USA Tortures Canadian

I think the thing that the 'Love it or Leave it' folks are missing is that all these things that are being used to fight the war on terror are going to be used to fight the war on Fundamental Christianity, and the rationale will be 'well you all said it was ok to do it to the muslims'. Wrong is wrong is wrong. This country was founded on certain principles. One of those principles is a man is innocent until proven guilty. How can you justify treating an innocent man like a convicted terrorist until he confesses? If you want to believe its make believe, fine. Just don't say its ok. Its not ok.

 

If I read MP's source as well as you have, I'll be just as misinformed as you are.

The Canadian government only admitted that they wrongly labeled him as a possible terrorist, not that they were in any way complicit with shipping him to Syria. That is all.

His story still reeks with implausibility that the Canadians neither affirm nor deny.

 

At this point it should be obvious to everyone that if we are to win "the war on terror" we must be able to torture all suspected terrorists...even if 70 - 90 percent of them turn out to be innocent.

I mean it just makes sense, right? Just don't call it torture, pressure sounds so much more acceptable.

 

There are a lot of things wrong with this story. To put any of the blame on President Bush is way too much of a leap for me.

Assuming everything in the story is true (I just read the msn link Daisy I did not read the other links you posted so there is more information out there. Thanks for keeping up with this story) what happened to this man is terrible. He should be compensated and apologized to. This is a great example of how injustices can occur when we carry profiling to the extreme.

BUT:
Who tortured this guy, Canada, the United States, or Syria? The article said that often these interrogations are often carried out by CIA officers wearing black hoods. Do we know who did the interrogation in Arar’s case? I guess he was sent to Syria because he held Syrian citizenship. What does Syria have to say about this? Also what exactly is a “coffin sized dungeon?” Is that code for a small cell or was he really in a coffin where he could not even sit up? Exactly what is torture in this case, how was he tortured and for how long? Being questioned by a guy in a black hood I don’t think would qualify as torture. Now if they were cutting off his fingers one at a time until he “confessed,” not that is torture.

As far as MP’s analogy, I think because he was a Syrian citizen "I give her to a bunch of thugs, knowing that they will rape and abuse her" should read "I send her home to her family who I know will abuse her.” It still does not excuse it, torture is wrong no matter who is doing it. I just don’t think what we are doing through aggressive interrogation usually qualifies as torture. That is why we need clear legal clarification on how the United Sates is going to interpret the Geneva convention article 3 1 (a) and (c). What I call torture and what you call torture could be worlds apart.

Sorry I don’t know enough about this case to lay any blame on Bush or his administration. Daisy, do you know more about this we should know?

 

That is dead on right James:applause:

 

"Canadian intelligence officials passed false warnings and bad information to American agents about a Muslim Canadian citizen, after which U.S. authorities secretly whisked him to Syria, where he was tortured, a judicial report found Monday.

*snip*

"The inquiry, which focused on the Canadian intelligence services, found that agents who were under pressure to find terrorists after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, falsely labeled an Ottawa computer consultant, Maher Arar, as a dangerous radical. They asked U.S. authorities to put him and his wife, a university economist, on the al-Qaeda "watchlist," without justification, the report said."

That's not complicit at all?


And what of all the other links in this thread?

They told the US government that he was a terrorist and did nothing to help him after the Americans kidnapped him, even though he was a Canadian citizen.

What, precisely, do you find implausible about his fairly well documented story?

 

There are two factors here that must enter the picture. He was a Canadian citizen and the USA should have respected that first. Secondly, the Canadian government should have taken charge for its citizen. The fact that this Canadian citizen was imprisoned at all is enough torture. We are supposed to believe in justice for all. Without due jurisprudence, we have failed all around.

Canada has apologized and is considering financial assistance to help restore his dignity, self-respect and fair standing in Canadian society. That is the least we can do.

By the way, now three others are making claims to the Canadian government for ill-treatment.....Where will this end? That is the problem. How many will exploit the situation?

Cheers,

Jim

 

The op stated that Bush is evil. The premise for this is this mans detention and torture. Yet the only complicity in this matter was a request to the United States by Canada to detain this man suspected of being a terrorist.

This is a reasonable request and we have no info to indicate just why Canada suspected this fellow. There is nothing in this mans description to indicate the US took part in any torture or in fact did anything evil. The op is a mischaracterization of the President and in fact slander as it has no basis in this situation.

This young mans fear initially was that he would go back to Syria and be made to answer for his crime. Apparently he ran from his legal obligation to sign up for the military under Syrian law. That was his own admission.

As far as torture neither the President nor the US are complicite in any of this. We detained him and turned him over at Canadas request. They consistantly interviewed him in Syria. Not the US.

I would say this op is wrong, a fallacy, misguided, inapprorpiate, without merit, and complete slander.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by c
The Canadian government only admitted that they wrongly labeled him as a possible terrorist, not that they were in any way complicit with shipping him to Syria. That is all.

They told the US government that he was a terrorist and did nothing to help him after the Americans kidnapped him, even though he was a Canadian citizen.

 

I didn't see that Canada asked the US to detain him in the source. I saw that:

There are a few hints: 'under pressure to produce', 'without justification', 'falsely labeled', 'no involvement , 'categorically there is no evidence', 'innocent Canadian', ...

You say this is "reasonable"? Why?

The man's description is "innocent", "falsely accused", etc, so no, not in the man's description. But

"The report, released in Ottawa, was the result of a 2 1/2-year inquiry that represented one of the first public investigations into mistakes made as part of the United States' "extraordinary rendition" program, which has secretly spirited suspects to foreign countries for interrogation by often brutal methods."

"This is really the first report in the Western world that has had access to all of the government documents we wanted and saw the practice of extraordinary rendition in full color," he said in an interview from Ottawa. "The ramifications were that an innocent Canadian was tortured, his life was put upside down, and it set him back years and years."

​

Right, torture is good when done for the right reasons.

What? Where did you get that from? He came to Canada when he was 17.

That's just wrong. Canada did not request that we detain him. They did not interview him in Syria. Where are you getting this misinformation from? Are you making it up or do you have a source?

Cognitive dissonance....drinking the Kool-Aid...

 

All they admitted is a lot.

 

James 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

 

people are arrested daily and convicted of crimes they did not commit.

We apologize and move on . . . . we give some financial restitution . . .

Rodney King (Not ROK), I feel sorry for. I probably feel sorry for this guy.

But, I am not moved more by his wrongful incarceration than I am for any other wrongful incarceration . . .

That is part of freedom . . . that is part of dictatorship . . . unless you live by your self on a deserted island - wrongful punishment is always possible.

 

Is there a possibility he exaggerated while describing the size of his accomodations or maybe the writer used his own interpretation?

Are there any witnesses that back up his claim of a "coffin-sized dungeon"?

Sounds like another unverifiable claim to me. Could be a total lie. Who knows?

 

2,000,000 million Americans died without the opportunity to live the rest of their lives in the freedom a small cell would offer.

They died for your and my freedom.

I regret that they died.

A mistake? In the name of freedom, I do not regret a mistake. I pray that it won't happen in the future.

 

Now, this is certainly true. This is nothing new. As a matter of fact, it isn't even an original idea to this administration. The rendition program was around long before President Bush:

Link

Bill Clinton is the one who originally approved the practice and implemented it. If anyone is pure evil, it would have to be Slick Willy. For some reason, however, I don't notice any of the liberals looking for a political issue to crucify the president in an election year, condemning the originator of the program. I wonder why?:laugh:

Joseph Botwinick

 

President Clinton . . . we should give him an award . . .

 

What is this? No liberals are lining up to condemn the evil President Clinton? I wonder why? We must not have known how truly evil this man really was.:laugh:

Joseph Botwinick

 

North Carolina Tentmaker, I just noticed that you had asked me a question.

Not Canada. Whether it was Syria or the US is a bit of a gray area. The US kidnapped him (and others), held him in the US incognito for nearly two weeks before being transported to Syria as an "extraordinary rendition". I don't know whether the CIA actually interrogated him there or had Syrians do it, but all indications are that the CIA was in charge.

Let's face it, since they thought he was connected to al Qaeda, as the Canadians had said, they're going to be very, very interested in what he had to say.

No, the interrogators have not been identified yet. Side note - the FBI was appalled to see CIA interrogators disguised as FBI agents, as a point in pride in their own professionalism and the CIA's lack thereof.

He had a dual citizenship. Canada was closer, his wife was there, his job was there, he had lived there since he was 17 (almost half his life) and that's where he had been headed anyway. The CIA doesn't have any secret interrogation camps in Canada, but they apparently do in Eastern Europe and Syria. Syria is known for their lack of squeamishness towards torture. They speak Arabic and are doubtlessly a lot more aware of the culture and the terrorist connections an al Qaeda enlistee would have.

Good question - I don't know if any Western journalist has asked.

I believe you are right that it usually does not qualify as torture, but these secret camps seem to be exceptional.

I think there is enough evidence to lay blame in a casual way. There probably won't be a real investigation until Bush is well out of office. A lot depends on who his successor is as to how soon most the truth will come out from our government, I think.