Miranda Rights For Gitmo Terrorists?


Canadian Guantanamo detainee wins court battle

Omar Khadr

* The youngest member of Canada’s most notorious terrorist clan is becoming a celebrity:

*    “A prisoner of war is a man who tries to kill you and fails, and then asks you not to kill him” 

Winston Churchill 

A Canadian detainee at Guantanamo Bay has won the right to use interrogation transcripts to help him prepare for his trial before a military commission.

Omar Khadr is accused of murdering an American soldier in Afghanistan in 2002.

In a unanimous ruling, the Canadian High Court said Khadr has a constitutional right to transcripts of interviews that Canadian foreign affairs and security agents conducted with him during his detention at Guantanamo Bay.

But the court rejected demands for additional documents that Canadian authorities may have dealing with other parts of the case.

The court ruled that information can be withheld because of national security.

Defence lawyers say the ruling falls far short of what they had hoped for, but they say it confirms that Guantanamo Bay is contrary to US domestic laws and violates obligations to protect fundamental human rights.

Khadr was 15 at the time of his capture in Afghanistan.

ABC News

* The Khadrs, Canada’s First Family of Terrorism, in the News

* Sudanese terror suspect charged at Guantanamo Bay

* Agent: FBI Can’t Protect United States From Terror

3 thoughts on “Miranda Rights For Gitmo Terrorists?”

  1. Everyone deserves human rights, whatever they have done. You are arguing that they are removed? That in itself would erode the “free society” which we live in today in the west. That is not a place I would like to live in, ironically that would take us a step towards an islamic state where human rights are not equal for all people. (referring to men and women, believers and non believers).

    At the moment they violate their human rights overseas, probably torchoring them to get the ‘evidence’ they want, then take them to court. That is not something which is constitutional or morally acceptable.

  2. Dear Josh,

    I beg to differ.

    No Islamic nation has ever signed up to the universal declaration of human rights. Instead they have concocted the ‘Cairo declaration of human rights’ which would subject humanity to Islamic law, the sharia. In other words, Muslims do not accept Western style human rights laws, except when it seems advantageous to them.

    As for Gitmo inmates, they are not citizens and violated every statute of the Geneva convention, including hiding behind women and children from which they launched their attacks. Ironically, many of their own countries do not want them back, or would execute them upon arrival, that’s why the US is stuck with them.

    A million things could be said about their status, but when dealing with jihadists we must keep in mind that they don’t have our morals, they do engage in real torture, not in the hyped up water-boarding supervised by military medics which was only used in 3 cases.

    You would be well advised to direct your anger towards what Muslims do, rather then fall for the totally overblown leftist propaganda against the US.

  3. This situation begs the question…at what point does a human, who ceases to act, think or respond to it’s natural place in a society, who in point ceases to be human in thought, word and deed, still deserve the Rights of a human?

    Miranda rights for Jihadists is an oxymoron of politics…one among millions in the culture of America.

Comments are closed.