October, 15 2010, 12:22pm EDT

US: End Military Commission Trial of Former Child Soldier
NEW YORK
The US government should stop the Guantanamo military commission trial of Omar Khadr,
a former child soldier captured when he was 15, Human Rights Watch said
today. According to news reports, US military prosecutors are currently
in talks with Khadr's defense counsel regarding a plea agreement before
trial proceedings resume on October 25, 2010.
Khadr, a Canadian citizen, has spent more than eight years in US
military custody. He faces charges of murder and attempted murder in
violation of the laws of war, conspiracy, providing material support for
terrorism, and spying.
"Omar Khadr was picked up at age 15 and has now spent a third of his life at Guantanamo,"
said Andrea Prasow, senior counterterrorism counsel at Human Rights
Watch. "The US government has mistreated Khadr as a child offender and
now is misusing discredited military commissions to try him."
Khadr's military commission trial began in August, but was delayed
when his military lawyer, US Army Lt. Col. Jon Jackson, collapsed in
court while cross-examining a witness. The trial was scheduled to resume
on October 18, but recent news reports indicate that the two sides are
negotiating a plea deal. On October 14, the military judge issued an
order delaying the trial until October 25.
If a plea deal is reached, a sentencing hearing would still take
place and the military jury would still decide upon a sentence. That
sentence would only be imposed on Khadr if it was lower than the
sentence under the plea agreement.
US forces captured Khadr, who is now 24, on July 27, 2002, after a
firefight in Afghanistan in which Khadr is alleged to have thrown the
grenade that killed US Army Sgt. 1st Class Christopher Speer and injured
other US soldiers. Khadr was seriously injured during the firefight and
taken to Bagram Air base in Afghanistan.
While detained at Bagram he was forced into painful stress positions,
threatened with rape, hooded, and confronted with barking dogs. The
government's own witnesses confirmed some of this treatment when they
testified that Khadr was interrogated while strapped down on a stretcher
just 12 hours after sustaining his life-threatening injuries. They also
testified that he was threatened with rape if he did not cooperate.
In October 2002 Khadr was transferred to Guantanamo where the abuse
continued. He told his lawyers that he was shackled in painful
positions, told he would be sent to Egypt, Syria, or Jordan for torture,
and used as a "human mop" after he urinated on the floor during one
interrogation session. He was deprived of all access to legal counsel
until November 2004, more than two years after he was first detained.
The military judge assigned to his case, Army Col. Patrick Parrish,
ruled that despite the ill-treatment, all statements made by Khadr could
be used as evidence against him.
"Any decision rendered by the fundamentally flawed military
commissions will be subject to legal challenges for years to come,"
Prasow said. "If the US is serious about its international legal
commitments, it will stop this trial before it becomes an even bigger
embarrassment."
Human Rights Watch will send observers to the Khadr proceedings, as
it has with most military commission proceedings and selected federal
court trials.
Concerns about the fairness of prior Khadr proceedings were
heightened by the apparent withholding of important evidence from the
defense during pretrial hearings. The prosecution had initially claimed
Khadr was the only insurgent alive and in the vicinity at the time the
grenade was thrown. However, a document released inadvertently in
February 2008 revealed that two versions of the Khadr incident report
existed, one stating the insurgent who threw the grenade had been killed
- and thus could not have been Khadr - and another indicating that he
was still alive.
While child offenders may be prosecuted for war crimes, the US has
failed throughout Khadr's detention to afford him the protections
provided to children under international law. The US government has
refused to acknowledge Khadr's status as a child at the time of the
alleged offense or to apply universally recognized standards of juvenile
justice in his case. International law requires that certain procedural
protections be followed when prosecuting child offenders and that
rehabilitation and reintegration be primary considerations. No
international court or Western country has prosecuted a child offender
for alleged war crimes in decades.
Under the Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the
Child on the Involvement of Children in Armed Conflict (Optional
Protocol), which the United States ratified in 2002, the US is obligated
to recognize the special situation of children who have been recruited
or used in armed conflict. The Optional Protocol requires the
rehabilitation of former child soldiers within a state party's
jurisdiction, mandating that states provide "all appropriate assistance
for their physical and psychological recovery and their social
reintegration."
Referring to the Khadr case and others, the United Nations committee
that monitors the rights of children found that the United States has
held alleged child soldiers at Guantanamo without giving due account of
their status as children. It also emphasized that "criminal proceedings
against children within the military justice system should be avoided."
"Any plea deal with Khadr needs to fully recognize his status as a
child offender, making his rehabilitation top priority," Prasow said.
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
LATEST NEWS
Billionaire Palantir Co-Founder Pushes Return of Public Hangings as Part of 'Masculine Leadership' Initiative
"Immaturity masquerading as strength is the defining personal characteristic of our age," said one critic in response.
Dec 07, 2025
Venture capitalist Joe Lonsdale, a co-founder of data platform company Palantir, is calling for the return of public hangings as part of a broader push to restore what he describes as "masculine leadership" to the US.
In a statement posted on X Friday, Lonsdale said that he supported changing the so-called "three strikes" anti-crime law to ensure that anyone who is convicted of three violent crimes gets publicly executed, rather than simply sent to prison for life.
"If I’m in charge later, we won’t just have a three strikes law," he wrote. "We will quickly try and hang men after three violent crimes. And yes, we will do it in public to deter others."
Lonsdale then added that "our society needs balance," and said that "it's time to bring back masculine leadership to protect our most vulnerable."
Lonsdale's views on public hangings being necessary to restore "masculine leadership" drew swift criticism.
Gil Durán, a journalist who documents the increasingly authoritarian politics of Silicon Valley in his newsletter "The Nerd Reich," argued in a Saturday post that Lonsdale's call for public hangings showed that US tech elites are "entering a more dangerous and desperate phase of radicalization."
"For months, Peter Thiel guru Curtis Yarvin has been squawking about the need for more severe measures to cement Trump's authoritarian rule," Durán explained. "Peter Thiel is ranting about the Antichrist in a global tour. And now Lonsdale—a Thiel protégé—is fantasizing about a future in which he will have the power to unleash state violence at mass scale."
Taulby Edmondson, an adjunct professor of history, religion, and culture at Virginia Tech, wrote in a post on Bluesky that the rhetoric Lonsdale uses to justify the return of public hangings has even darker intonations than calls for state-backed violence.
"A point of nuance here: 'masculine leadership to protect our most vulnerable' is how lynch mobs are described, not state-sanctioned executions," he observed.
Theoretical physicist Sean Carroll argued that Lonsdale's remarks were symbolic of a kind of performative masculinity that has infected US culture.
"Immaturity masquerading as strength is the defining personal characteristic of our age," he wrote.
Tech entrepreneur Anil Dash warned Lonsdale that his call for public hangings could have unintended consequences for members of the Silicon Valley elite.
"Well, Joe, Mark Zuckerberg has sole control over Facebook, which directly enabled the Rohingya genocide," he wrote. "So let’s have the conversation."
And Columbia Journalism School professor Bill Grueskin noted that Lonsdale has been a major backer of the University of Austin, an unaccredited liberal arts college that has been pitched as an alternative to left-wing university education with the goal of preparing "thoughtful and ethical innovators, builders, leaders, public servants and citizens through open inquiry and civil discourse."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Hegseth Defends Boat Bombings as New Details Further Undermine Administration's Justifications
The boat targeted in the infamous September 2 "double-tap" strike was not even headed for the US, Adm. Frank Bradley revealed to lawmakers.
Dec 07, 2025
US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Saturday defended the Trump administration's policy of bombing suspected drug-trafficking vessels even as new details further undermined the administration's stated justifications for the policy.
According to the Guardian, Hegseth told a gathering at the Ronald Reagan presidential library that the boat bombings, which so far have killed at least 87 people, are necessary to protect Americans from illegal drugs being shipped to the US.
"If you’re working for a designated terrorist organization and you bring drugs to this country in a boat, we will find you and we will sink you," Hegseth said. "Let there be no doubt about it."
However, leaked details about a classified briefing delivered to lawmakers last week by Adm. Frank Bradley about a September 2 boat strike cast new doubts on Hegseth's justifications.
CNN reported on Friday that Bradley told lawmakers that the boat taken out by the September 2 attack was not even headed toward the US, but was going "to link up with another, larger vessel that was bound for Suriname," a small nation in the northeast of South America.
While Bradley acknowledged that the boat was not heading toward the US, he told lawmakers that the strike on it was justified because the drugs it was carrying could have theoretically wound up in the US at some point.
Additionally, NBC News reported on Saturday that Bradley told lawmakers that Hegseth had ordered all 11 men who were on the boat targeted by the September 2 strike to be killed because "they were on an internal list of narco-terrorists who US intelligence and military officials determined could be lethally targeted."
This is relevant because the US military launched a second strike during the September 2 operation to kill two men who had survived the initial strike on their vessel, which many legal experts consider to be either a war crime or an act of murder under domestic law.
Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, watched video of the September 2 double-tap attack last week, and he described the footage as “one of the most troubling things I’ve seen in my time in public service.”
“Any American who sees the video that I saw will see its military attacking shipwrecked sailors,” Himes explained. “Now, there’s a whole set of contextual items that the admiral explained. Yes, they were carrying drugs. They were not in position to continue their mission in any way... People will someday see this video and they will see that that video shows, if you don’t have the broader context, an attack on shipwrecked sailors.”
While there has been much discussion about the legality of the September 2 double-tap strike in recent days, some critics have warned that fixating on this particular aspect of the administration's policy risks taking the focus off the illegality of the boat-bombing campaign as a whole.
Daphne Eviatar, director for security and human rights for Amnesty International USA, said on Friday that the entire boat-bombing campaign has been "illegal under both domestic and international law."
"All of them constitute murder because none of the victims, whether or not they were smuggling illegal narcotics, posed an imminent threat to life," she said. "Congress must take action now to stop the US military from murdering more people in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Leaked Memo Shows Pam Bondi Wants List of 'Domestic Terrorism' Groups Who Express 'Anti-American Sentiment'
"Millions of Americans like you and I could be the target," warned journalist Ken Klippenstein of the new memo.
Dec 07, 2025
A leaked memo written by US Attorney General Pam Bondi directs the Department of Justice to compile a list of potential "domestic terrorism" organizations that espouse "extreme viewpoints on immigration, radical gender ideology, and anti-American sentiment."
The memo, which was obtained by journalist Ken Klippenstein, expands upon National Security Presidential Memorandum-7 (NSPM-7), a directive signed by President Donald Trump in late September that demanded a "national strategy to investigate and disrupt networks, entities, and organizations that foment political violence so that law enforcement can intervene in criminal conspiracies before they result in violent political acts."
The new Bondi memo instructs law enforcement agencies to refer "suspected" domestic terrorism cases to the Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs), which will then undertake an "exhaustive investigation contemplated by NSPM-7" that will incorporate "a focused strategy to root out all culpable participants—including organizers and funders—in all domestic terrorism activities."
The memo identifies the "domestic terrorism threat" as organizations that use "violence or the threat of violence" to advance political goals such as "opposition to law and immigration enforcement; extreme views in favor of mass migration and open borders; adherence to radical gender ideology, anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, or anti-Christianity; support for the overthrow of the United States Government; hostility towards traditional views on family, religion, and morality."
Commenting on the significance of the memo, Klippenstein criticized mainstream media organizations for largely ignoring the implications of NSPM-7, which was drafted and signed in the wake of the murder of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk.
"For months, major media outlets have largely blown off the story of NSPM-7, thinking it was all just Trump bluster and too crazy to be serious," he wrote. "But a memo like this one shows you that the administration is absolutely taking this seriously—even if the media are not—and is actively working to operationalize NSPM-7."
Klippenstein also warned that NSPM-7 appeared to be the start of a new "war on terrorism," but "only this time, millions of Americans like you and I could be the target."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular


