The Merged Maher Arar Thread

[geo]

As you have said

It is what it is!.. And that's all she wrote

Chimo!

 

[3rd Horseman]

AKE that.

  I am sure this will come out in the near future and when it does I will reveal the source. If I am wrong I will return to this thread and eat all kinds of humble pie and crow. An offer I would find distastefull but appropriate.

3rd

 

[Good2Golf]

3rd Horseman,

The portion of the CONDUCT GUIDELINES related to posting of information (specifically that portion below) is not limited to DND-specific/sensitive information.

• You will not post sensitive or non-public information.

You have been verbally warned in the past; you now are on Recorded Warning IAW the Army.ca Warning System.

The Army.ca Staff

 

[kincanucks]

Maher Arar to stay on U.S. no-fly list

:nana:

 

[vonGarvin]

All kidding and joking aside, I wonder *why* the US keeps him on the no-flly list.  Given that the US is a massive bureaucracy, the chance for personalities to influence the decision without bereaucratic influence to keep it on the straight and narrow boggle the mind.  I mean, it makes perfect sense to blame Bush for everything,  : , but I don't smell a conspiracy here.  Just curious is all.

 

[GAP]

I seriously think that the US just does not want to back down. It would send the message that they can be wrong and there's no way in hell they want anybody, especially Canada, telling them what to do. Besides, what are we going to do?

 

[vonGarvin]

I seriously think that the US just does not want to back down. It would send the message that they can be wrong and there's no way in hell they want anybody, especially Canada, telling them what to do. Besides, what are we going to do?

My point is this: those "in the know" if you will, probably have little influence to say that personality will influence decisions such as this.  With all the red tape, and with all the checks and balances inherent in the U.S. system, I would find ego as a basis for such a decision to be problematic, is all.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Does 3rd Horseman know we're not talking about Leahy form the 'Trailer Park Boys'? Just wondering, cause that seems to be the level of his discourse.

 

[manhole]

I am wondering WHY he would ever want to go to the US.  What difference is it if he is on their no-fly list?  If I went through what he went through, I'd be darned if I would ever want to go back to the US.  Just my 2 cents worth........

 

[FredDaHead]

I am wondering WHY he would ever want to go to the US.   What difference is it if he is on their no-fly list?   If I went through what he went through, I'd be darned if I would ever want to go back to the US.   Just my 2 cents worth........

What, if you had allegedly been deported to a Middle East country where you had been alledgedly tortured (which there is absolutely no proof of) for being suspected of being a terrorist and acting very suspiciously?

Of course, if you really were a terrorist, you'd want to avoid going back to the US so they can't arrest you again and make you confess...

 

[George Wallace]

I am wondering WHY he would ever want to go to the US.   What difference is it if he is on their no-fly list?   If I went through what he went through, I'd be darned if I would ever want to go back to the US.   Just my 2 cents worth........

Apparently for the same reason he was arrested in the first place......He was flying on the cheapest Airline Ticket he could find and it had US Connections. 

If you wanted to fly from Toronto to Australia, you would have a US Connection in LA and Honolulu.  That would mean that if you were on the NO FLY List in the US, you would be arrested, or refused the connecting and any other flight.

 

[geo]

Then there is also the issue of riding in a plane that is not destined for the US and for some unknown reason, mechanical or otherwise, the plane lands in the US.  Guess what happens, regardless of where your intended destination was, you are hauled off th plane and detained for however long the US wants to detain you.  Remember, Cdn airlines must make available all passenger data of flights that even come near the US

 

[observor 69]

What, if you had allegedly been deported to a Middle East country where you had been alledgedly tortured (which there is absolutely no proof of) for being suspected of being a terrorist and acting very suspiciously?

Of course, if you really were a terrorist, you'd want to avoid going back to the US so they can't arrest you again and make you confess...

"allegedly been deported to a Middle East country where you had been alledgedly tortured (which there is absolutely no proof of) "

Did you even take a glance at the O'Connor Report ?  Please spare me!

 

[Edward Campbell]

Perhaps 3rd Horseman is using the same faint hopes as John Ibbitson in today’s (24 Jan 07) Globe and Mail in this article which is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070124.wxibbitson24/BNStory/National/home

Democrats see shades of McCarthyism in Arar case

JOHN IBBITSON
From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

The case of Maher Arar has become a political football in the United States. This is heartening.

The American government released a letter Monday, stating that it will not remove Mr. Arar from its border-control watch-list, on the grounds that the Americans have information different from that provided by Canadian police and intelligence sources.

The information is, apparently, not seriously incriminating. Canadian officials have reviewed the American intelligence and concluded that it in no way changes the findings of the Canadian judicial inquiry that exonerated Mr. Arar. Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day repeated yesterday that the Canadian government would continue to press to have Mr. Arar's name cleared south of the border.

But those efforts have been ineffectual. This White House has never worried much about the civil liberties of its own citizens -- let alone those of foreigners -- in its efforts to deter another terrorist attack. Neither has Mr. Arar had much luck in the U.S. courts. Prior to last November, his cause was pretty much hopeless.

But the midterm election placed the Democrats in charge of Congress, and they accuse the administration of abusing its powers, through extrajudicial incarcerations, the alleged use of torture at Guantanamo Bay prison, and warrantless wiretaps. In that context, Mr. Arar is valuable to the Democrats as part of the Bush-equals-McCarthy indictment.

Democrat Senator Patrick Leahy is particularly incensed about the U.S. government's treatment of Mr. Arar. Mr. Leahy is the new chairman of the Senate judiciary committee, which makes him a very powerful person. Last week, he excoriated Attorney-General Alberto Gonzales over the administration's decision to deliver Mr. Arar to the tender mercies of Syrian interrogators.

"We knew damn well, if he went to Canada, he wouldn't be tortured," Mr. Leahy -- who is generally a very respectful senator -- practically yelled. "We also knew damn well, if he went to Syria, he'd be tortured."

It's good to hear some Yankee horse sense once again being spoken in Congress.

Mr. Gonzales made two promises: that he would present more public information on the administration's decision to keep Mr. Arar on a watch list, and that he would brief the committee in private.

The release of the letter is presumably part -- and perhaps even all -- of the new public information. Since it says nothing more, in essence, than "Trust us: We have our own reasons to suspect Mr. Arar," and since the Canadians have already discounted the information behind those reasons, that letter doesn't help the situation at all.

Mr. Leahy gave Mr. Gonzales until the end of this week to schedule that in-camera briefing on Mr. Arar. A spokesman for the senator said yesterday that, as yet, Mr. Gonzales has not proposed a date for the briefing.

If the Attorney-General misses the deadline, Mr. Leahy has vowed to convene a public hearing exclusively on the Arar situation, which would turn it into a major political story south of the border.

The American sequel to the Arar affair offers an important lesson for Canadians on the importance of treating the Bush administration over the next two years as though it were a Canadian minority government: impermanent, weak, subject to political blackmail by the opposition. With both houses of Congress in the hands of the Democrats, a Vermont senator who decides to champion the case of a persecuted Canadian can strike the fear of the Lord into the administration in a way no Canadian remonstrance ever could.

The Canadian government might want to consider talking less to the White House, the State Department, and the U.S. embassy in Ottawa and focus more on the Democrat senators and representatives who control the congressional committees.

If all else fails, we can always wait two years, in hopes that the next president will do right by Maher Arar.

jibbitson@globeandmail.com

First, this is undeniably true: "We knew damn well, if he went to Canada, he wouldn't be tortured … We also knew damn well, if he went to Syria, he'd be tortured."  It speaks volumes about the impact fear has had on the world’s most liberal society – liberal being used in its correct sense, not as the terminally lazy and stupid would have it as a synonym for left wing.

Second, neither I nor 3rd Horseman nor Sen. Leahy, nor unnamed Canadian officials, nor even omnipotent journalists have any idea what information the Americans have – they may tell some people some of the truth some of the time but our American friends are not fools – not most of them anyway – and only fools release ALL counter-intelligence information, to anyone, even to politicians with lawfully mandated oversight functions.  The ‘facts’ provided about Mr. Arar have been declared, in the tradition of Scottish law, as not proven, even as not provable.  That does not mean they were without foundation, it just means that the evidence provided to a distinguished Canadian jurist was insufficient to prove anything so he, quite rightly, said ‘Not guilty’ of the allegations.  That’s not quite the same as innocent, but it is good enough for Mr. Arar in Canada but not for Mr. Arar in the USA.

Third, it is the legitimate duty of a government, any government, to press the case for its citizens when there is reason to believe that they have been unjustly treated in a foreign country.  Mr. Justice O’Connor’s finding impose that burden on the Government of Canada.  I think the exchange of notes means that Canada has met its minimum burden towards Mr. Arar.

Finally, Sen. Leahy’s interest is in weakening the Republican Party in advance of the 2008 elections.  He is using Mr. Arar.  Given what I’ve read about Sen. Leahy I’m sure his outrage is real enough but the interests he is serving are 100% American.



Edit: hyperlink to Globe and Mail source added

 

[observor 69]

+1 Edward

 

[cplcaldwell]

Yup. Edward Campbell quotes John Ibbitson; I'm pretty good with that...

What I would note is the reference to the verdict not proven. This is of course an interesting artifact of Scottish law that, AFAIK, does not exist in Canadian or American law. It's sort of by 'default' that 'not proven' goes not 'not guilty' in this instance.

Mr Justice O'Conner, after all, has a framework he must work in and it is Canadian law not Scottish law: however useful it might have been to have been able to, however illuminating the reference is.

Perhaps we should adopt 'not proven' in some instances. But hey, I'm out of my lane there .. so ...

I think it's quite clear that the Americans have more on this than they will share. 'We' all know secrets, at many levels, exist at a 'need to know' level, and that 'we' keep secrets that 'we' share with only a few countries, or some not at all. It's just the way it is.

I am not sure that this excuses the Americans on the way Mr Arar was handled. I am pretty sure it means no one, except perhaps Mr Gonzales, Sen Leahy (et al, in camera) and few spooks will actually ever know the whole truth.

Sad times we live in, but times to remain ever so squeaky clean, nevertheless.

 

[observor 69]

So I am right in hearing the thread say that I can accuse anyone of anything and they have the onus to prove their innocence.

Guilty till proven innocent. 

 

[geo]

Well....
In Canada, he's inocent

in the US, where it is their playing field, they say he isn't.
They say they are justified in their stand by documents that we are not privy to.

So long as we play in their field.... guess we have to play house rules - whatever that means.

 

[GAP]

It's their country. They can let anyone they want in, and conversely stop whomever they want from coming in. It sucks to be Arar, but that's all this is.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

It's their country. They can let anyone they want in, and conversely stop whomever they want from coming in. It sucks to be Arar, but that's all this is.

+1. Their country, their rules. None of our business. There's lot's of Canadians, and other nationalities, that for one reason or another, are not allowed entry into the US.

He's not special.