First of all, get used to it -- Omar Khadr is destined to come back to Canada, land of his birth, if not his affections and loyalty.
For nearly 10 years he's been a "detainee" at Guantanamo Bay after being wounded and captured fighting for al-Qaeda in Afghanistan as a 15-year-old in 2002. Canadian governments (Liberal and Conservative) have wanted no part of him.
But we're stuck with him and what's left of his family, after his father was killed in a 2003 ambush in Pakistan. Former PM Jean Chretien had appealed to Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto in 1996 to get Khadr released from jail, only to be killed later.
As a teenager, young Khadr didn't have much of a chance.
He was enrolled in al-Qaeda, believed in Osama bin Laden, fought the enemies of al-Qaeda and the Taliban. In 2002 when U.S. troops attacked, Khadr killed a sergeant and badly wounded another with a grenade and was shot in the chest.
In 2010 he pleaded "guilty" to murder, spying, conspiracy and terrorism. He was sentenced to eight years (most of it time served) and is now awaiting return to Canada.
Clearly he's not wanted here, but has become something of a folk-hero to some human rights activists and the CBC.
The Americans want Khadr transferred to Canada, where a spokesperson for Justice Minister Robert Nicholson has said the possibility of criminal charges against Khadr "rests with police and provincial Crown attorneys."
This is an odd reaction -- but not as odd as the Conservative party's view that "any Canadian citizen . . . who commits treason by taking up arms against the Canadian Forces (or allies) . . . automatically invalidates his or her Canadian citizenship."
The suggestion is that Khadr should be charged with high treason for "assisting an enemy at war with Canada" or (assisting) those against whom the Canadian Forces are engaged in hostilities. Bafflegab.
To view Khadr as "treasonous," or even as "criminal," is wrong to the point of absurdity. He's done nothing against Canada. His "crime" of murder -- to which he confessed, in order to facilitate return to Canada -- was fighting against an invader. America attacked Afghanistan and al-Qaeda, to whom Khadr had pledged allegiance.
Canada wasn't involved -- had no links nor interest in Afghanistan prior to 9/11.
Killing in a war is not usually considered "murder," and certainly isn't treason. Surely some Ottawa authority can see the difference? While we may not like the Khadr family, Omar has done nothing to warrant criminal charges in Canada.
It's also unfair to compare Khadr with Kanao Inouye, the only Canadian ever convicted of high treason. As an interpreter and guard of Canadian soldiers captured at Hong Kong in WWII, Inouye was known to POWs as the "Kamloops Kid" who consistently beat and abused Canadians.
Sentenced to hang by the British for war crimes, the verdict was overturned on appeal and he was re-tried by Canadians and in 1947 was hanged for high treason.
Ironically, Inouye's father served honourably in the Canadian army in WWI, and won the Military Medal for Bravery in the Field.
Omar Khadr is no Kanao Inouye, and really is an accidental Canadian who has done nothing criminal against this country. Nor has he done anything for Canada.
When the Supreme Court said the Gtmo process was illegal, the first time, in 2008, and Obama announced a review of all the cases shortly after, the Harper Government should have requested repatriation and offered to try him here. They were advised to change policy by the former Liberal Government, all Opposition parties, the Canadian Bar Association, a host of human rights groups, a parliamentary committee and the majority in Parliament, and a court ordered them to seek repatriation. They ignored them all and fought the courts, resulting in the Supreme Court declaring Khadrs rights violated, by the US with Canada's help, in 2010.
The Harper Government put Khadr in a position to sue them instead of complying with the courts and the law. That may explain their strange behaviour -- signing the agreement to favourably consider a transfer. Pretending they had nothing to do with it. Being coy and dragging their feet about implementing the agreement. Toying around with absurd suggestions.
Obvious truths are obvious.
Khadr was a child soldier and his detention is a disgrace. Our government's failure to protect the child that was is a disgrace.
I'm sorry an American soldier died.
But this whole affair is a travesty.
Fox News North actually disagreeing with the Harper government? Actually saying what other MSM including the CBC have been cowed into zipping it about. (That's the only mistake in his column. That the CBC wants to make him into a folk hero.)
I have been waiting in vain for any MSM to say the obvious about the Omar Khadr case ..... that killing an invader during wartime cannot be interpreted as "terrorism". Especially if you are under attack at the time and were fighting for your life. On top of that you are 15 years old!
He is definitely NOT a folk hero, a stupid and inflammatory accusation to human rights groups, but it HAS been a black stain on our country to allow a 15 year old to be pent up in a cage in Gitmo, maybe even tortured, for 10 years for these made up "crimes".
Hats off to you Peter, I for one am now seriously rethinking my previous opinions about you. It's obvious you're not an Omar fan, but your sense of justice and human rights trumps your feelings about this man.
Thanks Peter, I for one will read your columns with a more open mind and a view extra grains of salt from here on out.
First of all the last sentence is irrelevant and makes no sense. America wasn't involved in Afghanistan, nor did it have any links or interest prior to 9/11 either. Whether Khadr "pledged allegiance" to Afghanistan or Al Qaeda is also irrelevant, not only because he was a minor, but because neither confers citizenship. Canada and the US were allies in Afghanistan (again, post 9/11) and therefore a blow struck against our ally by a citizen of our country, is indeed a treasonous blow against us.
Once he is here should he be charged with an offense against the nation? If so it would seem such a charge would have to be laid as against a minor. If convicted, to what end and what punishment? Should he be stripped of a citizenship in which he had no voice in obtaining in the first place?
My apologies to the family of Sgt Speer, but I don't see the comparision as fair.
The one was made to kill babies, torture, mutilate and force unspeakable acts upon others. He (or she) would be killed if they refused. The other was forced to plant bombs directed at a legitimate enemy millitarty and is alledged to have killed an enemy soldier in a firefight.
He's already been in aji lfor longer then if he got into a illegal gunfight in downtown Toronto; we should just let him go.
Those with long memories or the ability to use Google know that Khadr's father artfully played the Canadian government for a bunch of fools: while being held on terrorism charges in Pakistan, he mounted a hunger strike, and pleaded for the Canadian intervention.
Jean Chretien made a personal appeal to Pakistan, and won Khadr's release - with eventual results that are obvious to even the most casual observer.
Does the Canadian government hold a grudge? Was Omar Khadr kept languishing in Guantanamo because of the "sins of his father"?
Or, is it a case of "one diplomatic intervention per family"?
Resisting an invasion, in the eyes of the US at least, is a crime punishable by torture and indefinite detention. This was an attitude also shared by a number of very unsavoury regimes, none of them worthy of emulation.