While I have disagreed with you in the past, usually you had some valid arguments – today…. we’ll you are close to dr roy.

  30. I was criticising the Harper Government. I was pointing out however, that this case required a balanced hand – which is not what Harper had done.
    It matters none if it was Harper or not. This case requires that Canada state that the U.S. is acting like a rogue state. Odd how Australia and England have their citizens back yet you’d pussy foot around.

    As for Afghanistan, that war has long lost it’s “best before” date. Whatever reason for being there has long been perverted and any supporter should really wonder about supporting a narco-state. Don’t worry, the little adventure there will cost Canadians, don’t be surprised when I tell you “I told you so”.

  31. “If we have such treaties with the American (repatriation, extradition) we should seek to initiate and use them.”
    Beyond that, Gitmo and the treatment that the U.S. (with this enemy combatants wording) should be denounced for it’s illegality.
    I don’t see much difference between U.S. actions and all those countries they have criticized for human right abuses. In fact they are worse and Canada has become a joke not speaking out.

  32. CWTF:

    You have officially become unglued.

    I support your position on Omar Khadr, however, his parents – the dead one and the live one – are responsible for brainwashing him and turning him against his country. They manipulated a minor into a terrorist. I support trying him in Canada and perhaps in rehabilitating him in this country.

    Canadians were killed on 9/11. Anyone who supported Al Qaeda deserves to have their loyalty questioned. Seifert proved to be a Nazi – out he went. No difference.

    The difference here is that I do not tolerate Terrorists – of any type – domiciling in Canada. AQ, IRA, Nazis, Communists: if you advocate disorder and incite violence, then I have no problem with sending you back to where you came from.

    I fully supported the case against Zundel. I see no difference between him and Khadr’s violent anti-Western mater.

    Unlike you, I am not politically-correct when it comes to deporting undesirable radicals out of the country. Extreme right or extreme left – away with them.

    The Iraq War is wrong. Fighting & eradicating Al Qaeda is not. Bush fucked-up, but that does not mean Al Qaeda should be let off the hook.

  33. I think introducing Khadr’s family into the equation needlessly muddies the waters in my opinion. The relevant point at hand here is whether the government should be making efforts to repatriate Khadr so that he can face justice in Canada owing to the fact that the military tribunal process set up by the Bush administration is, to put it bluntly, “a sham” (a point reiterated by his defense lawyer today on CTV’s Question Period). Unfortunately, the Canadian government seems to regard him as guilty before the fact and a “terrorist threat” (or whatever), in addition to being a highly unsympathetic and politically toxic figure due to his loathsome family. This decision however demonstrates a complete disregard for due process and wantonly flouts any purported respect for the rule of law. People opposed to Khadr’s repatriation generally seem to do so for the most base and unprincipled reasons, if one can even call them that.

  34. however, his parents – the dead one and the live one – are responsible for brainwashing him and turning him against his country. They manipulated a minor into a terrorist.
    What terrorist act has he done?
    Has he turned against Canada? No.
    At best, he was a child soldier.

    Canadians were killed on 9/11.
    So fucking what? Canadians were also killed in Lebanon when Israel over reacted.

    9/11 was a terrorist act designed to get an over reaction from the U.S. – and inflame some religious jihad by uniting Muslims. So far, the U.S. has taken the bait.

    Funny how we have not declared war against Saudi Arabia – the source of those terrorists.

    Anyone who supported Al Qaeda deserves to have their loyalty questioned.
    Al Qaeda are rather inept terrorists. Demonizing them has only helped their cause.
    Al Qaeda was relatively minor players in the Muslim world. The reaction to 9/11 and the continued farcical actions have radicalized and drawn whole generations towards their ideas.

    Unlike you, I am not politically-correct when it comes to deporting undesirable radicals out of the country.
    Actually, you are being PC. I’m saying Freedom of Speech gives them the right to say whatever they want as long as they don’t hurt others. Zundel should have been able to say what he wanted, just not teach it in class.

    Sometimes, you have to question authority and be ready to take up arms and disrupt for what you believe in. America was founded upon that after all.
    You can look at the early history of Israel and their leaders to see that some were/are terrorists.

    Fighting & eradicating Al Qaeda is not.That was abandoned by NeoCons long ago. Maybe it should also be pointed out that Al Qaeda were once our allies. Blowback is a bitch for some.

  35. “Blowback is a bitch” – no question. That doesn’t mean they get the free-run of Afghanistan.

    And for the record, I am FOR squeezing the Saudis – which is what NATO should have done first – post 9/11. I advocated that at the time.

    My plan would have been involved:

    * NATO invading Afghanistan
    * Extreme pressure on Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and Sudan
    * Proxy pressure in other rogue Islamist-supporting states
    * I would have left Iraq alone – it was disarmed anyway and Hussein had no supporters in the region

    Just because I support the idea of NATO in Afghanistan does not mean I agree with the overall strategy. Bungles everywhere , and dangerous ones to boot.

    Free speech does not include the right to subversion and insurrection – not in civilised states anyway.

    I may be a red tory on some issues, but I am still a conservative. I’m just not a neo-liberal, which are what the CPC’ers are. Stop being confused.

  36. Aeneas, I guess there is some middle ground between us…
    I never said that Al Qaeda should get free reign in Afghanistan. The first post 9/11 response was the correct one. As soon as the neocons headed to Iraq, the war in Afghanistan was lost. Bush Sr., in the first gulf war acting in an appropriate manner. That example was not followed. At the moment, we are only acerbating the situation. Afghanistan is a clusterfuck and nothing short of getting rid of Karzai and removing all troops will help.

    Free speech does not include the right to subversion and insurrection – not in civilised states anyway. Quite the grand statement, we should revisit this someday.

    As for the conservatives I know, they had a history of supporting human rights would never have supported the treatment of any child soldier the way the US and by proxie Canada is.

    So whatever disagreement we may have about Afghanistan, I still think that your “complex” comments about Khadr are deflecting the core issue with regards to international rule of law, what is moral and neglecting Conservative values for those of Neocons and trying to someone justify what you think.

  37. CWTF,

    You said:

    “…As for the conservatives I know, they had a history of supporting human rights would never have supported the treatment of any child soldier the way the US and by proxie Canada is.”

    Whether you like it or not, we have troops over there. What message is our repatriating Young Omar saying to them? Do you think they would appreciate our efforts?

    What if 15 year old Joe Blow from Hamilton decides to do the same thing, goes over to Afghanistan and (allegedly) blows up one of our troops? Do we bring him home too? Do we charge him with murder after bringing him home or pat him on the head and give him counselling because he’s only 15.

    Have you thought this thing out, or just shooting from the lip here?

    Canada is not the world. We live in a society of rules that allows our communities to remain ordered, safe and fair to other Canadian’s. Using these rules to sidestep justice was not and is not envisisioned by the average Canadian.

    Omar went to Afghanistan to kill allied troops. He apparently did so, but rather than being executed on the spot, he happened to be caught by another civilized nation that took him as a prisoner, and has clothed him, fed him, taken care of his medical needs, and is now about to give him the due process he and the Taliban had not planned to give the American soldiers.

    Your out of your league here. Its all just rhetoric to you, isn’t it.

  38. Tomm, was not really planning on engaging with you are you are only one step above the average shrieking loonies that support Harper.

    I’d hope that our troops are professional enough to understand that in a theatre of war they are still laws and standards that they are to abide by. I’d hope that they are above the kind of relativist rhetoric that you want to bring up.

    I don’t give two fucks about what our soldiers think. They are paid to do a job and sometimes that puts them in danger. At the same time, they should act within international laws. These are very clear when it comes to child soldiers and “civilized” Canada is signatory to these agreements. You cannot change them because you are suddenly “emotionally” involved.

    Omar, after capture, was abused – he was likely kept alive for possible information and for this ill-thought show trial that the U.S. is conducting.

    It’s amusing to see some lecture about democracy, freedom and human rights, when they are such hypocrites about it. You can sod off no Tomm, I don’t waste time with wankers….

  39. Just to be clear: I think Khadr should be sent to Canada for trial, and I think the US – as they will eventually – should be held to task for Gitmo.

    I also think the Mother should be sent back to Egypt on a Security Certificate.

    That is all.

  40. Ok, somewhere along the line we’ve let this get reframed, (Worthington’s most recent column is a perfect example – “Will Khadr backers sway public?”).

    I don’t support Khadr, I don’t not support him either. In some ways I couldn’t give a toss about him. Hell I don’t know him.

    I’ll tell you what I do support.

    Democracy. The rule of law. All the freedoms that everyone tells me the terrorists hate.

    Divorce the Kadr family and Omar himself from the equation: What is going on at gitmo, what is going on with rendition, what is going on with these joke trials is against democracy, the rule of law and freedom. Period.

    Now, throw Omar back into the equation for a second: Nothing has been proven against him (this isn’t about whether you trust him more or less than the US forces, it’s about evidence) , when it looked like the judge was going to release more evidence they fired the judge, the only guy standing up for him is a military lawyer who has stayed on to defend him and is probably putting his civilian legal career in the shitter (his military career is probably already gone). He’s a child soldier who is now mostly blind, who has been tortured, who may or may not have been denied proper medical care, who is being held in a way that does not meet the Geneva convention (which puts our troops in danger). Hell there seems to be some evidence to suggest that he didn’t do anything but get shot up (also, can I ask someone how killing a soldier in combat qualifies as murder?)…

    Anyway, all of this is moot. He’s Canadian. We have a stable democracy and legal system. If there is something to charge him with, bring him home, send him to trial.

    Oh, and Aeneas the Younger, Security Certificates? Also not very much in the spirit of democracy, freedom and the rule of law.

  41. “I also think the Mother should be sent back to Egypt on a Security Certificate.”

    may she ay least receive her due process first?

    KEvron

  42. The Mother lost that if she is an active supporter of an Organisation that is a threat to national security. Landed Immigrants are not allowed the same rights as Natural Born Canadians in such matters.

    Sure, give her due process. But if she is proved to have been an active supporter to Al Qaeda, then send her packing like we do with Nazis. Fair is fair.

  43. If you think we should protect the rights of Nazis and AQ supporters who have been found to lied about their extra-national activities, then you are a little more loosey-goosey about the obligations of citizenship than I am.

  44. Aeneas, maybe you should rally your MP to get a security certificate to deport Harper for being a traitor to Canada….

    The point being that your fucking holier than other morality seems to be an excuse for some kind of latent xenophobia and racism in you.

    In what fucking way is Al Quaeda a danger to national security? A couple vague references from a largely inept terrorist group? Security certificates are an embarrassment – their only purpose is to get around the law.

    Like I said, I’m ashamed of sharing my Canadian citizenship with so-called Conservatives like yourself who are making excuse for civil rights abuses.

    “Obligations of citizenship”? You are a collaborator of the NeoCons with your attitude.
    You use the same innuendo and insinuations as the Assmonkeys do – I wonder if you’d be spouting the same garbage if their names were “Reed” or “Smith” or even “Tremblay”.

    I’d say that you are a frightened little coward that refuses to stand up for justice and Canadian values.

  45. That’s enough now. If you know anything about me, you would know that I oppose neo-cons/neo-liberals on most of their policy stands; however, I am – and will always remain – a Canadian nationalist when it comes to national security.

    I do not submit to your definition of racism – primarily because you are so McCarthyite about it. If Kahdr’s mother is found to be a supporter of Al Qaeda, she should be bounced back to Egypt. Nothing racist about that at all – it’s just common sense and good security policy.

    Quite frankly, if you think that is racist then you are completely batshit crazy – or probably a krypto-communist with some sort of hidden agenda. That is the only plausible explanation for your patent over-reaction on the issue of Khadr’s mother.

    I don’t think it is un-democratic to want to deport someone who does not, and is unwilling to become, a full Canadian – with all that this entails; if she supports an organisation that wants to kill Canadians she should be deported. I don’t think many Canadians would oppose such a view.

    Now, good-day to you. This is done. Take your lithium before you log-in next time.

  46. Being a Canadian nationalist does not mean having to trample of civil liberties and fair process. Canada had a reputation for protecting its citizens and upholding human rights. Ironically, you use nationalism and implying (or) supposing guilt to justify regressive behaviour.

    You have asserted that “Civil Rights” and “access to due process” is critical to a free and ordered society “advocate violent and treasonous behaviour counter to the laws and conventions of Canadian society”.

    Who should Canadians trust to uphold those laws? Normally it would be the government, the Justice apparatus and law enforcement agents.

    If you look at their known behaviour, they are far from an example that should be followed don’t you think?
    We have the head of the OPP doing illegal wiretaps and justifying it with a cavalier comment does not make me think that he has respect for the law.

    We have RCMP officers going Taser happy in Vancouver murdering a confused person. The RCMP outright lie about the incident and was only “found out” because someone videotaped it and pushed to have the tape back.

    You have undercover police dressing up as protesters in Montebello trying to provoke a riot.

    I’m sure that this is only the tip of the iceberg regarding your fair and democratic society.

    In all these cases, there has been no punishments and the powers that be have lied and muddied the facts in the media to protect their asses.

    So Aeneas, you’d like us to look up to those cretins as representing Canadian values?

    Should we get into how Harper acting like a dictator by bending the laws and firing civil servants looking to protect Canadians?

    So what’s your take on violating Canadian law and citizenship in these cases? Yes, I know they are not equivalent but you seem to blanket all…

    When it comes to Khadr, you fail to recognize that he was a child soldier, he’s been tortured and abused, imprisoned for years by a rogue state. The fact that Bush has invented laws and definitions to permit human right abuses is indication that the war on terror is one perverted joke.

    “I have also suggested that once this sad escapade is over – no matter what happens, that the Mother and Daughter should be deported. They have proven to be either explicit or implicit supporters of Al Qaeda. There is NO PLACE for this activity in Canada.”
    And activities would that be?

    “It is widely-known in Canada. She is an Al Qaeda sympathiser and suspected supporter.”
    Allegations or proof?
    It seems that if you want to deport people, why not start with Neo-nazis and the Bloc Quebecois – they seem to fit your all encompassing definition or traitor.

    “I support your position on Omar Khadr, however, his parents – the dead one and the live one – are responsible for brainwashing him and turning him against his country”
    and
    “Canadians were killed on 9/11. Anyone who supported Al Qaeda deserves to have their loyalty questioned.”
    So fucking what if Canadians were killed on 9/11? It was a terrorist attack and not directed at Canadians. Maybe, by your reasoning, we should question what Canadians were doing at the world trade centre that day. Maybe some had abandoned Canada to pursue the mighty dollar in the U.S.?
    Where, when how has Al Qaeda committed acts of war against Canada?

    It seems that you are ready to curtail human rights in an unclear war on terrorism all the while letting Canada take one step closer to being a police state…. Security certificates bypass the so-called laws and values you hold in esteem.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s