Aung San Suu Kyi, Omar Khadr, and Barack Obama

A Dreadful Tale of What America Has Become

During his trip to Asia, President Obama called for the government of Burma to release Aung San Suu Kyi, a noted dissident who has spent years under house arrest.

It made headlines, a fact which tells us more about the role of media as an outlet for government press releases than in communicating genuine news.

Obama’s was hardly a brave or innovative act when you consider that it is a universally-condemned military junta keeping Aung San Suu Kyi penned up.

But when you appreciate the full context of Obama’s call, you may agree with me that it was more a cowardly act than anything else.

A year ago, after eight years of mind-numbing stupidity, countless public lies and bloody war crimes, Obama’s arrival on the American political scene thrilled the world. His intelligence, his grace, and his sense of decency were striking. His like as an American politician, quite apart from his race, had not been seen in the lifetime of many.

But the hopes raised by Obama, like so many flickering little candles in a fierce wind, already are largely extinguished. This polished, educated, liberal-minded and decent man, after only one year in office, has been overwhelmed by America’s military-industrial complex, a terrible machine which grinds on night and day, chewing people in its gears, no matter who is elected ostensibly to be in charge of it.

Much as I resent Burma’s treatment of Aung San Suu Kyi, it shines as genuinely humane compared to America’s treatment of Omar Khadr.

The key facts in the case of this young man, a prisoner at Guantanamo, are easily told.

Omar Khadr was born to a fundamentalist Muslim, highly political family whose father knew and died fighting for Osama bin Laden. In an era whose ruling myths are a clash of civilizations and a war on terror, Omar would seem to have been doomed from birth.

Under intense pressure from his family, fifteen-year old Omar went to fight in Afghanistan when America invaded it. In doing that, he was doing nothing that tens of thousands of Americans hadn’t done, both as idealists for causes and as soldiers of fortune in countless wars from the Spanish Civil War to the Cuban Revolution or the turmoil of the Congo.

Omar’s experience reminded me a little of American Ron Kovic’s Born on the Fourth of July, a story where the need for maternal approval helped drive his destructive participation in America’s Vietnam holocaust (three million Vietnamese slaughtered, many hideously with napalm, and the legacy of soil saturated with Agent Orange and littered with millions of landmines more than justifies that term).

The American claim against Omar is that he shot an American soldier, a medic no less, a fact seemingly almost designed to increase his infamy.

The story, as I heard it in an interview a few years ago with an American soldier, a friend of the dead medic’s, was that after a small firefight, Omar hid himself, then leapt up, heartlessly killing the medic whose only interest was the wounded. Omar was then captured and eventually sent to Guantanamo.

Even were that story true, and it is not, there would still be no excuse for sending a fifteen-year old child to Guantanamo. That act violated all international conventions on the treatment of child soldiers, but then almost everything America has done over the last eight years has violated international conventions, international laws, common decency, and the spirit of its own Bill of Rights.

For years, Omar, like hundreds of inmates at Guantanamo, was held incommunicado: he was allowed no contact with his family, he was allowed no visits from the International Red Cross (again in contravention to international conventions) and he was allowed no legal counsel. Omar was allowed no rights of any kind: being kept shackled in a secret prison ninety miles offshore was considered adequate to efface the entire spirit and meaning of America’s own rights and laws.

We now know that the soldiers who captured Omar, in fact, shot him twice in the back as the frightened boy tried to run. Despite life-threatening wounds and his young age, Omar was consigned to years of imprisonment and torture at Guantanamo. Indeed, his worst torturer, a soldier with a reputation at Guantanamo as perhaps its most vicious interrogator, deliberately contrived his sessions with Omar so that the boy had to sit in a position which pulled at his slowly-healing and painful wounds.

We also know now, evidence having just been published in Canadian newspapers, that Omar could not possibly have killed the medic: Omar was photographed hiding under a pile of rubble as the soldiers passed.

So who killed the medic? One perhaps should recall the case of Pat Tillman, an American football player killed by his own forces in Afghanistan, a case at first covered up the military, but even now full of unanswered questions.

And why did the Americans shoot Omar, twice, in the back? One simply cannot avoid the suggestion that the American soldiers involved acted with cowardice and savagery.

Some readers may object that American soldiers are incapable of such behaviour, but let’s go back to that time in Afghanistan, reviewing some things we now know as facts, and think about what they suggest about the ethos prevailing there when a fifteen-year old was shot in the back and sent to be tortured.

America’s carpet bombing in Afghanistan was destructive beyond anything Americans have ever been told. Just as was the case in the First Gulf War when uncounted tens of thousands of poor Iraqi recruits were bulldozed into the desert after having been literally pulped into tailing ponds of human bits and fluids by B-52s, the true horror of what massive bombing did in Afghanistan was understandably not well advertised..

The public has been led to believe that, compared to the horrors inflicted upon Iraq, the invasion of Afghanistan was almost bloodless. But I learned recently from an expert journalist — an American no less — with many years of experience in that country that a great deal of blood was shed. In Kabul alone, fifty to sixty thousand Afghans died in America’s brutal bombing and artillery cover for its Northern Alliance proxy army, itself a gang of thugs many of whom are not one wit more ethical or civilized than the Taleban.

We knew too, those who cared to search, of the brutal tactics of American special forces in the mountains after the initial “victory”: tales of heavily-armed goons marching into remote towns, throwing stun grenades, breaking down the doors of homes, holding women and children at gunpoint while their male family members were marched away with no explanation. The men were often kept for considerable periods to be “questioned.”

At the least suspicion, air strikes were called in, and in dozens and dozens of cases, those air strikes wiped out whole families or groups of villagers who had done nothing to oppose Americans. They were the victims, thousands of them, of young Americans filled with irrational resentments over 9/11, anxious to prove how good they were with their high-tech killing machines, and let loose on someone else’s country.

And we knew, at least again those who cared to search, the story of America’s hideous treatment of Taleban prisoners in the early days of occupation, of Secretary of Defence Rumsfeld’s Nazi-like public demand that all prisoners should be killed or walled away forever. One of America’s ghastly allies of the Northern Alliance, General Dostum, took Rumsfeld in deadly earnest: he had his men round up three thousand prisoners, seal them in vans and drive them out onto the desert to suffocate in the heat. The bodies were then buried in shallow mass graves. All this was watched by American soldiers who somehow failed to act the way Jimmy Stewart did in war movies. Instead they picked their noses or smoked cigarettes as they gawked.

We also knew of the terrible tales of boys being raped while American troops never lifted a finger to help them. In a strict fundamentalist country like Afghanistan, where young women are kept guarded and almost hidden, the sexual behaviour of men often takes on the character of that common in prisons everywhere: that is, young and vulnerable men are brutally raped and often treated as “bitches” by older, tougher prisoners.

Only recently, I heard the horrible stories of a Canadian soldier with post traumatic stress who told of seeing a boy with blood running down his legs as two Afghan allies raped him. The soldier could do nothing and was told later only to buck it up. He told too of a translator, a hired Afghan, gleefully relating to him about the way he liked to use a knife on boys he raped.

We all saw the ghastly pictures from Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq. Only now we know far uglier pictures and recordings have been suppressed, images and sounds of young Iraqis being raped and sodomized by American soldiers at the prison.

Those facts give us some realistic sense of the atmosphere in Afghanistan when American soldiers shot Omar in the back, falsely accused him of killing a medic, and sent a fifteen-year old boy off to years of torture.

Omar remains a prisoner in Guantanamo, although the torture mercifully has stopped, but it was announced only a couple of days ago that he would be among those who would stand trial in New York.

Trial for what? For trumped-up charges of murder? Trial for acts in war? Trial for being an abused child soldier? Trial under American laws which never applied to Afghanistan? A trial where every scrap of government evidence is tainted with years of torture and human-rights abuse? Where the government doing the trying itself has acted against countless laws and treaties in invading and occupying two countries?

If there were one breath of decency left in America’s establishment, Omar and the other abused prisoners would all be released and allowed to live the rest of their lives in peace. They are no threat to anyone, most did nothing deserving imprisonment, and those who may have committed something we would regard as a crime have been viciously punished already.

Only days ago, Obama’s White House Counsel Greg Craig was let go. Craig, an old friend of the President’s, had promised to make his administration the most transparent in history. Craig was the main force behind the Obama’s promise to close Guantanamo in one year.

Well, there is no sign Guantanamo is to be closed any time soon, and the policy’s chief advocate is gone. But more importantly, when we speak of American torture chambers, it is easy to forget that Guantanamo is only the most publicized of many. What horrors go on at places like America’s secret base at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean or at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan, or in a number of other locations, all part of the CIA’s vast international torture gulag, is anybody’s guess.

Obama has not uttered a whimper about the CIA’s euphemistically-named extreme rendition, a practice whereby thousands of people have been kidnapped off streets and sent bound to some of the world’s hell-holes for months of torture. Afterwards, having been discovered innocent of anything, they find themselves dumped in some obscure place like Bosnia without so much as an apology for their treatment.

Obama told people repeatedly during his campaign that American forces in Iraq would be withdrawn promptly, saying “you can bank on it,” and people believed him because Obama did not vote in the Senate for that illegal war, but most of America’s soldiers remain there still.

Obama appointed a commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, who has a background swirling with suggestions of black operations and dirty business, and now that ghastly man has said he needs forty-thousand more troops.

American Predator drones, guided by buzz-cut, faceless men with computer screens in locked rooms in America, now frequently invade Pakistan’s airspace. One can just imagine them hooting and pumping their arms like young men playing a computer game when one of their terrible Hellfire missiles strikes its target, the home of someone not legally charged with anything, killing everyone who happens to be nearby.

No, I only wish the ugly stain on America’s flag was keeping a dissident under house arrest.

John Chuckman lives in Canada and is former chief economist for a large Canadian oil company. Copyright © by John Chuckman. Read other articles by John, or visit John's website.

8 comments on this article so far ...

Comments RSS feed

  1. rosemarie jackowski said on November 17th, 2009 at 1:31pm #

    Good article here. The US arrested , tortured, and imprisoned a 15 year-old Canadian boy on foreign soil. That’s all anyone should need to know to show that the US is guilty of ultimate acts of child abuse. Omar should receive millions in reparations paid by US taxpayers who continue to fund illegal wars of occupation.

    The case of Omar Khadr was argued in the Canadian Supreme Court. The Canadian government is trying to figure out what to do when one of its citizens is captured and tortured by the US. The Supreme Court hearing was aired on C-Span a few days ago. C-span should once again be congratulated for its programming. Thanks C-span.

  2. ranter22 said on November 17th, 2009 at 6:16pm #

    Yes, excellent work on this article.
    You sir, were very generous when describing the behavior and reckless actions of Americas best.(please allow for the many American heroes)
    You did not mention the millions of casualties during the Korean war. The bombing of Hospitals, schools and homes. Women and children all alike were shredded like paper and scattered about like potpourri. Equally not said was the take over of Cuba and Puerto Rico, I really don’t have to mention what happened there because it was, although not thoroughly bombed as the others, there were the rapes and killing of civilians. The evilness and obsessive nature to rule with impunity. Dare I mention Vietnam as you so well stated, 30 years after that war and 30 before that the interviews that John Kerry had with Tim Russert, in which he openly admits to genocide. Raping and killing women and children with 50 cal sub machine guns. Not because they were attacking anyone, but because it was the Order. We in America, do need to maintain our nation safer, but we also need to recognize and desist from this horrid pattern of aggression.

  3. Annie Ladysmith said on November 18th, 2009 at 1:41am #

    CHUCKMAN YOU MUST HAVE MUSH FOR BRAINS if you actually believe in what these politicians puke-up. People of intelligence and discernment hated this forked-tongue serpent from the getgo. We knew he was the fifth column and would betray our country from within. It has basically been given over to the Chinese, who need our space and resources. AGGRESSION! Are you aware of human history? It’s nothing but aggression. You will never see such unfettered aggression until the Chinese invade, for we will, despit the traitors in our government, will fight those bastards with everything the militias can muster-up and when that goes we will use tooth and nail. And YOU FOOL to think that America is SAFE. Do some reserch and find out for yourself if our entire continent has not been handed over to China to do what they want with in exchange for global government. The sons and daughters of Americans are also victims in this war for it is as much, maybe more, to kill of our armed forces than to police Iraq.

  4. Annie Ladysmith said on November 18th, 2009 at 1:48am #

    AND, YES, they are all cowards, they are terrorfied that the people will turn on them before they can get to there underground bases. But, O! They cannot hide from the wrath that is coming. I’d rather deal with nuclear fall-out than that great, relentless wrath.

  5. bozh said on November 18th, 2009 at 9:28am #

    America in design and mind had not changed an iota. US is now able to invade any country while century ago it cld not.
    US also appears to have more destructive weaponry than any empire. They can be placed anywhere in the world.
    US warlords’ mind 1800=US warlords’ mind-intent today. Since it invaded iraq, or may be even before the aggression, soldiers of that war are mysteriously ailing and dying because shell makers use some kind of uranium in them or on them.

    99.99% of USans have not noticed the nature of america and of own masters of warfare. Masters’ control of america grew and grew. Today, with the strongest army in the world, biggest terror org, fbi, private informers, warlords can control each american.

    Today, their grip on power appear near-apsolute. It wld likely increase and especially while masters wage wars; in order to wage more wars.
    So, expect more wars. More misery for some americans. More authoritarianism.

  6. Rehmat said on November 18th, 2009 at 10:37pm #

    The Canadian teenager, Omar Khadr, who was captured by US collaborators, Northern alliance, at the age of 15 – has been kept inside the notorious Guantanamo Camp – may have been celebrating his 22nd birthday today with his family and friends – had he been a free man.

    The UN Convention on the Rights of Child says – “The Juvenile prisoners (under 18 years of age) require special protection”. Has Omar Khadr received those “special protections” during that last seven years of his confinement? The answers lies in Andy Worthington’s article Siezed at 15, Omar Khadr turns 22 in Guantanamo.

  7. Mary said on November 19th, 2009 at 2:31am #


    Can anybody comment on the case of Lynne Sawyer who has been ordered to go to prison for 2 1/2 years at the age of 70 and awaiting surgery. As far as I can see her ‘crime’ was to defend a ‘terrrrrrist’, the so called Blind Skeikh who was imprisoned for life in 1996.

    An e-mail just received ‘November 18, 2009 – Just minutes ago Ralph Poynter (Lynne Stewart’s husband and close political comrade) phoned me from New York City and told me that Lynne (who is 70 years of age) has reported to prison, after, in an outrageous and unprecedented move, she was informed that today’s original understanding that she would be allowed 7 to 10 days before reporting to prison, while the judge considered her lawyers legal request that she be allowed to stay out of prison at least until her scheduled December 7, 2009 surgery, has been reversed. Obviously, this is meant to intimidate and instill fear into the people in general, and politically conscious defense lawyers in particular.


    The struggle continues and must be intensified.’

    YouTube: Lynne Stewart on DEMOCRACY NOW 11/18/09 ‘

    Here in the UK our law is being eroded. From the Morning Star yesterday.

    A good day to bury bad news? High Court rules trials can be held in secret
    Wednesday 18 November 2009 by Paddy McGuffin

    The very tenets of the British legal system have been dealt a devastating blow when the High Court backed a government bid to hold trials in secret.

    The judgement, which was handed down by Mr Justice Silber, would allow the government and security services unparalleled powers of non-disclosure in cases it deemed sensitive to national security.

    Legal and civil rights campaigners described the ruling as “profoundly disturbing” and said that the British government’s role in torture and rendition could remain hidden forever as a result.

    The ruling was on a legal principle which arose during the civil action brought by seven former Guantanamo detainees against the British state.

    Bisher Al Rawi, Jamil Banna, Richard Belmar, Omar Deghayes, Moazzam Begg, Binyam Mohamed and Martin Mubanga were all subject to extraordinary rendition, detention and torture in which they argued the British government was complicit.

    The seven are seeking disclosure of information held by the government and security services which they believe will prove the government’s complicity.

    For its part the state argues that the material is too sensitive to be disclosed as it would impact on national security.

    Justice Silber, in his judgement, stated that in his view “it can be lawful and proper for a court to order that a ‘closed material procedure’ be adopted in a claim for civil damages.”

    He rejected arguments that such a process would disadvantage a claimant more than the existing public interest legislation.

    The judgement proposed a special advocacy model whereby a lawyer appointed by the Attorney General could hear the evidence and argue on behalf of the claimant. The advocate would not be able to tell the claimant the evidence.

    Justice human rights director Eric Metcalfe said: “This ruling is unprecedented. It dramatically extends the model.

    “Previously claimants in a case who have made very serious allegations of conspiracy to commit unlawful acts and complicity in torture would have had disclosure.

    “This ruling takes that away. This is the first time an English court has suggested this and it is a profoundly disturbing ruling.”

    Amnesty International UK campaigns director Tim Hancock said: “Today the court has missed a crucial opportunity to uphold human rights and the rule of law.

    “The ruling means that alleged complicity by the UK authorities is likely to remain hidden, possibly forever.”

    The case will now be expedited to the Court of Appeal.

  8. rosemarie jackowski said on November 19th, 2009 at 7:52am #

    Lynne Sawyer is a true American hero. We should be having parades in her honor. The legal system often provides neither truth nor justice. This case dealt a death blow to the lawyer/client privilege of confidentiality. Good luck to anyone who is ever caught up in the US legal system.