Omar Kahdr to receive C$10.5 million settlement

[riggerrob 558]

Canadian newspapers just announced that Omar Kahdr will receive an apology and a C$10.5 settlement because of torture he suffered during a decade at Guantanamo Bay.
Kahdr was born in Canada, but his father was a known Al Queda operative. Egyptian-born Ahmed Kahdr had numerous contacts with Al Queda and was killed by Pakistani security forces in 2003, near the Afghan border. Omar's older brother: Abdullah Ahmed Kahdr admitted to buying arms for Al Queda but successfully fought extradition to the USA.
At age 15, (2002) young Omar Kahdr travelled to Afghanistan for jihad with Al Queda.
While he was a boy-soldier 15-year old Kahdr threw a grenade that killed US Army medic Sgt. Speer. Kahdr was wounded and captured by American soldiers. He spent the next decade in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba where was aggressively interrogated for weeks at a time. Kahdr was convicted and sentenced by a US Army tribunal. Kahdr was eventually repatriated to Canada, where he served more of his sentence, but was paroled early. Now the government of Canada feels that they owe an apology to Kahdr because of a decade of wrongful imprisonment and abuse suffered at Guantanamo Bay.

Another American soldier: Sgt. Lynne Morris lost an eye earlier in the battle, but he was medivaced hours before Kahdr threw the grenade that killed Sgt. Speer.

Since Sgt. Speer's widow and (retired) Sgt. Morris have won civil lawsuits (in American courts) against Omar Kahdr, they now are trying to claim part of his financial settlement.

This case is being rowdilly debated in Canada.

159 Canadians died in Afghanistan with hundreds more suffering long-term disabilities (e.g. amputated limbs) and/or PTSD.

What do DZs.commers think?

[aphid 0]

Here's more thorough background than Rob was able to supply in his OP: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Khadr

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled/upheld that Khadr's rights were violated by the Canadian government and that the government had acted illegally: (shortcut to the applicable section) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omar_Khadr#Canadian_documentation

It is intellectually lazy to conflate Khadr's crime with the denial of his charter rights by the government of the day. They are distinctly separate issues.

[DJL 232]

I voted for the bottom three but that doesn't mean they're what should actually happen either. There are laws in place over combatants, there are laws in place over juveniles, there are laws in place over terrorism. A 15-year old throwing a grenade during the military actions in Afghanistan straddles a few lines but ultimately he's a child soldier. He will live his life in a perpetual limbo of legal and popular opinion regardless of how many tribunals or generals he stands in front of.

As for the torture and interrogation techniques, I follow the advice of professionals Ali Soufan - FBI Agent in the field that torture does not yield good results and voids our ability to prosecute. You can get a little bit of information from someone but then you can't prosecute that individual in any court, thus the reason that many of those in Guantanamo are held there for such long periods because you also can't release a terrorist that you spent 10 years torturing.

Edited to correct his age from 17 to 15. That puts the exclamation point on him being a child soldier, typically manipulated into their actions, still not devoid of responsibility.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[RiggerLee 61]

Let me preface this by saying that I have never been in the military. What follow was explained to me by some one who has been. He was rather drunk at the time of the conversation and my memory may be imperfect as well.


I do think that there has been blatant abuse and violation of the civil rights of the prisoners in custody in the "War on terror". I firmly believe that it is unlawful to hold them indefonantly. At least this guy got some kind of trial and sentence which puts him ahead of many. This may shock you, I realize I sound like a winy liberal when I say this. The truth is I'm about as far right as you can get. I ran into Gangus Kan at a party the other night and we got to talking politics and he basically told me that I needed to chill out.

My solution to all of this is that we need to follow the law. I talked to a retired army officer about this once and he straightened me out. There are "Laws", rules, or at least agreements that cover this. They go back for centuries. When you fight a war. Every one picks teams just like in gym class. They all put on uniforms, skins and shirts. They line up on opposite sides of a field, just like in gym, and they fight. It's like dodge ball in PE. That's how it's done. There are agreed on penalties for cheating. If you are caught fighting out of uniform you are hanged or shot depending on what ever is most expedient, some times there isn't a good tree or rope available. That's one of the rules. There are other rules, or at least gentleman agreements. Like you don't serrate the edge of your bayonet or use hollow point/dumb dumb bullets. There are lots of rules that we've agreed on over the years. Like you don't put some one in a cage and set them on fire and watch them burn. In fact there are a lot of rules about prisoners. You actually have a responsibility to protect them. That is if they fought by the rules.

I think it's time that we all started following the "Laws", rules, agreements that every civilized nation on earth has committed to. I believe that it is a violation of their human rights to hold these people indefinably. Ether they play by the rules like good solders, in which case they are prisoners and have the rights of prisoners, they are laid out in the rules. Or they are an... "Unlawful Combatant", I think that's the right term. By the laws of land warfare that is not allowed. They must be marched out into a courtyard and hung by the neck until dead, or shot. When ever we catch one of these people fighting out of uniform, with out a direct chain of command, I think there were some other requirements but I can't remember them, we need to execute them. They should be interrogated. That's fair. The rules allow that. But once you squeeze every ounce of intelligence out of them they must be executed in a speedy and humane manner as stated above. It is a violation of there innate human rights to imprison them indefently with out trial.

This is my understanding. Apparently they actually have classes in this when they make you an officer. Could some one chime in and clarify this for me.

Lee

Lee
[email protected]
www.velocitysportswear.com

[DJL 232]

Quote

They should be interrogated. That's fair. The rules allow that. But once you squeeze every ounce of intelligence out of them they must be executed in a speedy and humane manner as stated above. It is a violation of there innate human rights to imprison them indefinitely with out trial.

This is why our methods of interrogation need to also be lawful. The biggest problem that the FBI had in making a case against many of these terrorists is that the evidence against them was collected in a way that doesn't stand up in court.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[aphid 0]

DJL

A 17-year old throwing a grenade during the military actions in Afghanistan straddles a few lines but ultimately he's a child soldier.

A minor correction if I may; at the time of the incident, Khadr was 15 years of age.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

DJL

I voted for the bottom three but that doesn't mean they're what should actually happen either. There are laws in place over combatants, there are laws in place over juveniles, there are laws in place over terrorism. A 17-year old throwing a grenade during the military actions in Afghanistan straddles a few lines but ultimately he's a child soldier. He will live his life in a perpetual limbo of legal and popular opinion regardless of how many tribunals or generals he stands in front of.

As for the torture and interrogation techniques, I follow the advice of professionals Ali Soufan - FBI Agent in the field that torture does not yield good results and voids our ability to prosecute. You can get a little bit of information from someone but then you can't prosecute that individual in any court, thus the reason that many of those in Guantanamo are held there for such long periods because you also can't release a terrorist that you spent 10 years torturing.

You have summed up what I think of the issue pretty well. So I will just say: ditto.

As pointed out already he was 15 at the time. I have a bigger problem with his mother's continued presence in Canada to be honest.

[riggerrob 558]

Agreed!
I have difficulty with any Kahdr family member staying in Canada, considering that A: most have connections with Al Queda and B: Al Queda fought against Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan. Meaning that a few Canadian jihadis fought against Canadian soldiers.

I also struggle with the notion of immigrants holding two passports: one from their country of origin and a second passport issued by the Canadian government??????
I also have difficulty with dual-citizens engaging in political violence in their countries of origin.
I used to believe that foreign-born jihadis deserved to be extradited to the most miserable prison in their country of origin, but realized that most will be freed a week later. Now I believe that the most violent of Canadian jihadis deserve to spend the rest of their lives rotting in Canadian prisons. Part of the problem is that after "X" number of years service with Al Queda - they are impossible to reform and will never become productive members of society.
Similarly, one of President Obama's difficulties with closing the Guantanamo Bay Prison was getting rid of prisoners. Some came from countries that no longer exist. Many of their home governments refused to repatriate them. Many neutral countries refused them asylum because of fears that they would resume political violence in their new-found home.

Finally - like most Canadian citizens - I struggle with the notion of Canadian citizens fighting in wars unconnected with the Canadian government: Papal Zouaves, MacKenzie-Papineau Brigades (Spanish Civil War during the 1930s), Viet Nam War, Air India bombing, collapse of the former Yugoslavia, various African wars, Afghanistan, ISIL, etc.

[aphid 0]

riggerrob

struggle with the notion of immigrants holding two passports: one from their country of origin and a second passport issued by the Canadian government??????

As the subject line is specifically Omar Khadr, remember that his nationality (and passport) of birth are Canadian. He was born & raised in Toronto.

To avoid any potential misconception, I'm not not defending the guy. I just don't want facts accidentally massaged.

The settlement arose from the actions of the previous government and adjudicated by the Supreme Court to be unlawful on a number of counts.

As much as many Canadians are apoplectic about the money and the apology, to quote a friend of mine yesterday...

"Do people really believe the Supreme Court makes its decisions at Wing Night?"

[Phil1111 910]

aphid

***A 17-year old throwing a grenade during the military actions in Afghanistan straddles a few lines but ultimately he's a child soldier.

A minor correction if I may; at the time of the incident, Khadr was 15 years of age.

When Are Adult Sentences Used for Youth?

If the offence is murder, attempted murder, manslaughter or sexual aggravated assault (presumptive offences) then it is presumed that an adult sentence will be given unless the youth can persuade the court that a youth sentence will hold the youth accountable.
If the offence is not a presumptive offence (described above), the Crown may seek an adult sentence if the youth is 14 and if the offence is the youth's third serious violent offence or one which an adult could receive more than 2 years.

Prior to the Enactment of the YCJA in 2003, What was the Process for Giving Youth an Adult Sentence?
If the youth offender was 14 years of age or older, s/he could be moved to adult court. If convicted, the young offender could have received an adult sentence. If the young offender was 16 or 17 years old and was convicted of a "presumptive offence," the court would use an adult sentence unless s/he convinced the court not to. Presumptive offences were:

Murder
Attempted murder
Manslaughter
Aggravated sexual assault
http://www.lawlessons.ca/lesson-plans/2.7.adult-sentences-for-youth

How about paying the 10.5 million into a fund to pay for the rehabilitation of Yazadi women refugees from Iraq, admitted to Canada. Forced into sexual slavery by the Al Qaeda offshoot IS?

How about using the money to pay for the rehabilitation of Canadian Forces personnel injured in Afghanistan?

Yes a wrong was done to a Canadian citizen subsequent to his personal, direct actions as a terrorist in another country.

Fifteen year old Canadians have been sentenced as adults before in the courts of Canada.

IMO give him $10.5 million, suspended, for his active participation in a terrorist group.This properly recognizes the failure of the Canadian government to protect his rights subsequent to capture an the battlefield. IMO any Canadian who joins a terror group like Al Qaeda or IS. Should be stripped of citizenship regardless of place of birth.

The courts, charter of rights, constitutions of many countries, fail completely to deal with international terror. A citizen travels to another country to participate in genocide, institutionalized rape and other war crimes. Then returns to his place of birth to expect the full protections as a citizen of that state.

[aphid 0]

Phil1111

How about paying the 10.5 million into a fund to pay for the rehabilitation of Yazadi women refugees from Iraq, admitted to Canada. Forced into sexual slavery by the Al Qaeda offshoot IS?

How about using the money to pay for the rehabilitation of Canadian Forces personnel injured in Afghanistan?

IMO, if the settlement reveals terms such as you suggest, the debate up here would be substantially less heated.

[gowlerk 1,911]

After thinking on this for a couple days I've come to the conclusion that this settlement and apology is a colossal blunder by Trudeau. Baird is making the rounds of the media trying to excuse it by saying that they would have lost the court case and that it would cost much more in the end. So Fucking What?

This case should have been dragged through the courts as far as possible. Only then should the judgement have been paid. After exhausting all possible appeals. The message this sends is appalling, even to a big time liberal like me.

Yes, what happened to Kahdr was wrong. And yes the Canadian participation in his torture was wrong. But there is still the matter of the grenade and the dead soldier to consider.

This is going to cost Trudeau a huge price politically. It will not be forgotten for many years. Well past the next election.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[riggerrob 558]

Putting Gowlerk's comments in perspective: the Canadian government has already spent C$5 million defending their case in court. With little chance of success, the gov't decided to cut their (Canadian tax-payers') losses by settling for half of what Kahdr requested.

It's clear that the Harper gov't violated the Canadian Charter of Rights when they left Omar Kahdr to rot in Guantanamo Bay for a decade. Now the Trudeau gov't (Liberals) are obliged to right the worst wrongs committed by a previous gov't, but I do not believe that any amount of money can heal psychological damages suffered during 10 years of confinement and interrogation. Considering how many members of the Kahdr family were involved with Al Queda - before Omar was captured - there is little hope of him renouncing his violent ways (religious fanaticism).
The saddest thing is that boy soldiers (15 years old when captured) are mere cannon-fodder in hundreds of wars. They suffer irreparable damage and survive with few (legal) marketable skills. For example: look at the 'lost generation' of Iraqi men who fought in the Iraq-Iran War.

[pchapman 261]

riggerrob

when they left Omar Kahdr to rot in Guantanamo Bay for a decade.

I'd like to know just what the Canadian gov't could have done.
Send a stiffly worded letter of protest to the US embassy? Invade Guantanamo to free our citizen?

I'd want to know more about the exact ways his rights were violated, the story behind all the headlines for and against. I wonder how the payment compares to those for innocent people who are accidentally put in jail for for raping and killing a young person. Which happens from time to time, and may not be the healthiest thing to be in prison for.

Still, he was actually a combatant. I don't blame him much for being made into who he was made into as a teenager, but he happened to get tied up in the odd war on terror where it's a bit unclear just which laws of war or peace apply.

[jakee 1,254]

pchapman

I'd want to know more about the exact ways his rights were violated, the story behind all the headlines for and against. I wonder how the payment compares to those for innocent people who are accidentally put in jail for for raping and killing a young person. Which happens from time to time, and may not be the healthiest thing to be in prison for.

Normal rapists and murderers aren't put in jail without due process being followed. There's a reason for that.

Everything that's happening here is a direct result of various western governments inventing ways to deny certain people the right to any judicial process at all. As distasteful as it is, we fucked up and we have to deal with the consequences. If we hadn't fucked up, this guy wouldn't be getting rewarded for doing terrible things. View it as a painful lesson for all involved.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Quote

It's clear that the Harper gov't violated the Canadian Charter of Rights when they left Omar Kahdr to rot in Guantanamo Bay for a decade.

Just as a reminder that this all Started under Chretien (L), continued under Martin (L), then Harper (C) and is now ended by Trudeau (L)

[riggerrob 558]

CSIS (or other some other Canadian spy agency) visited Kahdr several times in Guantanamo Bay. Canadian agents knew how Americans were interrogating Kahdr, but were far too curious about confessions to interfere.
Globally, this is part of a much bigger trend. While Canadian law severely restricts how the Canadian gov't can imprison/interrogate/spy on Canadian citizens, there are few legal restrictions on foreign gov'ts. This leads to American, etc. intelligence agencies spying on Canadian citizens and sharing their findings with the Canadian gov't.
Meanwhile, Canadian police/intelligence/spy organizations often spy on American citizens and share their findings with the US gov't. Neither gov't spy agency broke their own laws. Gov't intelligence agencies have shared evidence for decades.

[Lawndarter 3]

For what it's worth, I served in Afghanistan in 2012. A very good friend of mine was killed there. Two NCOs who had a very significant impact on my career development were too.

I harbour no particular ill will toward Omar Khadr. Other members of his family are far shittier people, but this isn't about them. Ultimately it's not worth my time or effort to hate the guy. What little he's said and has been said about him publicly suggests he wants to get on with his life, and I think that's the best way he can ever make any amends - to live a decent life, to be a contributing member of society.

He was taken to Afghanistan at 9 and sucked into their civil war even before 9/11. I have no doubt he was under a variety of terrible influences which shaped the course of his life up until his capture. Having been a 15 year old once, with some terrible ideas of my own from those around me, I understand that.

At the core of it, whether he was a deemed a child soldier under conventional definitions at the time (which apparently changed from 14 to 18 at some point) is irrelevant. Whether he threw the grenade that killed SFC Speer and blinded Sgt Morris (and there's no evidence of that whatsoever) is irrelevant. What he was doing in Afghanistan at that time is irrelevant. Whether he was a committed true believer in Al Qaeda's ideas is irrelevant.

Indeed, the only thing that matters is that in his interaction with Canadian officials from CSIS and DFAIT, his Charter Rights were violated. That's the finding of the Supreme Court of Canada in Prime Minister v Khadr 2008. That finding meant that there is no prospect whatsoever of the government defending the civil suit filed by him.

Settling the case ends it being dragged on to the same conclusion at a much higher cost.

It's time to move on. He got a perfunctory apology, which he deserved. The money will mostly go to his legal fees, I'm sure, but I don't really care about it to be honest. The amount is comparable to what Maher Arar got, and that's likely no coincidence. Sure, it'd be great if he donates the money or helps make some kind of peace with the families of his alleged victims, but I see no obligation for him to do so.

The ramifications of trying to run from culpability and accountability are far worse to me. Three successive governments, representing two parties, decided to make the easy decision to ignore the rights of a citizen of this country, and that is truly odious. The idea that any government could decide to simply ignore the highest law of the land because it was politically expedient is a far more dangerous precedent than the settlement could ever be seen as.

[Lawndarter 3]

pchapman

I'd like to know just what the Canadian gov't could have done.
Send a stiffly worded letter of protest to the US embassy? Invade Guantanamo to free our citizen?

They had to ask for him, it seems like. The best parallel case I can find is David Hicks, an Australian who pleaded guilty to a charge, got a suspended sentence, and went back to Australia. His conviction was later overturned (which will likely be what happens with Khadr once his appeal proceeds in the United States).

pchapman

I'd want to know more about the exact ways his rights were violated, the story behind all the headlines for and against. I wonder how the payment compares to those for innocent people who are accidentally put in jail for for raping and killing a young person. Which happens from time to time, and may not be the healthiest thing to be in prison for.

You can read about it here. https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7842/index.do

He got a similar settlement to Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen incorrectly connected to Khadr's father, whom the Canadian government sent to Syria knowing he would be tortured.

pchapman

Still, he was actually a combatant. I don't blame him much for being made into who he was made into as a teenager, but he happened to get tied up in the odd war on terror where it's a bit unclear just which laws of war or peace apply.

The main issue was that Guantanamo was specifically created to avoid US law and the formalities of things like due process of law. Canada knowingly participated in that.

[SkyDekker 1,122]

Difference being that Khadr actually did something and Arar was actually innocent.

And let's not forget that Trudeau specifically orchestrated this so there could be little interference.

[grimmie 173]

Excellent post. Thank you.

And thank you for try to make a difference in serving in Afghanistan.

[Lawndarter 3]

SkyDekker

Difference being that Khadr actually did something and Arar was actually innocent.

And let's not forget that Trudeau specifically orchestrated this so there could be little interference.

There's no evidence that he did what he was accused of beyond that he was there. And there is no substance to the suggestion that "Trudeau specifically orchestrated" anything. The Government's lawyers negotiated a settlement of a lawsuit, that's not particularly unusual. What "interference" would there be? Such negotiations (and settlements) are customarily confidential.

[Lawndarter 3]

riggerrob

...I do not believe that any amount of money can heal psychological damages suffered during 10 years of confinement and interrogation.

Nope, don't think so either. Nor will it do anything to make Tabitha Speer feel any better.

riggerrob

Considering how many members of the Kahdr family were involved with Al Queda - before Omar was captured - there is little hope of him renouncing his violent ways (religious fanaticism).

He long ago did so, and isn't described in any of the reporting or assessments that came from Guantanamo or anywhere else as being particularly fanatical.

riggerrob

The saddest thing is that boy soldiers (15 years old when captured) are mere cannon-fodder in hundreds of wars. They suffer irreparable damage and survive with few (legal) marketable skills. For example: look at the 'lost generation' of Iraqi men who fought in the Iraq-Iran War.

Dalhousie University in Halifax is doing a lot of work in studying demobilization and reintegration, particularly for child soldiers, but I suspect a lot of it will be more broadly applicable. Indeed one of the things that we're grappling with her is what to do with soldiers when they're no longer fit to be soldiers, and we're a professional army in a well educated Western democracy.

[aphid 0]

Widow of U.S. Sgt. Chris Speer launched attempt at asset freeze.

Justice Edward Belobaba said the request for an injunction from the widow of an American soldier killed in Afghanistan was “extraordinary” and the decision to reject it was not difficult in law.


source: http://www.macleans.ca/news/effort-to-freeze-khadr-money-dismissed-by-judge/

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

The part that gets me about this (and it's a bit off topic) is that lawsuit.

How in the world can that lawsuit happen?

They were soldiers in the US Army. They were invading/occupying a foreign country. They were killing and injuring lots and lots of the opponents.

So one of those opponents hits back. One is seriously wounded, one died.

That's called war.

Wouldn't a suit like this set a precedent? One that would allow those opponents to sue the US soldiers who injured them (or a suit by the families of those killed).

How about the innocent civilians killed accidentally? Could their survivors sue the soldiers who dropped the bombs, launched the rockets, fired the guns, ect? Not the US government or the US military, but the actual, individual soldiers?

Based on the little I know, the suit against Kahdr was a default judgement because he was in Gitmo and unable to defend himself.
That doesn't change the very simple fact that the suit never should have made it to court.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo