• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Arar Sues Ashcroft

Thanks PPG! I heard on As it Happens last week that they are going to have a commision investigate Mr. Arar's complaint.

PS I couldn't find anything at AIH but a search there led me to the CBC, the Canadians(who I admire very much) have a security law much more like the British than the United States: Mr. Arar may never get to hear the vidence against him especialy since most of it came from another person detained and tortured in Syria
CBC story about the commisionon Arar's detention

Arar is expecting the inquiry into his case to answer a long list of questions, all focused on how Canadian officials were involved in his ordeal.
Lorne Waldman, Arar's lawyer, says "the public information that has been made available to date raises the very grave and serious question of whether the Canadian government, and in particular the Canadian security services, are involved in contracting out torture, in violation of Canadian and international law."
The answers may be contained in some of the thousands of pages of documents the commission has sought from 10 government departments and agencies, including the RCMP and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS).
But Marlys Edwardh, Arar's co-counsel, says her client may never see most of those documents.
"Certainly we have been told there is a large body of documentation that the government of Canada does not wish to put into the public domain. Obviously we haven't seen it."
The government of Canada can ask the inquiry's commissioner, Justice Dennis O'Connor, to declare any evidence secret on the grounds its publication could harm national security, national defence or international relations.
O'Connor will make those decisions in secret, at times with only government lawyers present.
"We have taken the position that we do not agree Mr. Arar needs to be present, or his counsel need to be present, that the interests necessary can be addressed by commission counsel," said Barbara McIntire...
Click to expand...
 
rikzilla said:


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.

The fact that one of the australians was kidnapped in pakistan...nowhere near any combat zone is a fact you are happy to place in the "facts that must be ignored" box. Why do you do it rick? Is it due to ignorance or dishonesty?
Many of your fellow citizens have sacrificed a lot to enshrine basic principles of freedom that usefull idiots like you allow people like bush to throw in the gutter...



[/B]
Click to expand...
 
rikzilla said:


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.



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

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
Click to expand...

I have said it before, they may be guilty as hell of something. Part of our clime out of the primordial slime to a civilisation was to invent the justice system. The legal process they are being subject to is not a judicial process.

We even had the travesty of justice become even worse. An 'interrogator' went onto 60 minutes to let them know what they believed was the inside dirt on Hicks. When the justice system has been debased this much, you really have to worry. A part of the legal system telling the general public what the accused probably doesn't even know what they are planning to hatch on him.

The justice system is not just a system of finding guilt and innnocence, it is also a set of rules to be followed to ensure that justice is seen to be done. When you lose that, you don't have a justice system any more.
 
posted by AUP
I have said it before, they may be guilty as hell of something.
Click to expand...

The possibility of guilt is no excuse for any government to break the law. which is why this is important.

Either Mr Arar was deported becuase of information that was 'obtained' by the Canadian or US governement, Mr. Arar knows that part of the evidence is that a memeber of AlQueda witnessed a lease and may have lived with him. But he was alos cleared by US officials after Sept. 11 to travel to the US four times after the clamp down. Surely the US was aware of this when they cleared him to travel to the US.

There was another CBC article that says Mr. Arar was detained after evidence was obtained under torture. Which means again that Mr. Ashcroft is violating the law signed by Bush the Elder.

CBC story saying that the evidence was obtained under torture

Almalki and Elmaati both knew Arar and, like him, they've been investigated by the RCMP and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.
Elmaati's lawyer, Rocco Galatti, made his case Friday in a teleconference.
"The facts of Mr. Elmaati's detention, his torture, his divulgence of Mr. Almalki and Mr. Arar, which later led to their own arrest and detention by the Syrians are intertwined," he said.
Click to expand...
 
Know and Exercise Your Rights



Mohamed Harkat detained since December 10, 2002 without any charges under a CSIS security certificate... four other men [have been]similarly arrested and detained under the power of security certificates: Muhammad Mahjoub, Mahmoud Jaballah, Hassan Almrei and Adil Charkaoui. Mohamed Harket is not allowed to know why he is being detained and possible deportation under the pretext of "national security."




Evidence used to obtain and defend the certificates haven't been shown to the men, or their lawyers.



Canada is among many countries that human rights groups criticise the sacrificing of human rights in the name of stepped-up national security.
 
rikzilla said:
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.
Click to expand...

This is an old post, rikzilla, but I believe a point has been missed.

I have always hated powers that rest on "magic words". In other words, all they have to do is just SAY the person was caught in a war zone shooting at US soldiers, and they are automatically free from scrutiny, or anyone finding out if that's what actually was the case. If they have this power, they COULD jack some poor Aussie tourist, SAY they were an enemy combatant, and nobody would have the chance to prove otherwise.

No one's talking about setting dangerous people loose. Hell, I'd even negotiate about the presumption of innocence (though carefully). But anyone deserves the chance to prove that the circumstances under which they were held, are different from what they are accused of.
 
corplinx said:


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.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, I did see one or two people say that on the Audio Asylum "Outside" board, at the very least.

I'm sorry that I can't point you there, I doubt that that material remains on the board, and if it does, it's mega-pages into the past.

But I have seen a FEW (I emphasize that word to make the point) people try to lionize Koresh. A very, very few.

I have seen a lot more people demonizing Clinton for Reno's actions.

Why aren't those same people demonizing Bush for Ashcroft's actions?
 
Very intyeresting PPG, if I reads canadiam politicians correctly, they have admitted they gave the evidence to the Us that convinced the Us to deport Arar, but they did not say "you should deport him".

They also didn't say "He is a Canadian citizen, return him to us forwith."

I am still upset that we would deport a foriegn citizen in transit, to a country other than his home. AAAAARRRGGGHHH!
 
I prefer to invoke Occam's razor on this one. Is there a giant conspiracy by CSIS, Ashcroft and the INS to "punish" Arar, or did Arar raise a red flag somehow...only time will tell...
 
Ochams Razor hmm, what does that apply to?

The questions are these:
1. Why did the US , who had cleared Arar to eneter the US on numerous ocassions after 9-11 to work in the US, illegaly deport him to Syria? Why not deport him to Canada? He was a canadian citizen.

2. Why deport him Syria knowing full well that he was likely to be tortured there? In contradiction of American law.

3. What information did the Canadians want concealed at the hearings?

4. Is the fact tha Mr. Arar signed a lease as a witness the sole piece of evidence?


Why is it okay to subvert the constitution of the US?
 
Dancing David said:
...
Why is it okay to subvert the constitution of the US?
Click to expand...

Because we are at war. We did want this war. It was brought to us by swarthy, turbaned men in the wee hours of the morning of September the Elventh©. It was brought to us by an ee-vil dictator. Whom we have now deposed and will deliver into the hands of those he oppressed for justice. (pause for applause) So we will fight it. And we will win. (pause for applause) We will win because God has told me that we shall. He has told me that he has smiled upon this great land of ours and that his hand will be with us to smite the terrorists.

And other stuff Dubya would say/has said.
 
Dancing David said:

Why is it okay to subvert the constitution of the US?
Click to expand...


It's a pattern of behavior. From slavery, to the federal income tax, from gun control to various government institutions. The constitution has always been subverted. Are you really surprised that it continues to be subverted?
 
LostAngeles said:


Because we are at war. We did want this war. It was brought to us by swarthy, turbaned men in the wee hours of the morning of September the Elventh©. It was brought to us by an ee-vil dictator. Whom we have now deposed and will deliver into the hands of those he oppressed for justice. (pause for applause) So we will fight it. And we will win. (pause for applause) We will win because God has told me that we shall. He has told me that he has smiled upon this great land of ours and that his hand will be with us to smite the terrorists.

And other stuff Dubya would say/has said.
Click to expand...


emphasis mine

Which ee-vil dictator brought you September Eleventh?
 
PygmyPlaidGiraffe said:

Which ee-vil dictator brought you September Eleventh?
Click to expand...

BEGIN DUBYA

Well, ah, at the time, you know we were sifting through a uh, lot of information. And what the uh, current director of the CIA, you all remember George Tenet right? I believe you went to lunch with him one time Rob. Had the salmon steak, right? George Tenet presented the president, presented me, with a folder outlining how heavily in bed Saddam and bin Laden were. Now, Saddam's been an enemy of freedom-loving people everywhere for years. This man tried to kill my dad. Of course we figured he was involved. He's got the will and the drive. Now uh, (*rubs finger against the side of his nose*) it turns out it might not have been that close. Mr. uh, Tenet gave me a spot of bad information. (*chuckle, Dubya grin with an elbow on the podium*) This isn't anything against George or how he did his job, so please don't print it like that. The intel looked good. Was a slam dunk but it turns out it just wasn't true. But we did go in and topple an evil dictator who would have tried to bring more terror to the free and God-fearing American people. We have liberated a nation and its people welcome us as the bringers of freedom.

END DUBYA

If you missed the point of my orginal post it was more or less, "Because we were attacked and Dubya says we can subvert the Constitution."
 
LostAngeles said:


Because we are at war. We did want this war. It was brought to us by swarthy, turbaned men in the wee hours of the morning of September the Elventh©. It was brought to us by an ee-vil dictator. Whom we have now deposed and will deliver into the hands of those he oppressed for justice. (pause for applause) So we will fight it. And we will win. (pause for applause) We will win because God has told me that we shall. He has told me that he has smiled upon this great land of ours and that his hand will be with us to smite the terrorists.

And other stuff Dubya would say/has said.
Click to expand...

Crap! That should read "We did not want this war."

Oops, oops, oops. It's a uh, Bushism. That's right. Going for authenticity...

:hb:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom