But as always, US officials are pressing Canada to keep their troops in the country, and the Conservative government confirmed today that they are strongly considering a plan that would keep the troops there through at least 2014.

Defence Minister Peter MacKay says that such a move would involve redefining the troops as “non-combat” and putting them in a less volatile province to focus on training police and military forces.

Canada has just under 3,000 troops in Afghanistan today, and 152 Canadian troops have died in the war since the 2001 invasion, the third largest death toll of any country involved in the occupation.

Khadr was forced into service resisting the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 by his father, and despite the fact that he was only 15 when the alleged crime was committed US lawyers insist he is a “terrorist and murder” and that the protections normally afforded to child soldiers doesn’t count because the group he was with wasn’t technically an army.

A number of questions were raised during the trial, including the years of abuse Khadr suffered in US detention and the coerced confession which was the center of the case against him. Less often mentioned was that the “crime” in question, throwing a hand grenade during combat, has never been considered a war crime. The military jury in Khadr’s “trial” deliberated for less than nine hours before delivering the ruling.

Under the plea deal, Khadr will spend another year in US military custody at Guantanamo Bay and then be turned over to the Canadian government to serve another seven years in Canadian prisons. Canadian lawyers believe they can win his release in short order once he is out of US military custody, considering his status as a child soldier. The Harper government has been trying to prevent Khadr’s return, not wanting to have to take any official stand on the treatment of a Canadian born Canadian citizen by the US military tribunal system.

Of course throwing a hand grenade during combat wouldn’t be a “war crime” in the first place, and Khadr’s young age at the time of the incident affords him additional protection as a child soldier.

But the Canadian government issued a collective yawn today to the report of the clearly coerced confession, insisting it was “between Mr. Khadr and the American government.” Some reports had Khadr pleaing guilty in the hopes of being returned to Canada instead of spending the rest of his life in military prisons.

Which ought to be shocking for Canadians. After all, the Canadian government would generally act as an advocate for its citizens when they get detained by a foreign power, and in this case we are talking about a child soldier in the custody of a foreign military which is known to have been abusing him for years.

The trial comes amid considerable international scrutiny, and a public condemnation from a top UN representative who warned that it set a dangerous precedent for the treatment of child soldiers in future wars.

Khadr has been in US custody since he was 15 years old, and is accused of throwing a hand grenade which, while not generally considered a “war crime” has him liable to spend the rest of his life in a US military prison.

Of his 15 potential jurors, only two claimed to have ever heard of his case before, and none said they were even “somewhat knowledgable” about Islam. And while it is unclear why this was a topic of discussion, 12 of them said they regularly watch the TV show CSI.

Khadr’s trial has been controversial on a number of different levels, from the dubious standards of justice in the military-styled tribunal to the fact that the judge, yesterday, ruled that all of his confessions were admissible even though they came after abuse by interrogators. This is particularly important as the prosecution tries to make a case against Khadr with little to no direct evidence and will have to lean heavily on the confessions, which came after threats of gang rape.

The military’s judge did throw the defense a bone today, however, when they conceded that the jury would be allowed to consider Khadr’s young age at the time of capture when they decide if he will spend the rest of his life in prison. The jury is expected to be pared down tomorrow.

Khadr, a Canadian citizen, was 15 years old when he was arrested. Now 23, he is charged with having thrown a grenade at US troops during the Afghan War, and is being labeled an “unprivileged enemy belligerent” to explain the charges, as throwing a hand grenade during a war is not generally considered a war crime.

Defense lawyers had argued that Khadr’s confessions should not be allowed because they came in the wake of threats of gang rape and repeated abuse during past interrogations. Prosecutors argued, and the judge agreed, that the threats were irrelevant to the confessions.

Khadr has previously indicated that he will boycott the “trial” because he does not want to help the US further its political goals. His eight year detention has been somewhat controversial, both because of his Canadian citizenship and his young age when captured.

In fact the military judge’s ruling today was just the last in a long line of attempts to block the trial by the defense, which had petitioned the US Supreme Court to suspend the trial on Constitutional grounds. The court declined to do so.

Even coverage of the proceding at Guantanamo Bay have become something of a controversy, as the Pentagon continues to restrict what journalists allowed to see the trial will be permitted to cover, citing “operational security concerns.”

Having virtually grown up in US custody, Khadr could face life in prison if convicted. The Canadian Supreme Court decided in January that it could not force the current Canadian government to seek his repatriation, but it remains possible that some future Canadian government may decide to seek the return of its citizen.

Abdullah Khadr was accused by the US government of buying arms for al-Qaeda, and has been held without bail in Canada since December 2005, pending the hearing. The Canadian government has not ruled out appealing the judge’s decision but for now, the elder Khadr is a free man.

Abdullah was arrested by the Pakistani government in 2004, after the CIA paid them $500,000 to do so. His return to Canada however ensured that he would eventually see a court hearing, and long before his younger brother ever did.

The younger Khadr is one of the more well known US detainees in the war on terror. Arrested in 2002 at the age of 15, Khadr was accused of “war crimes” and has been held at Guantanamo Bay ever since. Set to turn 24 next month, Omar may soon be facing a military commission for his alleged crimes.

Yet as this criticism has grown abroad, the pressure for Israel’s public to toe the official line on the story (whatever it may be at any given time) has also grown, and in the West there is an increasingly visible effort to lionize the Israeli attack and do demonize even perceived criticism of the Israeli government as “anti-semitism.”

In a speech earlier this week, several Congressmen demanded that the US bar anyone who was on board the Mavi Marmara from ever entering the United States because they are “terrorists.” There have also been calls to join Israel in re-classifying the aid group that sent the ship as a “terrorist organization” because they sent the ship that attempted to transport electric wheelchairs and toys to the Gaza Strip.

The ire has been even more blunt against Turkey, as a number of US Congressmen are openly promising “payback” against the Turkish government for complaining about eight of its citizens being slain on the Mavi Marmara. A US citizen was also slain, eleciting the following response from America’s Vice President: “So what’s the big deal here?”

In fact while officials were finishing up a collective yawn on the attack, the real ire was saved for Helen Thomas, a White House Press Corps reporter who responded to the attack by saying Israelis should “get out of Palestine.”

In the run-up to Thomas’ resignation, the White House publicly condemned her remarks as “reprehensible” and demanded she apologize. There were several open calls to punish her for the comment, and several claimed that the comment proved Thomas was secretly an anti-semite for years, the new explanation for her years of criticizing the wars of the Bush and Obama Administration.

The situation is even more incredible in our neighbor to the north. Canadian member of parliament Libby Davies, a representative from Vancouver, called Israel’s occupation of Palestinian lands “the longest occupation in the world” and hinted that she personally supports a boycott campaign against Israel.

The backlash against Ms. Davies was quick and astonishing, with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper demanding that she resign and insisting that he had called Israel’s ambassador to reassure him that this was not the position of the Canadian government.

Ms. Davies may be thankful that she is not in Germany, however, where three MPs who were on board the Mavi Marmara are facing charges of “incitement to hatred” for even being on the ship. The MPs and their Left Party were, in public comments by rival politicians, condemned as “anti-semites” on a number of occasions.

In the weeks since the attack, the story about the Mavi Marmara has changed a number of times, as has the tenor of the story. An Israeli attack became a battle and finally an “act of self defense.” The aid workers on the ship have gone from aid workers to “pro-Palestinian activists” to “terrorists” in the blink of an eye. Turkey itself appears to have moved from “close US ally” to NATO member and finally to enemy in the same span, with Israeli Education Minister condemning Turkey’s government for a “new type of anti-Semitism.”

The story can be taken as an example of how much can happen in a matter of a half a month, and while Israel’s killings may have sparked enough outrage to force at least minor relaxing of the blockade, they have also underscored just how large a crowd remains willing to praise anything Israel does, no matter how much of an atrocity, and willing to attack anyone even tangentially opposed to it at the slightest provocation.

The judge recessed the hearing for today, but said that in the future he might have guards “forcefully” bring him to the tribunal so it could be explained to him how important it was that he attend.

Khadr’s previous “trial” in 2008 was dropped amid the resignation of a military prosecutor, and the Canadian, originally arrested at 15, has remained in custody pending another chance for the military to bring a case against him.

The latest issue, besides the earmuffs, is an effort by Khadr’s lawyer to get his various confessions thrown out on the grounds they were obtained by coercion. The FBI has defended their interrogations, however, insisting the whole process was “friendly” after the hood and handcuffs were removed from the teen.

Khadr is accused of killing a US soldier with a grenade, and today the tribunal saw a video showing Khadr at a bomb-making camp in Afghanistan. Khadr could face up to life in prison if convicted. He has already spent eight years in detention, however, and at the rate which trials are moving it seems possible he could spend life in detention even without a trial.

The Canadian government started the push by demanding that the United Nations issue more sanctions against Iran until the nation agrees to entirely abandon uranium enrichment. The call then devolved into the usual US and Western calls for sanctions, with President Obama demanding that such action happen in “weeks.”

The net result was what such talks usually see: eager support from Western nations who were already on board for the sanctions and indications that both China and Russia remain far from the Western position.

IAEA chief Amano Yukiya also chimed in, reiterating that Iran was not in compliance with the additional protocol to the safeguars agreement, something Iran insists it never formally ratified. But Amano also seemed to caution against sanctions, warning that the tension could make matters more difficult for inspectors.

The al-Shabaab faction is one of the more hardline of various factions vying for control of Somalia, was presenting hundreds of new recruits at a rally in northern Mogadishu, and said that Yemeni factions should “be ready for our welcome.”

The US has made clear their intentions to dramatically escalate their ongoing but heretofore covert war in Yemen, and as the nation has made enemies with its years of on-again off-again meddling in Somalia, al-Shabaab seems eager to cash in on anti-American sentiment by focusing on Yemen. This is an unusual move for the group, however, which generally does not operate outside of Somalia.

The Canadian government was the first to react to the announcement, saying that their anti-piracy warship in the Gulf of Aden would stand ready to stop any Shabaab crossings to Yemen. Since Yemen is a popular destination for refugees from the various nations along the Horn of Africa, it may not be easy to determine who is a militant and who is merely a refugee.