Khadr back in the news

I suspected that he would be back in the news soon enough. President Elect Obama said recently that he would close Gitmo in his first week as president. This is a very wise move on Obama's part as this is a sore thorn in the American identity. However, challenges would arise with such a move.

The issue I am concerned about is where and what will happen to Khadr. I just read about Romeo Dallaire's request to Obama on the CBC. The thing I like about online news sources is that you are able to read other people's opinions on the matter. I am still amazed at how little informed Canadians are in general when it comes to worldly matters. It is bothersome to me, as a Canadian, that our country does not create more global citizens.

I don't know how many times one must inform people of the actual illegality of the case before it sets into their skull. Without taking into consideration the terrible investigation of the US intelligence units (and lets be honest here they have been terrible in recent times), Omar Khadr was a child at the time of his arrest, A CHILD. Under UN Convention laws that pertain to children--child soldiers in particular--this whole case would be considered a farce. You can not charge a child with war crimes or terrorism. You don't do it in Africa, you don't do it in Latin America, you don't do it in Asia so you definitely should not do it in Afghanistan.

All I can say is I hope Obama makes the right choice to send him back to Canada and I hope that Bush is made to apologize for his treatment of the child and I hope that Canada has the audacity to apologize to the family for lack of involvement on this case. This my friends is a shameful thorn in our Identity.

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child defines a child as "every human
being below the age of 18 years unless under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier." Biologically, a child is anyone in the developmental stage of childhood, between infancy and adulthood.

What great firewall of China?

It's been since months since I last wrote on the blog. My guess is that since the Beijing Olympics the great firewall of China has relaxed it's control on the internet so I've got access to blogger again. Although some can argue that you've had access since the summer--it's only since the prospect of my daughter writing her own blog on her time here in China that I have been re-discovering my old friend--the blog!

As for the update in my life--I'm still in China and living and working a good life. My daughter is coming back for a visit. This will be fun and full of surprises. I can't wait until she discovers what I have planned for her.

This blog is about to get a lot more interesting. You'll still have my rants and raves about politics and social justice issues close to my heart but there will be a focus on travel, work and general life in China.

Until my next entry--Zai Jian

The Case of a Child Solider

So I got thinking more and more about Khadr and his case. What I have read on the websites around the scary world wide web is astonishing. It amazes me that people do not take to time to truly educate themselves about something before speaking about it. If a financial question was to arise regarding the whole housing mortgage situation I dare not speak on this. I haven't a clue about finances nor do I pretend to understand anything about why the crisis is happening. I don't care really to be honest. It doesn't affect me as I live in China now and I don't have to pay for my housing costs thanks to my company. Maybe it might affect me when I go to purchase property in the Philippines but alas that's in the far future.

However, since being back in Canada for a much needed break I can't help but find myself getting reacquainted with issues that I hold near and dear to my heart. As most of my readers know they are ones that pertain particularly to youth and youth related issues. I've written on youth issues in Canada as well as youth issues on the international scale. As of late, with three weeks until Khadr comes to trial, I've been bothered by the lack of understanding and lack of educated people on this case or the case of a child solider. So I thought it best of me to take this opportunity to state the case of a child solider. In hopes that at least one person understands and changes their mind. I figure with one person it can create that whole spiral thing. Maybe I'm just writing into thin air. Nonetheless I need to put it out there~with only hope!

First I would like to educate people about what a Child Solider constitutes under international law:

According to UNICEF:"A 'child soldier' is defined as any child - boy or
girl - under 18 years of age, who is part of any kind of regular or
irregular armed force or armed group in any capacity, including, but not limited
to: cooks, porters, messengers, and anyone accompanying such groups other than
family members. It includes girls and boys recruited for sexual purposes and/or
forced marriage. The definition, therefore, does not only refer to a child who
is carrying, or has carried weapons" (Cape Town Principals, 1997).

Now some would argue that part about "anyone accompanying such groups other than family members" as proof that Khadr should and could be tried as a soldier of war. However, the case is a little more complex than that. His story is very unique to child soldiers born into families who are fighting for their cause. Khadr may have spent his first 9-10 years in a Canadian school and community however family obligation and indoctrination led the family to leave Canada because the father--from a very patriarchal family--insisted. Therefore placing his children in the hands of people who would mould his hatred for America and American things.

Some would argue that at 9 years old you should know better and the difference between right and wrong. Some of higher intellect would argue that the very definition of right and wrong is up for discussion based on cultural practices. Lets say for arguments sake that taking a life is high on the list of agreed upon wrongs. Unfortunately, the world is never this black and white. Some would argue that a woman who murders her husband after years of systematic and ritualistic abuse is good, or a parent who kills the person who rapes their child is a godsend, or a person defending their home during an attempted robbery accidentally kills the perpetrator is well within his/her right. During the time of war it was perfectly acceptable for allies and combatants to kill on another without fear of prosecution--it is a war after all. However, these same people would condemn a child soldier for his alleged killing of an American Soldier in time of conflict because his last name is Khadr and because his father is a known financier and backer of Al-Queda. It's shameful actually.

Now back to the 9 years of age. One could argue that his first 9 years were spent in Canada and therefore should have inherited the "Canadian Identity" with their "values" and "morals" of the culture. Let's examine this a little closer. These Canadian values and morals we talk about are usually learned in either a public or catholic school board where it is mandated by the government with qualified teachers. These Canadian values are usually taught from many generations of Canadians who have successfully integrated into the psyche that is Canada. These Canadian values are usually influenced by peers, parents, teachers and other community leaders. This is the accepted norm. However, what if you were raised in a community that encourages rules that are outside the accepted norm? You may not agree with these norms however if your raised in these norms and if everyone around you follows these norms than you are more likely to follow these norms. Everyone wants to be accepted. Especially a child who is developing.

Which brings me to my point. Khadr has had various types of teaching from an early age on. He attended a madrassah in Peshawar, Pakistan. These are questionable institutions. Some madrassahs--which literally translated is school--are where a lot of poor children attend and are moulded into killing machines. This is the case the further you go into rural Pakistan and other nations. Greg Mortensen talks about this in his book Three Cups of Tea. Khadr also attended a school that was half regulated by the Ontario Government. It followed the Ontario curriculum and did the standard testing, however it lacked qualified teachers. Then he was moved to Afghanistan in 1996. If anyone knows the history of this country--which even the most ill educated would know--the Taliban was in full effect and propagating the hatred of everything Western. Despite being his mother's favorite child, he was still educated at a time--9 years is impressionable--when it was an accepted norm to hate everything he had previously learned in Canada.

I don't know about you but at 9 years old I was still living in my rural town of Bright, I was chasing boys around the town and I was not burdened with the terror of Taliban rule. I had it pretty easy, but even I can understand that the need for acceptance and the need to please is very high at that stage of development. I see it now with my 10 year old when I have conversations with her. She is very black and white in her thinking and she is a 'moralist' as I like to put it. Just the other day she was talking about her best friends school. I send her to a French Immersion program but her best friend attends a local public school. She was comparing her school to her friends school. She said that her friends school was a bad school because "the kids didn't even follow the school's code of conduct." I asked for clarification, she said that "the girls wear spaghetti straps instead of three finger straps, and that is just wrong." Hence my little 10 year old moralists has her belief that her school is better because the kids follow the school rules with regard to dress code.

Now, put yourself in her mind and find this amusing. Now step out of that mind and put it in Khadr's 9 year old mind. Everything you thought you knew to be correct at 9 years old had to be reprogrammed; 10 year old girls would definitely not be allowed to wear spaghetti straps. As a matter of fact, a 10 year old is close to marriageable age. Your families values are the correct views because everyone else in the community has the same values. Your teachers are your parents, your parents friends and friends of your parents friends. They do not have the 'balanced' approach of our certified teachers. You father was not around a lot because he was off doing business dealings therefore you were raised by your mother but made to wear a burka because he enjoyed helping his mother bead--this was to avoid scrutiny by the community--and after this 'embarrassing' situation asked to move to be with the men in the village. His father agreed and left him in the care of Taliban leaders hence beginning his indoctrination into Taliban thinking.

Therefore, by all definitions, Khadr is a child solider. This makes him eligible for special protection under international law. In a country that holds democracy as our solid foundation we lacked the judgement to intervene on his behalf. It's utterly shameful.

How is this child solider any different than Khadr?

or this child?

or this child?

There is absolutely no difference in definition. The difference is the definition of the war. While these children may have been in civil conflicts, Khadr was involved in a 'war on terror'. Unfortunately his war was with the US instead of with some rebel group. Unfortunately he is alleged to have killed an American soldier instead of some lonely civil combatant. For this he has earned the inaction of our incompetent Government.

That's all I have to say on this matter. For now that is ;)

Dallire is correct again

Being back in Canuckistan once again I can't help but get re-involved in Canadian politics and other musings of a Canadian life.

There has been a lot of coverage in the news as of late with respect to Omar Khadr--and justly so. My previous posts touched on the Khadr case and my thoughts on the circus that is. However, today's news story about the case pitting my favorite all time Canadian against the PM--who in my opinion is not a very nice man--calls for me to comment on the whole thing.

My problem with this article is not the content but that people have pitted these two people against each other. It's not fair to Harper to be put up against Dallaire. Poor Harper I say.

Some of you are probably going---WTF?? She hates Harper and finds him repulsive on every issue and writes constantly about her dislike for this man. It's not because I like Harper that I say it's not fair, it's because putting Harper in the same league as Dallaire is unfair because he would loose on all fronts!

The PMO has accused Dallaire of grandstanding. Grandstanding?? Do they not know this man? Do they not know what a great and honorable man he is? Do they not know the size of his balls? Dallaire has done more for this Nation's reputation than Harper will ever do on the international stage.

Romeo Dallaire is the only man--other than a few of the men under his command--to know the difference between right and wrong. He's the only man to stand up to his superiors when morality called for it. He's the only man who cared enough to stay in Rwanda when the rest of the world turned it's back on the country. He's the only man to stay witness to the atrocities then had the balls--despite his personal breakdown--to take the men to court responsible for those crimes. He's the only man to call it for what it was--a pure genocide. For this he has won numerous awards and has gained the respect of many nations around the world. And Harper and his minions think he's grandstanding.

You realise that Harper and company would loose any battle against Dallaire. He is a highly decorated officer--and I'm no big fan of the military(but I like Peace Keepers), a highly moral man and a man of great honour!

Shame on you Harper and company for calling into question a man of greatness. You and your company make me absolutely sick!

Omar Khadr Revisted

I know it's been a while. I've been living the high life in Shanghai and access to Blogger has been limited. With the Great Firewall of China lifted in time for the Olympics I'll have some access. It may or may be lowered after the Olympics. Time will tell. In the meantime I am writing from the comfort of my Canadian home--well not mine, more like my mothers. I'll be returning to the cesspool that is Smelly Shanghai in August.

I've returned back to Blogger because I have an excellent post I wish to revisit. I'm revisiting this post on the heels of the released video of Omar Khadr. From previous posts one knows my stance on this issue. It's a sad day in Canadian history when this kind of illegal treatment of a human being takes place. I'm going to repost what I have said in the past instead of making it easier for you to read instead of being linked. I don't know about you but I'm getting tired of being linked here and there. Anyways here's an exert of my previous post.

I think Rosie Dimanno put it right in her editorial for The
Star. In this editorial she compared two teenage boys who grew up in similar
situations with similar outcomes yet because one happened on US soil and one
happened in Iraq they should be treated differently. The other child Omar was
compared to was Lee Boyd Malvo. You might have heard of him. He committed a
terrorist like act. He will go down in history as the Washington Sniper.

Both boys grew up in a 'family' that used and abused them by moulding their
minds of hate. I'm aware that the Khadr family has a rocky relationship with
Canada but to allow one of our children to suffer the torture of the American
Army in Abu Ghraib-we all know how that story ended-and the torture in
Guantanamo Bay is quite sickening. We as Canadians should be ashamed of
ourselves for not becoming involved in this case.This detainment of Khadr is in
direct violation of the United Nations Charter of Rights for Children and The
Geneva Convention special treatment of children in armed conflicts.

In these two documents it is said that children under the age of 18 shall not be recruited to the military as well as making it a war crime to recruit those under the age of 15 into armed conflict. It also allows for special treatment of children of
armed conflict and the International Court Court will not charge those under the
age of 18 with a war crime. According to them they are not criminally
responsible for their actions.

The Optional Protocol of the Children's Rights
Charter that specifically deals with child soldiers states the
specific:

Reaffirming that the rights of children require special protection,
andcalling for continuous improvement of the situation of children
withoutdistinction, as well as for their development and education in
conditions ofpeace and security, Disturbed by the harmful and
widespreadimpact of armed conflict on children and the long-termconsequences this has for durable peace, security and development,Mindful of the necessity of taking into consideration the economic,social and political root causes of the involvement of children in armedconflicts, Convinced of the need to strengtheninternational cooperation in the implementation of thisProtocol, as well as the physical and psychosocial rehabilitation and social reintegration of
children who are victims of armed conflict, Encouraging the participation of the community and, inparticular, children and child victims in the dissemination of informationaland educational programmes concerning the implementation of the Protocol,

What it says in essential is that someone like Khadr requires specific
consideration regarding what he has been accused of. Sure he killed a US solider
during the Iraq war but when he committed the crime he was just a child. A child
solider who has every right to be re-educated and protected under international
law. Unfortunately the US doesn't see it that way and their War on Terror is
blinding them to the call for the release of a child in Guantanamo.The war and
prison industrial complex that is the US has blinded them to basic rights of
children. I could go on about my thoughts on the US juvenile justice but I'll
leave that for another day. My concern to date is the inability of the Canadian
government to become involved in this case. We are failing a child and that
saddens me.

Oh Harper when will you learn!!

So my favorite PM is in the news today. Apparently he's gone and snubbed the Premier of Nova Scotia. You think this guy has some sort of social phobia or really poor social skills. Actually I think he does have poor social skills--he always looks so awkward up on stage and in public settings. Anyways, back to the point I'm trying to make here and less on the 'personal attack' side of things--that's more the right wing approach!

Harper was down in Nova Scotia over the weekend to make some big announcement regarding some military stuff. I don't pretend to know anything about what they're spending money on--I'm just not that into military stuff! The announcement was made without inviting the Premier to the announcement. In Harper's words:

that it was strictly a federal announcement

What is wrong with this guy?? How is an announcement that brings money to a PROVINCE and contracts to a PROVINCE not be considered a joint announcement between a PRIME MINSTER and a PREMIER?? Is this man smoking crack or what??