Arar Sues Ashcroft

[Dancing David]

Mahar Arar was a Canadian national deported by our country to Syria while he was in transit from Germany to Canada. He was detained in New York city and then deported, he claims that he ws never allowed to consult with Canadian officials. He also claims that he was deported by the US to be tortured by the Syrian government.

He is now suing Ashcroft and the INS officials that deported him, on the basis of a law outlawing the 'aiding and abetting of torture', which was a law that Bush the Elder signed into law.

I have been amazed at the complacency of this forum about this news story. A foriegn national deported while in transist through our country, no trial, no legal evidence presented and this guy gets tortured. We are starting to act like a police state and all the citizens just look the other way.

How would you feel if it was an American in transit in Canada who was deported to be tortured.

We need to have national security but not at the cost of our liberty! Funny how a 'leftist' is the one who cares about personal liberty, and not the traditional defenders of freedom.

We can not sink to the level of supporting torture and the abuse of human rights or we are no better than the Soviets that every one loves to decry!

 

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

I have been following this story but the facts have been so few, so ellusive , it has been very confusing to me.

Arar


A lot of controversy is being stirred up in Canada as a
reporter's home was searched by RCMP

It looks like Juliet O'Neill dug too deep for her story and allegedly communicated leaked sensitive governement documents. CHarges may be pending on reporter.

The CBS News program 60 Minutes II reported on Wednesday night that Canadian authorities were told of Washington's plan to deport Maher Arar to Syria and that they approved.

O'Neill has become a target. It will be interesting to see how the journalist community respond to the search of a reporter's home.


The Canadian government has come under a lot of criticism lately on its in-action, or inability to protect the intersest of Canadians abroad. The Canadian government has been using inneffective "soft diplomacy" to deal with detentions and allegations of torture of Canadain citizens in Syria and Saudi Arabia, and an execution of a Canadian citizen/journalist in Iran.

 

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

Arar's statement


"I was ready to confess to anything if they would stop the torture."

 

[Dancing David]

Thank You PPG, the last time I posted on this is was when Arar was saying that the Canadians were the ones who wanted him deported. On As It Happens last night they were saying that the main evidnce against Arar was that he had been to a 'training camp' somewhere. What ticks me off , here in the US, we have plenty of 'training camps' for paramilitary groups, where they practise all sorts of potential terrorist acts. Then we have the Nut Case Supreme David Koresh who is busy raping little girls, burns down his own compound and becomes some sort of national freaking hero!

And now it is back to the cold war menatlity, it is okay to break the law if we do it in the right cause.

AAAAARGGH!

 

[corplinx]

Then we have the Nut Case Supreme David Koresh who is busy raping little girls, burns down his own compound and becomes some sort of national freaking hero!

Can you point me to anyone who thinks David Koresh was a hero? I for one have never seen Koresh lionized but instead Janet Reno/Bill Clinton demonized.

Koresh was a sick mother scratcher and I have never heard anyone say otherwise.

It was the siege of his compound that was scrutinized as overboard dramatics that provoked a response from an unstable cult leader

 

[Zep]

Two Australian citizens have been held under extreme privation at Camp X-ray by the US government for two (2) years without charges, trial, or even access to lawyers on US suspicion that they may have been involved in Al Quaeda in some way. No evidence whatsoever to support their suspicions has yet been produced publicly.

Boy, how the US would squeal loudly if that were done to one of them! They would have probably mounted a major armed invasion already, if GWB had anything to do with it.

And this is how this US government treats its FRIENDS! So you wonder why they have no compunction in dealing with in-transit people so cavallierly. It's because they officially don't seem to give a big rat's a$$.

 

[rikzilla]

Two Australian citizens have been held under extreme privation at Camp X-ray by the US government for two (2) years without charges, trial, or even access to lawyers on US suspicion that they may have been involved in Al Quaeda in some way. No evidence whatsoever to support their suspicions has yet been produced publicly.

Boy, how the US would squeal loudly if that were done to one of them! They would have probably mounted a major armed invasion already, if GWB had anything to do with it.

And this is how this US government treats its FRIENDS! So you wonder why they have no compunction in dealing with in-transit people so cavallierly. It's because they officially don't seem to give a big rat's a$$.

Access to lawyers?? You think that would help? I suppose we could similarly criminalize suicide, eh? Those suicidal people will certainly think twice before ending their lives if they know that they could be prosecuted!

Originally posted by George W. Bush:
I know that some people question if America is really in a war at all. They view terrorism more as a crime -- a problem to be solved mainly with law enforcement and indictments. After the World Trade Center was first attacked in 1993, some of the guilty were indicted, tried, convicted and sent to prison. But the matter was not settled. The terrorists were still training and plotting in other nations, and drawing up more ambitious plans. After the chaos and carnage of Sept. 11, it is not enough to serve our enemies with legal papers. The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States -- and war is what they got.

 

[LFTKBS]

My ad hominem attack of the day: God, Rik, you suck so bad.

"it is not enough to serve our enemies with legal papers. The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States -- and war is what they got."

Hey, cowboy, you can't just round up whoever you think is a terrorist and do whatever you want. We have trials to determine guilt or innocence; that's the way it's supposed to work. You are a enemy of the Constitution, rik, and you President Bush are - yes, yes, yes - traitors.

 

[Dancing David]

Can you point me to anyone who thinks David Koresh was a hero? I for one have never seen Koresh lionized but instead Janet Reno/Bill Clinton demonized.

Koresh was a sick mother scratcher and I have never heard anyone say otherwise.

It was the siege of his compound that was scrutinized as overboard dramatics that provoked a response from an unstable cult leader

Ah, you point to my spin dear one, I can't deny it. I did have occasion to meet a few people who felt that Koresh was some sort of hero, and that T. McVeigh was sort of doing the right thing. Fortunately they are in the minority.

And I don't see why they demonized Reno for her choice at Waco, Ruby Ridge was a stupid thing to do. And the 'stand-off' at Waco should have never occured. Why was it called a 'stand-off' and not a 'hostage' situation.

And if a crack dealer shoots someone in his house they don't refer to him as an 'unstable cult leader'. They refer to him as criminal and dangerous. Koresh was a criminal and a danger, at least to 14 yo girls, and he should have been treated as such. And the FBI got hauled out for it's choices (a good thing) but there was very little scrutiny of how Koresh got to that point.

So it was just hyperbole on my part and an exageration of what i feel is very subtle support for dangerous religous kooks.

 

[Dancing David]

Access to lawyers?? You think that would help? I suppose we could similarly criminalize suicide, eh? Those suicidal people will certainly think twice before ending their lives if they know that they could be prosecuted!

So Mr. Rik, it would be okay for another nation to hold our citizen incommunicado?

the point to our liberties is to prevent government abuse of power. Holding people without trial is a good way to start down that path. No one is asking to legalize terrorism, just to make sure the government isn't abusing power.

I am sure that if there is evidence it could be presented in a closed court, if there is judicial review then that would be a long step in the right direction.

PS Thanks for the one start rating! It means I am somebody now!

 

[Zep]

Access to lawyers?? You think that would help? I suppose we could similarly criminalize suicide, eh? Those suicidal people will certainly think twice before ending their lives if they know that they could be prosecuted!

So you actually SUPPORT the arbitrary jailing of citizens the FRIENDLY ALLIED NATION of Australia without a single shred of evidence being produced to support said arrests, without one iota of access to any legal process, without access by Australian embassy or government staff, for TWO YEARS? Is that REALLY what you are saying, Rik? Did I read you right?

 

[karl]

"Evidence? We don't need no stinkin' evidence!"

 

[rikzilla]

So you actually SUPPORT the arbitrary jailing of citizens the FRIENDLY ALLIED NATION of Australia without a single shred of evidence being produced to support said arrests, without one iota of access to any legal process, without access by Australian embassy or government staff, for TWO YEARS? Is that REALLY what you are saying, Rik? Did I read you right?

Why yes, indeed I do! That is if by arbitrary you mean capturing them in a war zone shooting at US soldiers. Zep, be reasonable for one moment if you can. Arbitrary would be jacking some poor Aussie tourist who's out on the town.

ar·bi·trar·y ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ärb-trr)
adj.
Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle: stopped at the first motel we passed, an arbitrary choice.

If people wish to become terrorists, or serve as ununiformed soldiers for outlaw regimes, they know that they are acting outside the accepted rules of war. This is unconventional warfare, and they are not protected by any international laws or conventions. Guess what Zep? Terrorists are not soldiers. Terrorists are not criminals either, they perpetuate acts of war. They inhabit a niche between soldier and criminal. Since they are both, and neither, their handling has been...in a word...innovative.

You are also wrong about this and this

David Hicks and Mamdouh Habib Treated Well
Last week Australian officials visited Australian detainees at the US Naval Base in Guantanamo Bay.

The purpose of the visit was to advance the Australian investigation into the activities of both men.

The investigation team has confirmed that both men are being detained in safe and humane conditions. Detainees receive full medical examinations on arrival and have access to medical treatment on request. They receive culturally appropriate meals and are permitted to observe religious practices. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has contacted the men’s families about their wellbeing and has passed on letters from both men.

The Government will not be releasing details of the interviews for legal and privacy reasons, and in light of the fact that law enforcement and security investigations are ongoing.

Inquiries: Chris Kenny (Mr Downer) (02) 6277 7500 / Carina Tan-Van Baren (Mr Williams) (02) 6277 7300

As a matter of fact, the vast majority of Australians do not seem to care about these people. Tell you what, if Australia captures Americans on a battlefield in the same manner as these creeps were caught, they can do as they like with them as far as I am concerned.

-z

 

[Tony]

We are starting to act like a police state and all the citizens just look the other way.

Wake up!! "We" have been acting like a police state since the income tax was first instituted.

But to comment on the issue at hand. Why was the guy deported to Syria? Was he a citizen of that country? I think someone in the government or one of its agencies SHOULD be heald accountable for this guy's torture.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

How would you feel if it was an American in transit in Canada who was deported to be tortured.

I wouldn't like it!!

I hope Arar is successfull in his lawsuit, and deals sensibly with his new found wealth..

 

[Dancing David]

Re: Re: Arar Sues Ashcroft

Wake up!! "We" have been acting like a police state since the income tax was first instituted.

But to comment on the issue at hand. Why was the guy deported to Syria? Was he a citizen of that country? I think someone in the government or one of its agencies SHOULD be heald accountable for this guy's torture.

There are two theories in the current running, one is that the Canadians are the ones who wanted him deported, which is the big stink in the RCMP and the other is that it was actualy Syria that wanted him deported.

He admits to having a casual aquaintence with a member of AQ.

 

[Tony]

Re: Re: Re: Arar Sues Ashcroft

There are two theories in the current running, one is that the Canadians are the ones who wanted him deported, which is the big stink in the RCMP and the other is that it was actualy Syria that wanted him deported.

What is the evidence for the two of the theories? And if either proves to be true, why is he sueing the US? The circumstances around this seem weird.

 

[Dancing David]

Good question!
Arar claims he does not know why he was deported while in transit from Switzerland to Canada.
I think he is suing the uS because we have the FOI act and a better media, and if he can get Americans to feel they are the dupes of the Canadians then he will score some points.

This has been weird from the beggining, my concern is that we should not deport Canadians to another country.

 

[Michael Redman]

Re: Re: Arar Sues Ashcroft

I hope Arar is successfull in his lawsuit, and deals sensibly with his new found wealth..

Not likely. If he sues in the US, I would think the defendants would have the protection of sovereign immunity. If he sues outside of the US, he'll never get a judgment that any US court will enforce. I would be interested in the details.

This has been weird from the beggining, my concern is that we should not deport Canadians to another country.

Quite true. I would think (hope) that the Canadian government would raise hell if we did this without their approval. Sending someone to an arbitrary location seems strange. Sending someone to a country of previous citizenship when their current country of citizenship is denouncing their citizenship on the other hand . . .

Again, so much intrigue, so little information.

 

[PygmyPlaidGiraffe]

so little information.

that is accurate

Perhaps some facts will emerge as it looks like

an inquiry is in the works.


Of particular concern to me is that his testimony was allegedly elicited by torture.

Testimonies are notoriously innaccurate as it is, due to fallible memories, poor recall, emotions, biases, cultural influences, and "leading" by the interviewer/interigator.

Is torture more or less likely to elicit accurate testimonies? Does pain and discomfort encourage more accurate recall? Why did the U.S. justice system decide to utilise the interigation techniques of Syria rather than the universally available and reliable "lie detector"?


What evidence does the U.S. justice have that torture to get information and testimony is more accurate than "lie detectors?" or evidence that torture elicits more accurate testimonies than using other interigation techniques?