Turned on the PM news on BBC Radio 4 only to be confronted with the full on BBC whingeing mode on behalf of the inmates of Guantanamo. This time it’s newly released video footage of Omar Khadr being asked by Canadian officials in 2003 about events leading up to his capture by US forces that is causing BBC consternation. Khadr is accused of throwing a grenade that killed a US soldier in Afghanistan in 2002. Frank Gardner was promptly allowed to come on and pontificate about just how damaging this footage is to the image of the US around the world, and the Muslim world in particular. I agree with Frank and I share his outrage. I am outraged at the civil and caring manner in which the Canadians conducted the interrogation and I am even more outraged that Khadr was captured in the first place. If militant Muslims view the civilised manner in which we treat Gitmo residents they may continue their barbarism! How on Earth could we ever have conducted World War Two had the BBC behaved then as deplorably as it does now. It continually seeks to undermine our war efforts against Islamic terrorists and never fails to see things from the Jihadists’ point of view.
IT’S CLUB GITMO DAY.
Bookmark the permalink.
Not just Gitmo – there’s three anti-US stories on tonight’s BBC1 6.00pm news.
You name it, if there’s a bad news story about the US – sorry, nearly fell into the trap there – if there’s a story that can be construed as being bad news for the US, the BBC will weedle it out and spin it for all it’s worth.
Truly, the BBC is now riddled with bigoted political warriors.
Watched the Gitmo video – what a joke ! I was worse treated then that when I was “interviewed” by the Old Bill as a teenager. Trust Al-BBc to run with this pathetic attempt to smear the US. Let the Al-Beeb hacks show us a couple of “interrogations” conducted by the thugs of the Taliban for a change.
The BBC seems to have ‘forgotten’ the background story of who this terrorist is, who his family is, what connection they have to global Jihad and terrorism and in fact any information that would detract from his BBC induced victim status! Does the BBC want/need the viewer to think that this terrorist with strong links to some of the worlds most wanted terrorists is just a poor innocent child victim of the great Satan America? I wonder why the BBC are being coy about his background!
Maybe the BBC would have like his interrogation better if the Canadian armed forces had thrown a similar hand grenade into his cell and walked away.
Let’s face it ladies and gentlemen, liberals are sissies. They live in a pretend world, a world in which they are guaranteed safety and a pay check. Their safety guaranteed by U.K., U.S., Canadian and several other countries brave soldiers, their paycheck guaranteed by YOU the taxpayer. They sit and snipe at the very folks who keep them fat and sassy.
this poor child, taken and indoctrinated with some far fetched ideology. We’ve seen this before in the hitler youth
I’ve made this point time and time again. They shouldn’t be taking prisoners on the battlefield.
Pop em and move on. What was this little shit doing in Afghanistan anyway? Let me guess.
1. A Computer Course
2. A Wedding (surpried he didn’t get a bomb dropped on him)
3. “Charity” work
4. A holiday
5. Gay pride march (OK I made that one up, but it’s no more unlikely than any of the others)
Have I missed any of the excuses?
If the kid had been a Brit caught by the Taliban he’d have had a car battery wired up to his hairless balls by now. He should be grateful that he’s ended up in the hands of people who actually stick to international law. But of course, the BBC are too infected with that sanctimonious liberalism that pointedly ignores facts over emotions. Sadly this will doubtless fuel more outraged jihadists whose victim mentality keeps getting massaged by the BBC
I personally prefer the Jack Bauer (24) treatment of terrorists… you get my drift.
Send the guy a box of Kleenex and talk about something important instead.
Will86,
Sadly this will doubtless fuel more outraged jihadists whose victim mentality keeps getting massaged by the BBC.
That’s what they want. The BBC actually hopes this will provoke an outcry. The article accompanying the video is somewhat dishonest about who this kid is and why they are interrogating him.
Not a single statement from a US or Canadian official, just generalizations about White House policies. The final nail in the coffin of bias is the obligatory lie from Amnesty International. A travesty of justice? Human decency is actually belittled by statements like that.
So embedded is the BBC with Islamic jihad suspects , and ex-Islamic jihadists, that BBC News TV sees it as ‘natural justice’ and reasonable ‘multiculturalism’ to interview ONLY an ex-Guantanamo Islamic jihad suspect about a present one, as it did today, commenting on a suspect bit of video in anti-American terms. The suspect whom the BBC so sides with may have killed an American soldier.
In contrast, BBC reporter, Mr. M. Ilyas Khan, reports under a very misleading BBC headline:
“Taleban set up ‘Pakistan courts'”
-when what should be stated in the headline is that the Taleban has set up ISLAMIC COURTS. And in this same report by Mr. Khan of the BBC, the Taleban are referred to as ‘militants’, not as ISLAMIC JIHADISTS, which is what they are.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7508008.stm
To counter this sort of biased political reporting, non-Muslims may well find that they will increasingly resort to the site below to get a sense of proportionality:
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
I do love how the bBC portrays a blood thristy killer as a victim of society.
Here is what the bBC doesn’t tell you about the capture of Omar Khadr
“Those who witnessed his capture on July 27, 2002, say Khadr looked even younger than 15. U.S. soldiers came upon a mud-brick compound and through a crack in the door saw five armed men inside and ordered them to surrender.When they refused, the soldiers tried to negotiate, sending in translators, but the men inside killed the translators. The Americans called in air support, which smashed the compound to ruins.According to a Rolling Stone account, the soldiers then walked into what was left of the compound and encountered a wounded fighter behind a broken wall who threw a grenade that killed Special Forces Sgt. Christopher Speer and injured Sgt. Layne Morris. The soldiers opened fire, the bullets striking the wounded fighter twice in the chest. “When the soldiers got close,” the Rolling Stone story says, “they saw that he was just a boy. Fifteen years old and slightly built, he could have passed for thirteen. He was bleeding heavily from his wounds, but he was — unbelievably — alive. The soldiers stood over him. ‘Kill me,’ he murmured, in fluent English. ‘Please, just kill me’.”
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/khadr/omar-khadr.html
They also leave out a lot of information about his family;
Canadians learned this week that the Khadrs were one of the founding families of al-Qaida and lived for years in the same compound as Osama bin Laden in Jalalabad, Afghanistan and celebrated when they saw footage of the September 11 attacks. A revealing documentary by the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation made headlines in many newspapers. It featured interviews with his wife and two daughters, who went on camera to say how proud they were that the family patriarch died a martyr in a shoot-out with Pakistani authorities. “We believe dying by the hand of your enemy because….you’re doing it in the way of Allah, that is the best way to die,” his daughter Zaynab told CBC journalist Terence McKenna. The mother, Maha, told the CBC her children were better off being trained as “brave” Islamic warriors than growing up in Canada. “Would you like me to raise my child in Canada, and by the time he’s 12 or 13 years old, to be on drugs or having some homosexual relationship.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/mar/09/worlddispatch.annemcilroy
Take note of what i highlighted in bold above. Because later on the Mother then has this to say about Canada;
“His mother has complained that the Canadian government won’t give her a new passport to enable her to bring her son to Canada for better medical care.”
Yup the bBC and really half the story.
Jonathan Boyd Hunt:
Not just Gitmo – there’s three anti-US stories on tonight’s BBC1 6.00pm news.
You name it, if there’s a bad news story about the US – sorry, nearly fell into the trap there – if there’s a story that can be construed as being bad news for the US, the BBC will weedle it out and spin it for all it’s worth.
Jonathan Boyd Hunt | Homepage | 15.07.08 – 6:32 pm | #
Quite true Jonathan. They even had a story on the website yesterday about the Miss Universe contest (totally irrelevant in news terms as far as I am concerned) and guess what it headlined, not the winner but the fact that Miss USA stumbled over her evening gown. What a pile of bullshit to make a story that has no other objective than to portray the US in a bad light. It wasn’t news and it certainly wasn’t front page web news. Crap utter crap from the BBC.
This was Eddie Mair’s trail for PM after Law in Action at 4.30pm:
“What goes on behind closed doors at Guantanamo Bay? We’ve had the view of the American military, which you might consider to be partisan. We’ve heard the views of former detainees and their legal representatives, which again you might consider to be partisan. What we haven’t had before is footage, recorded inside the camp, showing the questioning of a detainee. Well, until now. Join me at five o’clock when you can hear the recording and the PM interview with the detainee’s lawyer.”
The spin is clear – we at PM have something which is not partisan, something with which you cannot possibly argue! And to prove it, we’ve got an interview with… the detainee’s lawyer?
Bullshit Eddie Mair, bullshit PM and bullshit the BBC.
“But I have two humble requests for any journalist who wants to pontificate about terrorists and international laws of war.
Make your first stop this collection of pictures. Then read about the lives of these people who died as the pictures were shot. If that’s not graphic enough to sate you, you can see terrorists in Iraq beheading a prisoner here. And if you think your status as an impartial “citizen of the world” will save your captured ass, click here for a graphic reminder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl.
I mean, if you’re going to defend these monsters, it’s only fair that you check out what it is you are defending. A long look in a mirror to determine what you have become in the name of an agenda is also recommended, but not required.
Secondly, do your goddamned homework and read the damned treaties rather than what Amnesty International, MoveOn or other advocacy groups feed you. If you’re too busy to take the time to know what you’re talking about, then write about something else.
Or just shut up. That’s just as good.”
http://www.rathergate.com/?p=880
Good advice for BBC “journalists”.
DB,
Yes – Mair was outrageous.
So Mair was supposed to bring “balance” to the article – he let the defence lawyer talk without any interuption whatsoever. I had a feeling that the other side of the story was never going to be heard. I was right.
The photo the BBC used
The photo the BBC didn’t use (via Gateway Pundit)
Excellent catch there DB – the BBC – you KNOW you can trust them.
Bloody hell with all the other things happening in the world at the moment.
The BBC have to lead with a terrorist being mildly scolded…
I wonder how the BBC made their decision on which photo to use.
Let’s review:
1)We have a MUSLIM JIHADIST MURDERER.
2)He killed an American soldier.
3)We have video of his detention.
4)Nothing in the video shows any disrespect or maltreatment.
5)Did I mention this MUZSLIME killed an American soldier?
6)He is still alive and has all of his limbs and his tongue.
7)He isn’t being beaten.
8)Did I mention he’s a murdering piece of shit MUDSLIME who killed an American soldier?
Now which picture to use?
The one the accurately portrays who this bag of dog shit is, or a nice picture of a kind little boy.
Fuck you BBC.
Yet again the BBC 10PM news runs the story of the two old farts and their Reggie Perin caper as the top story.
Does anyone think if inflation had fallent to 2% today that they would have had the same top story?
gus: Like I said. They should have popped the little shit.
it seems the anti amreican, western imperialist civilsation is now so far advanced that they are unable to understand that their propaganda even in drama series such as bone kickers, spooks etc is having the REVERSE effect of their intended brainwashing.
Ordinary viewers will react with ‘that’s bloody rubbish’ and as a consequence of the BBC’s moral inversions become more pro American and pro Israeli.
gus wrote: Let’s face it ladies and gentlemen, liberals are sissies. They live in a pretend world, a world in which they are guaranteed safety and a pay check.
And what a pay check. The BBC is awash with “Head of…” fill in the blanks. As head, they are on £200k -500k salaries, and many are retiring on £200k pensions per year. All this on the backs of the taxpayer. The worst thing is that the BBC brass is mediocre as well as Lib-Marxist to the last, but happily feed at the capitalist trough.
I am not a subscriber to the we are better than them theory so we must not do x and y.we are better than the islamo nazis in so many ways we have nothing to prove…they just need to die and the world is a better place.Supporters of these savages as in those that populate organisations such as the beeb need to line up with them and die in support of their equaly valuable social customs..sod em all.
Thud, the “we are better than them theory” is for panty waists.
If we were not “better than them”, this 16 year old Islamofascist would be shown gurgling as his mother fu#$ing head was sawed off by the United States Marines.
The “we are better than them” theory is just another occasion for pussies to wring their hands without having to get them dirty.
We are the U.K. and the United States of America. We are better than anyone else. Liberals HATE what I just typed. But then again, liberals AREN’T much better than them.
Liberals are part and parcel of genocide on a dialy basis. Both by their acquiesence to terror, and by their support of infanticide.
If it’s EASY, liberals do it.
‘Liberals are part and parcel of genocide on a dialy[sic] basis.’
Right. Do you not think this is going a tiny bit far?
First Steve, I notice you use the (sic) vis a vis an obvious typo.
Why?
I know why. You disagree with my conservative nature, and can’t help yourself. You need to try to assert some sort of superiority. That is sad and weak.
Second, abortions happen in the THOUSANDS every single day in the U.K and U.S.A. That is a fact. Not an opinion.
Unless you are bereft of any moral character or bereft of any honesty, you would recognize the legal genocide that occurs “on a daily basis”.
Steve, like most liberals, you do not address an issue in a head-on honest fashion. Why are you liberals such sissies?
I know why. Because you are aware that your positions are immoral. You seek to rhetorically argue and rationalize that which you know is wrong.
Gus,
You are correct in your assertion that the socialist/left are guilty of the mass murder of millions of children on the alter on ‘personal freedom/rights’! The leftists have reduced what should have been the highest and most important and sacred act(the creation of life) into a grubby quick and cheap thrill! The leftists/socialists have put the cheap thrill of cheap sex on the same level as dogs in the street and then they seem to scratch their ignorant heads and wonder why the fabric of society is breaking down!
Cassandra, God bless you, and I agree.
Unfortunately, the LEFT has used all of it’s collective intelligence and a-moral rationalization to create a litany of fabricated reasons to support baby killing.
I’ve seen dozens of illogical/immoral arguments from the left.
My disgust is not in the debate, it is in the left’s unwillingness to debate openly and honestly.
They know they are wrong, but the NEED to win an argument that is unwinnable….SO THE PREVARICATE and PARSE. The debate becomes a typical liberal debate. Deflect, dodge, divert, change the subject, then turn the moral issue on you.
To the liberal…having a “RIGHT”, is far more important than doing “right”.
Take for example the lefts moronic, immoral, unpatriotic and childish need to protect ISLAMOFASCISTS and more specifically GITMO detainees.
The LIB, like an American lawyer (ambulance chaser John Edwards comes to mind) believes that the GUILTY need to be protected.
They’ve lost sight of WHY the presumption of innocence exists. They don’t care about GUILT nor INNOCENCE. They feel morally superior to YOU. The person that they KNOW TO BE GUILTY deserves a lawyer. I AGREE. But the lawyer doesn’t need to be ME nor YOU, and the lawyer does not need to be DISHONEST nor does the lawyer have an obligation to try to get a guilty person off. Libs will NEVER understand that principle.
But in saying that I make my point.
Theory TRUMPS reality to LIBS.
Libs SUCK at reality, so they become contrarians.
Lt.C. Ralph Peters on Omar Khadr Gitmo Tape: “We should have killed that punk on a battlefield where it was legal to do so!”
Watch video at http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/2008/07/ltc-ralph-peters-on-omar-khadr-gitmo.html
In an Al-BBC Middle East story headed
“Israel and Hezbollah set for swap”
the hacks at Al-Beeb describe the ongoing exchange of live Hezbollah prisoners for dead Israeli soldiers. No comment from Al-BBc on why the Israelis always seem to let their prisoners live while the islamofascist always kill Israeli prisoners. But note the comment on the “big fish” the Israelis are releasing..
“The Lebanese prisoners being freed include Samir Qantar, in jail since 1979 for a deadly guerrilla raid in which he killed three Israelis, including a child.”
You have to admire the way Al-Beeb describes it as a “guerrilla raid” and the way they tack on “including a child” . Wonder why the Korporation hacks didn’t give the details of this “guerrilla raid” ? Perhaps the fact that Qantar caved in the head of a four-year old girl with his rifle butt doesn’t fit Al-BBC’s portrayal as islamofascist scum as “victims of the nasty Jews”.
Ditto, previous topic.
Muslims Against Sharia: I’ve seen Col. Peters on Fox News last night. Couldn’t agree with him more on that.
I sincerely hope you’ll be successful with your reformation attempts, by the way. What you’re doing is very courageous and should be supported by every freedom loving person.
Terry Johnson:
Watched the Gitmo video – what a joke ! I was worse treated then that when I was “interviewed” by the Old Bill as a teenager.
Ditto Terry. And not even the cops. Not my finest hour BUT…
As a stupid youth I devised this foolproof plan to reduce my British rail season ticket price. After about a week I was collared by 2 BR ticket inspectors at a station, asked to get off the train, and then taken into a room at the station and brow-beaten into I “confessed” at diddling BR out of the full fare.
But hey, at least I didn’t murder someone, right?
Yes interesting that the Jew hating BBC didn’t mention that the two israeli soldiers were originally alive, then killed. but they’re only Jews so who cares?
Is it true the BBC has a Muslim prayer room at Television centre?
The Beeboids certainly played up this “interrogation” as being a really big thing, unseen footage etc etc.
What a let down. All I saw was a whiny little fuck being very politely asked questions whilst sat at a table. How would the BBC like him to be questioned? Maybe the Americans should have rounded up 72 virgins first, to give the little shit a taste of heaven on earth?
My grandfather served in North Africa in World War Two. If a German had done what this little bastard did, they’d have left him to drown in his own blood, not being worth another bullet. That’s what happens in war, you have to kill your enemies before they kill you. Anything else is nonsense.
I am not normally a softie when it comes to how hard a line to take against jihadists, but I think many of you are going over the top.
Bear in mind the following:
This guy was a fifteen year old kid when arrested.
His original interrogator has since been charged and convicted by the US authorities with serious crimes against suspects.
There is no evidence of a kind that would stand up in court that he ever threw the hand grenade – and the sole eye- witness statement says that he didn’t.
Even if he did – he could reasonably claim self-defence on the grounds that the compound he was in had been strafed, bombed and attacked by more than a hundred soldiers.
When arrested he seemed to have only the vaguest idea why the Americans were in Afghanistan – he’d merely been told that the US had ‘declared war on Islam’.
He could genuinely have been simply doing what his father told him to do.
I am not suggesting they release him – sadly he’s probably more ‘radicalized’ and Islamist now than then. But my idea of defending Western values doesn’t include killing or maltreating children.
The fact is this kid doesn’t qualify for the protections afforded by the Geneva Conventions but, hey, we treat him decently anyway. Not that that stops Liberals expressing synthetic outrage – it makes them feel good about themselves.
PaulS,
“Im not normally a softie when it comes to Jihadists” Oh right, so why is your post one long handwringing excuse for the terrorist then? You wouldnt be his social worker would you? Hmmm! Why did you ‘forget’ to include any information that would detract from his leftist induced victim status? Perhaps you think that the Canadian/American security services just love abusing innocent children ‘jus fer the fun of it’? Perhaps your view of this poor innocent(in your mind)abused child is tainted by your obvious(to all) hatred of the Western struggle against the Islamists? Come on PaulS, tell us your real position, why try to put up a fake front in your very first sentence?
Cassandra
“innocent(in your mind)abused child”
The kid clearly has been abused by the Islamofascists who filled his head with their hatreds. Unfortunately the BBC gives that sort of child abuse a free pass.
Just a further note to PaulS,
“bear in mind the guy was only fifteen when arrested” A fifteen year old Jihadist can kill you and chop your head off just as well as twenty year old!
Ooooh shock horror! was he just playing with his toys when the warmongers(US army) just grabbed him at random?
Can we have a few real facts about the arrest and not just your starry eyed and cut version?
Our security services no only have to fight the Jihadist propagandists they also have to fight against their useful idiot infidel appologists.
PaulS | 16.07.08 – 2:58 pm |
I am not normally a softie when it comes to how hard a line to take against jihadists, but I think many of you are going over the top.
Bear in mind the following:
This guy was a fifteen year old kid when arrested.
So are any number of violent gangbangers in New York, LA, Sao Paolo, etc. This is someone who is a trained killer, remember, and had been living and working in that environment for years. This is not your average teen, and it’s irresponsible to pretend that he is.
His original interrogator has since been charged and convicted by the US authorities with serious crimes against suspects.
Irrelevant. Saying “serious crimes” is cute, but there was no actual torture. And you have no proof that this interrogator did anything to this kid.
There is no evidence of a kind that would stand up in court that he ever threw the hand grenade – and the sole eye- witness statement says that he didn’t.
Even if he did – he could reasonably claim self-defence on the grounds that the compound he was in had been strafed, bombed and attacked by more than a hundred soldiers.
Completely wrong. This was a battlefield, the kid was involved in the battle. Even if he didn’t throw that particular grenade, you cannot seriously be saying that we should just let everybody go at the end of every battle? Or is your contention we can only “arrest” someone involved in a military battle if enough credible eyewitnesses see them use a weapon? Is that really what you’re saying?
And….”self defense”? Seriously? When he’s a member of the opposing forces? This wasn’t a wrong-address police raid, for heaven’s sake. You seem to be viewing this entire issue in a false context.
When arrested he seemed to have only the vaguest idea why the Americans were in Afghanistan – he’d merely been told that the US had ‘declared war on Islam’.
He could genuinely have been simply doing what his father told him to do.
Which is probably the same as most of these cavemen. It’s a bit silly to ascribe modern, rational, informed thought to people like this.
I am not suggesting they release him – sadly he’s probably more ‘radicalized’ and Islamist now than then. But my idea of defending Western values doesn’t include killing or maltreating children.
Only a tiny minority here (one person?) has called for just killing the kid, and the rest of us have not been calling for torture or beatings or anything of the sort. You are slandering all of us when you say “many of you are going over the top”. To the contrary, we are saying that any “outcry” over his mistreatment is making a mountain out of a molehill.
The kid is not being tortured or mistreated. From the looks of things he has been treated about the same as most teenage gangsters are treated by US police after being arrested for murder and violence. Which is about right, because that’s what he is.
15 or not I’d still prefer him dead…colour me savage!
PaulS: There is a difference between a battlefield and peacetime operations by the Police.
Soldiers are not under any orders to force an enemy to surrender first, although in this case they did try, which is to their credit I guess.
Personally I think western soldiers are being made to fight with one hand tied behind their back (re the inquest into one of the British soldiers killed in Afghanistan where the air support refused to open fire because of their rules of engagement)
I sometimes wonder how many soldiers would be facing ‘criminal trials’ from WW2 if the modern day left wing “uman rites” lawyers had their way?
That fact this little shit was 15 makes no difference. Are you telling me if a 15 year old were pointing a gun at you, YOU wouldn’t shoot him to prevent him killing you? Oh and how many parents would take their child into a battle zone?
If you want to play with the big boys, you must expect to get hurt.
There is no difference between this 15 year old and these
“In February 1945, project Werewolf began, training German children as spies and saboteurs, intending to send them behind Allied lines with explosives and arsenic. But most of these would-be saboteurs were quickly captured or killed by the Allies as they advanced into the Reich. ”
http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/hitleryouth/hj-boy-soldiers.htm
Maybe there is an argument that these “kids” have been indoctinated – but it does not make them less deadly.
“The kid is not being tortured or mistreated.”
The kid was treated by US medics on the ground which probably saved his life in that environment.
So now he is using those very same scars to say they are evidence of ‘torture’.
And the BBC laps it up.
Because we know who the enemy is here, don’t we?
David Preiser (USA) | 16.07.08 – 5:03 pm
This is someone who is a trained killer, remember.
The US government alleges that he had 4 weeks of basic firearms training, beginning around seven weeks before he was arrested and possibly some training in landmines. He disputes this, saying he just had very basic instruction in firearms • as all Afghan kids do. As a fifteen year old kid I got firearms instruction in my school cadet corps, but any real soldier would have rightly laughed if I represented myself as ‘a trained killer’.
This was a battlefield, the kid was involved in the battle….This wasn’t a wrong-address police raid..
It wasn’t a battlefield. It was very like a right-address police raid.
This was in July 2002 • long after the initial fighting in Afghanistan was over. There was, for instance only one US serviceman killed by Taleban/Terrorist action in the four months before the incident where Khadr was arrested. No intensive fighting was going on in the area.
What happened that day was that US special forces unit got a tip-off that an Al Qaeda-linked satphone had been detected in use 300 metres from a property they were visiting.
They went to a farm compound nearby and asked to search the property, whereupon a group of 4 or 5 gunmen opened fire on them from the farmhouse.
The commander called in reinforcements and an airstrike by two A-10’s which strafed the farm with canon and dropped two bombs, whereafter they assaulted the compound with a force of one hundred men.
Khadr was found in the rubble away from the main house. A woman and a baby were also in the farm when the shooting started but ran to safety.
At least one of the original terrorist gunmen survived the airstrike and, according to the US soldier who killed him, was the one who threw the grenade that killed a US soldier.
So the actual context was much more like a police raid than a battlefield scenario.
His original interrogator has since been charged and convicted by the US authorities with serious crimes against suspects……Irrelevant.
It’s relevant because Khadr is due to face trial for murder in a US military court. If his interrogator has been found to have broken the rules any evidence extracted by him could be tainted so far as the legal process is concerned.
Only a tiny minority here (one person?) has called for just killing the kid, and the rest of us have not been calling for torture or beatings or anything of the sort. You are slandering all of us when you say “many of you are going over the top”.
“They shouldn’t be taking prisoners on the battlefield. Pop em and move on.”
“If the kid had been a Brit caught by the Taliban he’d have had a car battery wired up to his hairless balls by now. He should be grateful”
“I personally prefer the Jack Bauer (24) treatment of terrorists… you get my drift.”
“Did I mention he’s a murdering piece of MUDSLIME..?”
“they just need to die and the world is a better place.”
“Lt.C. Ralph Peters on Omar Khadr Gitmo Tape: “We should have killed that punk on a battlefield where it was legal to do so!”
Watch video at…….”
“I’ve seen Col. Peters on Fox News last night. Couldn’t agree with him more on that.”
“Maybe the Americans should have rounded up 72 virgins first, to give the little shit a taste of heaven on earth?
My grandfather served in North Africa in World War Two. If a German had done what this little bastard did, they’d have left him to drown in his own blood”
PaulS: Are you suggesting France wsa not a battlefield in 1944?
Anyone with a gun or a grenade is a potential killer. He had already killed.
Since when did the fighting in Afghanistan finish? I must have missed that in the news.
Listen, it’s dead easy. If you take up arms against an opponent, you must accept the concequences. Age is not relevant.
Muslims have a history of using small children to plant suicide bombs. Perhpas you missed that one as well?
Don’t they have televsion sets in Hampstead?
Perhaps you should join the Army for a few years?
Or do you support the Taleban?
PaulS,
It doesn’t matter when this took place. A military action during a long conflict is what it is.
And I said “wrong-address police raid”, didn’t I? So your contention that this was very much like a police raid doesn’t actually address my point. If an innocent person is woken up in the middle of the night by policemen who got the wrong address, in the confusion that innocent person can very reasonably act in self defense. That’s not at all what happened here.
People with less training than this kid are considered soldiers in conflicts the world over. The thing is, the US troops didn’t leave him to die. He was taken out and given medical treatment, and seems to be quite healthy, just like all those others who gained weight and improved their nourishment in Guantanamo.
Lastly, all those quotes you’ve got are about preferring that someone died in battle. During battle. If someone is armed in the middle of a battle, they are in it, full stop, regardless of age. And please, I’m not talking about small children. Nobody is saying we should kill children. He was an enemy soldier, and all those calls for blood were meant in that sense. It’s not pretty, but that’s what it is. A bit different from your mischaracterization, though. It seemed as if you were saying that people here were calling for him to be tortured and killed now, while in custody.