A sordid deal |

A sordid deal

A diplomatic plea deal — revealed only after the fact — makes the youngest Guantanamo Bay inmate’s 40-year prison term a sham and the outcome of his case a mockery of justice.

In exchange for his guilty plea to five war crimes, al-Qaida terrorist Omar Khadr, 24, will be allowed to serve his sentence in Canada — where parole rules ensure his release by age 32 . The Pentagon’s chief war crimes prosecutor says the deal ensured his conviction. What it really ensures is denial of justice.

Born into a militant Muslim family in Toronto, Mr. Khadr grew up there and in Afghanistan. He was 15 when captured in Afghanistan, where he planted mines and threw the grenade that mortally wounded a U.S. commando assaulting an al-Qaida compound in July 2002.

Those are actions of a committed, fanatical Islamist warrior — not of the “child soldier” portrayed by Khadr’s apologists. Four decades in prison would barely be commensurate with his crimes. The eight years he’ll actually serve — at most — constitute a travesty.

If ever an al-Qaida terrorist has been coddled, it’s Khadr. And with U.S. officials undercutting their own military justice system at Gitmo, al-Qaida has even more incentive to recruit more deadly “child soldiers” like him.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.