[bountyhunter]

Speaking of human rights violations... we all know that people here can be locked up without trial, but at least they can't be TORTURED....... well, apparrently the administration has an outside service who does that for them.

On 60 Minutes last night they ran the story of a canadian citizen of middle eastern descent who was siezed here in the US and held without charges. Then, he was sent directly to Syria where he was held in an underground cell the size of a grave (completely dark, total isolation) and brought out only for beatings and questionings. That went on a year until the Syrians released him. Apparrently he signed some bogus confession while being tortured, but the Syrians later reported to US officials they could find absolutely nothing on the guy and believed he was innocent.

Bottom line: the US Justice Department violated international law by deporting a canadian citizen to a foreign country, and they did it specifically because they could use "persuasion" on him. Ashcroft claimed it was justified because he was believed to be a "threat". What he failed to admit is that international law specifically forbids sending any person to a country where it is likely they will be tortured.

What's sickening is that Bush is well aware that Syria uses torture, and accused them of it outright and labeled them one of the members of the "axis of evil". I guess even mudering regimes have some useful purpose?

[Dave R]

Hmmmm. Did 60 minutes give sources on this? Why was the guy sent to Syria? And Bush knew about this and gave the order ro deport him to Syria specifically so he could be tortured? Are you sure it wasn't some lower-level person, possibly even a Democrat, who sent him oveseas?

Somthing is not making sense, here. Sounds like typical anti-Bush propaganda.

This is just like saying Hillary gave the order to burn the Davidian's compound in Waco.

[El Tejon]

You sure this wasn't a Nazi war criminal that held Canadian citizenship and the U.S. deported him to Israel?:confused:

[WR Olsen]

The story is true. The individual in question was held under the provisions of the Patriot Act when he arrived in the US from Syria Despite the fact that he is a naturalized Canadian he was returned to the country of origen ie: Syria

The US isn't saying why he was sent back, but I think the HSA mucked this one up big time.

[El Tejon]

So, why was he grabbed? Immigration?:confused:

[4v50 Gary]

Wasn't this story released a couple of months ago?

[buzz_knox]

The US isn't saying why he was sent back, but I think the HSA mucked this one up big time.

First, it's DHS, not HSA. Second, if they did muck it up, then it falls into the category of innocent people being caught up in the process. An absolute tragedy, but one that has been going on since well before 9/11. In fact, since before anyone on this board was alive. That makes the title of this thread a lie.

[JohnBT]

He came from Syria, he went back to Syria. If he didn't want to be in Syria then why oh why was he there? What's the problem?

John

[rock jock]

Apparrently he signed some bogus confession while being tortured
How do you know it was bogus?

[JitsuGuy]

If we can't torture people, then we'll send them to a place where they can be tortured... By the way, it's been proven that torture doesn't work. People confess to things they didn't even committ to end the grievous pain.

J

Down with the NWO!

[bountyhunter]

Hmmmm. Did 60 minutes give sources on this? ? The source was the person himself, his wife, documentary footage on the Prime Minister of canada making an angry speech about it, documentary footage of protest rallies in canada asking their government to intervene, Ashcroft making a whining evasion speech about how it was legal because the US was threatened, as well as statements from the Syrians who deny he was tortured..... that enough sources for you?

Why was the guy sent to Syria?

Because the US supected he might be a terrorist and they wnted the Syrians to get the information out of him. US officials questioned him and he kept denying everything (because it was false) so they sent him to a country where torture is used. It gives the US deniability.

And Bush knew about this and gave the order ro deport him to Syria specifically so he could be tortured?? John Ashcroft, the head of the Justice department gave the orders. he rports directly to Bush. So, no I can't prove Bush specifically gave the order..... just that the Nazi he appointed to run the JD did.

Here is the record on what Bush knew:

"Torture in Syrian prisons is well-documented. The state department’s own report cites an array of gruesome tortures routinely used in Syrian jails. And in a speech last fall, President Bush condemned Syria, alongside Iraq, for what he called the country’s “legacy of torture and oppression.”


Are you sure it wasn't some lower-level person, possibly even a Democrat, who sent him oveseas? It was the Justice Department, which is run by John Ashcroft who is a republican and a Bush appointee.

[bountyhunter]

How do you know it was bogus?

let's see.... because the Syrians checked out the information and found out it was false. he was never where he was accused of being or met with the terrorists he was accused of seeing. It was pure BS... but as the gentlemen pointed out, people who are tortured will confess to anything.

From the report, here is what the Syrians said:

"“But we did our investigations. We traced links. We traced relations. We tried to find anything. We couldn’t,” says Moustapha, who adds that they shared their reports with the U.S. “We always share information with anybody alleged to be in close contact with al Qaeda with the United States.”

[bountyhunter]

So, why was he grabbed? Immigration?

No charges were ever filed. he was accused by US officials of being Al Qaeda based on the claim that he had met with individuals who were terrorists. It was pure crap and they had no proof. He was of Syrian descent, but he was a Canadian citizen. The Patriot Act paranoia saw that as enough reason to have a guy tortured.

[buzz_knox]

So did Ashcroft give the orders or did the Justice Dept. which he heads do so? Pick your story and stick with it.

Once again, show me where anything happened that didn't happen prior to 9/11. We deported people and/or refused to allow their entry on a regular basis long before 9/11 occurred. As for Syria torturing him, sounds more like they were interested in figuring out why we booted him than anything. You see, Syria doesn't provide any real support for the war on terror, yet all of a sudden, they are torturing people at our request? Not likely.

[bountyhunter]

He came from Syria, he went back to Syria. If he didn't want to be in Syria then why oh why was he there? What's the problem?

He came from CANADA! he was a Canadian citizen who lived in canada and had lived there for years. By your reasoning, can I deport that lunatic Arnold Schwarzenegger back to Austria before he bankrupts California? I thought when you became a citizen of a country, that meant THAT was the country you were now "from".

[bountyhunter]

So did Ashcroft give the orders or did the Justice Dept. which he heads do so? Pick your story and stick with it.

Excuse me, the delete feature is there for when you accidentally post something ridiculous.

Ashcroft is responsible for the policies and actions of the JD, he also defended these specific (ILLEGAL) actions when it was made public. It's clear whomever filled out the travel authorization form to ship this guy out was following Ashcroft's orders. Take your pick as to who gave the verbal orders to put him on the plane, equivocating over that point shows desperation on your part.

[JitsuGuy]

The definition of a "terrorist" from section 802 of the Patriot Act...

(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;

A little broad don't ya think?

J

[bountyhunter]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/21/60II/main594974.shtml

[buzz_knox]

Take your pick as to who gave the verbal orders to put him on the plane, equivocating over that point shows desperation on your part.

Desperation? Not hardly. I've read your posts and while you have evoked emotions (usually some entertainment at your mental gymnastics to blame Bush for everything from 9/11 to your toast getting burned) before, desperation has never been among them.

You stated that Ashcroft gave the orders. Now, you state that it is irrelevant, because whoever it was was acting on his orders. I was just trying to figure out what the facts were versus your spin of the facts.

[bountyhunter]

You stated that Ashcroft gave the orders. Now, you state that it is irrelevant, because whoever it was was acting on his orders. I was just trying to figure out what the facts were versus your spin of the facts.

I think I remember the words to that song: "It vazent me, I vaz only follweeng orderz!" As I recall, the leaders were held accountable back then as well. I think Milosivic is trying to use that at his trial right now.

So, my claim that Ashcroft is responsible whether he personally issued the order to transport is based in solid historical and legal precedent. Your assertion that my argument is invalid because I don't know the name of the guy who bought the plane ticket is ludicrous... but, as solid as what comes out of the administration on the subject.

Actually, you were trying to deflect attention away from the facts that the Justice Department did and continues to do illegal acts under the umbrella of the Patriot Act and is now employing an enemy of our country (Syria) to do it's dirty work. It is a legacy of an administration that has cried about how we must fight the WOT while embracing Saudi Arabia, the actual source of power for Al Qaeada. It is an administration who publicly condems countries for human rights violations, and has no problem when they revoke all of the rights of somebody they have no proof did anything illegal.

Read the article and then try to put some republican whitewash on it. Good luck, it happened just like I said. Bush is overseeing a regime which sanctions complete revocation of human rights up to and including torture, as long as the torture isn't done here.... let's see you put the smiley face on that.

[Richardson]

I could almost believe this story, if it weren't for the fact that Syria isn't our friend. We support Israel, they support the terrorists. WHY would they torture someone for us? How could we expect legitimate information from the Syrians?

It just don't make no sense....


Richardson

[nico]

I agree with Richardson. 60 minutes isn't always the most credible news source (remember the story about Audi brakes?), and it doesn't make sense that Syria would torture someone for us. btw, if someone comes from a country, and is deported for some reason, I have no problem sending them back to the country they came from (regardless of where they claim residence or where they're a citizen).

[bountyhunter]

I could almost believe this story, if it weren't for the fact that Syria isn't our friend. We support Israel, they support the terrorists.

You are assuming we have no relations with Syria and that they harbor no ambitions to get favors from us. Not true. Bush just forgave Moamar Ghadafy, a lifelong exporter of terrorism, killer of hundreds on the Pan Am flight, all of his sins. It is now widely known Bush will do almost anything to get ammunition that supports his positions on his unilateral military policy. This quote from the article says it all:

"He says the Syrians were pressing him to confess he’d been to an al Qaeda training camp in Afghanistan: “They just wanted to find something that the Americans did not find -- and that’s when they asked me about Afghanistan. They said, ‘You’ve been to Afghanistan,’ so they would hit me three, four times. And, if I hesitate, they would hit me again.”

The theme is crystal clear. The US delivered to the Syrians somebody they wanted proof was Al Qaeda. The Syrians did their best to extract a confession. Pretty simple.

We support Israel, they support the terrorists.

You nailed it right there. Syria and other Arab states are trying to curry favor from the US to get Bush to shift his position of "blind support" for Israel, and there have been some signs it is happening. Bush publicly condemned some of Israel's attacks into palestine and that is the first US president to do that.

BTW, from their point of view it is the US that supports the terrorists because they view Israel's incursions into Palestine and annexation of territories as state terrorism. One man's terrorist is always somebody else's freedom fighter and vice versa.

[bountyhunter]

btw, if someone comes from a country, and is deported for some reason, I have no problem sending them back to the country they came from (regardless of where they claim residence or where they're a citizen).

OK, then would you PLEASE send Guvnor Ahnolde home to Austria before he bankrupts Kellyfooonia?

[idd]

and it doesn't make sense that Syria would torture someone for us.

A lot of things in that part of the world don't make sense. Earlier US support for Saddam didn't make sense - and yet it was official US policy.

http://bushflash.com/thanks.html

[Bill Hook]

OK, then would you PLEASE send Guvnor Ahnolde home to Austria before he bankrupts Kellyfooonia?

Uh, doesn't the Governator have to get approval from the communist-dominated legislature for his spending? :rolleyes:

[JitsuGuy]

Bush supports Israel? That's news to me. I've read in numerous places that he's for setting up a Palistinian state.

J

[Baron Holbach4]

Both Canadian and U.S. intelligence was extensive on Maher Arar:

http://circ.jmellon.com/docs/view.asp?id=300

A National Review commentator shares his thoughts on the Arar case:

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/stakelbeck200401120902.asp

[rock jock]

Earlier US support for Saddam didn't make sense - and yet it was official US policy.
At that time, yes it did.

Bush supports Israel? That's news to me. I've read in numerous places that he's for setting up a Palistinian state.
Uh, so is the Israeli govt. They have committed to setting up a Palestinian state, only they want to preserve their security in doing so.


I have to agree with Richardson on this. If the country in question was Saudi Arabia, then it might be believable. But Syria? Heck, if you remember, Syria was eyed as a possible invasion target only nine months ago.

[greyhound]

There's got to be more to this than we're seeing.

John Ashcroft is almost more hated by leftists and libertarians than Madeliene Albright was by conservatives.

Why the heck would ANYBODY want to be AG?

[Waitone]

Red Flags
--one media outlet
--CBS
--Offers story opponents of Bush desparately want to believe
--Contains elements of truth known from other sources
--A reader can't logically connect elements of the story

Based on what I know right now, I'd say it is planted agiprop. May not be but the lack of corroborating stories is suspicious.

[Cool Hand Luke 22:36]

bountyhunter wrote:

You nailed it right there. Syria and other Arab states are trying to curry favor from the US to get Bush to shift his position of "blind support" for Israel, and there have been some signs it is happening. Bush publicly condemned some of Israel's attacks into palestine and that is the first US president to do that.


Bush hasn't been a blind supporter of Israel. He has opposed the security wall being built by the Israelis for example, and has hesitated in going after Hezbollah in the War on Terror.

Other Presidents have had very serious conflicts with the Israelis. Carter actually recalled the US Ambassador from Israel and loudly announced that there was going to be a reevaluation of US policy towards Israel while Cyrus Vance was Sec. State.

Some, not all, of the Arab states are trying to placate the US to avoid being invaded like Iraq, not to force any shift on US policy on Israel. Lybia's capitulation on nuclear weapons inspections is a direct result of the war in Iraq and is another example of President Bush's successess.

The only thing that the Arab states have ever done to try and shift US policy on Israel is impose two oil embargos and support terrorism against US interests.

[RightIsRight]

Greyhound,

Madame Albright was Sec State, not AG

[Standing Wolf]

...a canadian citizen of middle eastern descent...

It doesn't have American civil rights.

[gunsmith]

a canadian citizen of middle eastern descent

Hey it's not Ashcroft's fault if the guy didn't listen to all the
propaganda!
If a a canadian citizen of middle eastern descent
was walking around my neck of the woods
I would call the CIA FBI TSA NSA and the guy around the corner who
has an illegal
rifle with a pistol grip!!!!

Don't they ( canadian citizens of middle eastern descent) realize
the DHS/TSA is in cahoots with the trilateral commision?
Lets get Syria!:rolleyes:


Has anyone seen my tinfoil hat?

[Mr Jody Hudson]

It's been my experience, and lots of it, when you DO know the truth about a subject and 60 minutes does a story on it...

1. The truth is edited in numerous ways to sound opposite the reality.

2. Verbal quotes are edited to make them the opposite of truth.

3. The reason for the lies are political and the purpose is anti-American in some way... sometimes it takes a while to understand how it's in opposition to America.

4. When I don't know the truth of a story I am convinced that 60 minutes is telling an alarming truth and I do become alarmed in accordance with the story in many cases... I have to MAKE myself remember what I know about 60 minutes stories.

YMMV... not mine.

[nico]

very good point. Another example of that: a few years ago, 60 minutes did an "expose" about how unqualified doctors were doing plastic surgery and other cosmetic procedures. One of the examples they used (and pressed) was how a dentist had been doing face lifts, nose jobs, and other face and neck operations. What they only mentioned in passing was that this dentist was an oral surgeon. They also completely failed to report that oral surgeons are more often than not MDs and surgeons. The procedures they mentioned that the "dentist" did are all perfectly legal for a liscenced oral surgeon to perform and well within their qualifications. They interviewed the president of the ADA for the piece and turned a 1.5hr interview into a few brief comments (couldn't have been more than a minute) that made him look very defensive. They didn't include the part of the interview where he explained an oral surgeon's qualifications for practicing plastic surgery, but they did show the interviewer asking the question and the ADA president's first couple sentences in response (which leads me to believe the omission was sensationalism). My father (who is a dentist and was the president of the UM chapter of the ASDA at the time) knew the president of the ADA and said that he was pissed at the hack job they did on the interview.

[jimpeel]

What's sickening is that Bush is well aware that Syria uses torture, and accused them of it outright and labeled them one of the members of the "axis of evil".I'm still trying to figure out when Bush named Syria as a part of the axis of evil which has three players, Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. I guess a couple of those are spelled sorta like S-y-r-i-a.

[The Scandinavian]

quote:...a canadian citizen of middle eastern descent...



It doesn't have American civil rights.




[John Cleese voice]
....Er...Ah! Well, that's all right then. NEXT!
[/John Cleese voice]

[JitsuGuy]

I'm still trying to figure out when Bush named Syria as a part of the axis of evil which has three players, Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. I guess a couple of those are spelled sorta like S-y-r-i-a.

Just give it time, Syria has lots of oil too.

J

[jimpeel]

Just give it time, Syria has lots of oil too.And perhaps Saddam's WMDs as well.

[Fred Thompson]

And maybe Elvis,too...

[fallingblock]

I assume that folks have seen their 'gun' related stories?:mad:

And now, they do a story on a (naturalized Canadian) Syrian tortured by Syria....

************************************************************
"is now employing an enemy of our country (Syria) to do it's dirty work."
************************************************************

Well, there you go.;)

Gee, the broadcast media is plumbing new depths in the U.S.:barf:

[hammer4nc]

Some have dismissed the premise of this thread, based on the source, and/of lack of corroboration. Might try rethinking that conclusion, as fallout from the incident emerges in Canada, at the Prime Minister level, no less.

I can't wait to hear our resident apologists respond to this article. Batter up!


Link: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1074813009075&call_pageid=968332188774&col=968350116467

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A search they'll come to regret


JAMES TRAVERS

Ottawa—Along with foolish, insensitive and stunningly self-destructive, the RCMP raid on a respected Ottawa journalist's home and office was also predictable. The consequences will now be enormous.

By figuratively kicking down Ottawa Citizen reporter Juliet O'Neill's door, the RCMP did two things it will regret: It pushed Paul Martin's new government into its first home-grown crisis and focused public attention on intrusive security measures that the country had until Wednesday chosen to largely ignore.

Only hours after the raid, the first results landed with a thud.

Speaking to reporters in Davos, Switzerland, the Prime Minister again promised to get to the bottom of the case that sent Canadian Maher Arar to a Syrian jail and the RCMP to O'Neill's doorstep.

Then he went a significant step further, suggesting security legislation written in fear and haste after Sept. 11, 2001, may need revision.

None of that is good news for the RCMP and its keenly political commissioner, Giuliano Zaccardelli.

An independent inquiry into the Arar affair is now all but inevitable. It will almost certainly embarrass the RCMP and perhaps other agencies, raise difficult questions about the cross-border exchange of information between government agencies and strain relations with the U.S. that Martin has been trying hard to repair.

Chances are the result will be more controls on a force that too often has been unable to control itself.

The RCMP can expect to soon get at least some of the scrutiny now reserved for CSIS, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. And the government will be under enormous public pressure to tighten sweeping anti-terrorism legislation that too easily trades privacy for the illusion of security.

Demonstrating how fast that pressure is rising, Martin was forced into an awkward denial that Canada is becoming a police state. He was more comfortable arguing that the RCMP has every right to plug leaks that have helped keep the Arar case in headlines. Fair enough. But while stopping leaks and recovering sensitive information is important to the force, what should concern Martin most is the role the RCMP played in fingering a Canadian citizen to U.S. authorities.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more than three years the RCMP has been sliding down a slippery slope
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


That concern spiked again this week when CBS television reported that law enforcement officials here approved Arar's deportation to Syria at the same time foreign affairs officials were trying to bring him home. Along with earlier suggestions of Canadian complicity, that contradicts statements by Martin and others that Ottawa was not involved in a decision that led to Arar's 10-month imprisonment and interrogation in a country with an appalling human rights record.

Equally embarrassing is the sense that Ottawa is getting much of its information from top U.S. officials, particularly U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell. Along with the RCMP's earlier and far from forthcoming testimony to a parliamentary committee, that suggests patterns identified by the 1981 McDonald Commission are repeating.

That should be no surprise.

For more than three years the RCMP has been sliding down a slippery slope toward the swamp it finds itself in today. That slide began when Jean Chrétien's administration, determined to reassure a traumatized Washington that Canada is secure, overruled experience, common sense and the royal commission to put the RCMP back in the spy business.

That decision recrossed a line Ottawa drew more than 20 years ago when it recognized the fundamental difference between police and intelligence work. What it learned then and forgot in 2001 is that the RCMP has a disturbing history of human rights abuse and political deception.

In its watershed report on barn burning, burglary and theft, the McDonald Commission found the RCMP's elected masters were kept in the dark as it broke laws and rules in the name of national security. In a conclusion that now sounds like a forecast, the commission stated: "The common thread which we have detected through these incidents is that of a willingness on the part of the RCMP to deceive those outside the force who have some sort of constitutional authority of jurisdiction over them and their activities."

Ottawa responded by stripping the RCMP of its security responsibilities. It created CSIS and its watchdogs in an effort to counter threats to national security without recklessly sacrificing human, civil and legal rights.

As attorney-general in 2001, Anne McLellan effectively reversed that decision by giving police new tools to fight terrorism. But she and others working on the security file chose not to impose on police forces the oversight the McDonald Commission considered essential. That error of omission or commission is now haunting McLellan in her new public safety portfolio. Along with the Prime Minister, it now falls to the former constitutional law professor to restore public confidence not just in the RCMP, but also in this government.

McLellan will have to quickly demonstrate that the RCMP is in check, that Canadian agencies are not putting citizens at risk by feeding information across the border and that freedom of the press, guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, is not in jeopardy.

Nothing less will do.

[bountyhunter]

Some have dismissed the premise of this thread, based on the source, and/of lack of corroboration.

Actually, they only dismiss it because they have no way to answer the heinous acts of the Justice Department and their implications of human rights violations. Ashcroft himself has spoken on this matter and there is a massive amount of "corroboration" as to what actually happened and who did it. The facts are not indispute, just the question of whether this man actually posed any threat to the US.

When confronted, Ashcroft has maintained that they have "proof" this man is Al Qaeda...... sound familiar? We have proof, but we can't show it to you. Same thing they used to justify a war recently... it's pure BS. If they had even a shred of proof of anything on this guy, they would have locked him up and thrown away the key. They don't have jack squat, but to cover what they did, they continue to slander him and maintain he is an Al Qaeda follower.

BTW: there has been a law suit filed naming Ashcroft personally as the respondent and charging a violation of law whereby a person was sent to a country where it was known that torture was used. We'll see how much "proof" they have to back up their claim this guy is in Al Qaeda if it goes to trial.

To answer a point brought up in vain yesterday: who SPECIFICALLY ordered that this man be flown to Syria (on a private jet no less). It was Ashcroft's undersecretary, the man who reports directly to him.

[bountyhunter]

I'm still trying to figure out when Bush named Syria as a part of the axis of evil which has three players, Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. I guess a couple of those are spelled sorta like S-y-r-i-a.

Well, the role call for evil nations is expanding in Bush's mind.

Here's the quote from the article regarding what Bush said about Syria in his speech:

"And in a speech last fall, President Bush condemned Syria, alongside Iraq, for what he called the country’s “legacy of torture and oppression.”

[bountyhunter]

There's got to be more to this than we're seeing.

There's all that invisible proof Ashcroft has that he just can't show anybody which is a lot like the Emporer's New Clothes. Invisible to everybody except Bush suppoters.....

I can see Ashcroft's point though: anybody who was born in Syria MUSt be a terrorist, right?

Uh-oh... wait a minute..... that would mean anybody born in Iraq would be a terrorist and we just spent 505 US lives and $400 Billion bringing "freedom" to them....

Crap, there's something wrong here. I'll give Big John a call and ask him to explain it again.:barf:

[DaveB]

Bravo! The board writes a textbook rightwing response to criticism.

Choose one or more of the following:

"He's a socialist."
"He's a faggot."
"He's a Democrat."
"He's a disgruntled former employee."
"He's a loser."
"He's a whiner."
"He's a terroristSymp."
"He's a dupe."
"He's an elitist."
"He's a pointy-headed liberal."
"He's a nattering nabob of negativism."
"He's an Easterner."
"He's a Californian."
"He's...

One doesn't need intellectual rigor or logic. The only thing necessary to dismiss your opponent is to call him names.

db

[bountyhunter]

Uh, doesn't the Governator have to get approval from the communist-dominated legislature for his spending?

NOPE. The legislator already told him to shove his "sell bonds now, dump the debt on the next administration" plan. So, Ahnolde is going to take it to a ballot initiative which bypasses the legislature. All he has to do is get 50.0000001% of the voters to go for it and it goes straight into law. That particular feature of Kali law is the main reason this state is so screwed up: ay moron can get signatures and get something on the ballot and then the sheeple are pretty easy to dupe into voting for it. Their campaign will probably be able to convince the majority that "bond" will be some kind of spiffy new denture adhesive.

[DaveB]

Arar is suing...

From http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0123-03.htm

...Arar said he was brutally tortured by the Syrians and forced to sign a false confession of terrorist complicity before being allowed in October to return to Canada.

In the suit, which names Ashcroft, Homeland Secretary Tom Ridge and FBI Director Robert Mueller among others, Arar seeks compensation, an apology and public exoneration.

The suit alleges that government officials made the decision to deport Arar to Syria, with the full knowledge of the existence of state-sponsored torture in that country, and in contravention of the Convention Against Torture, ratified by the United States in 1994.

"This case involves the torture and arbitrary detention of an innocent man, seized and removed on the basis of uncorroberated and incorrect information," said Barbara Olshansky, deputy legal director at the Center for Constitutional Rights (CCR), which filed the suit on Arar's behalf.

"Federal officials deported Mr. Arar to Syria ... precisely because that country can and does use methods of interrogation that would not be legally or morally acceptable in this country," Olshansky said.

In its only statement on the case, the US Justice Department has said it has information that Arar is a member of Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda organisation "and, therefore, remains a threat to national security."

Speaking by phone from Canada, Arar told reporters that he had spent 10-1/2 months in a "grave-sized cell" in Syria, during which time he was repeatedly beaten with a thick, rubber-covered electric cable...

Perhaps y'all could respond to what's written here, instead of posting nonsense about the source.

db

[jimpeel]

"And in a speech last fall, President Bush condemned Syria, alongside Iraq, for what he called the country’s “legacy of torture and oppression.”Ahhhh. There it is right there. He clearly states "Syria is a member ot the Axis of Evil".

Thanks for the clarification.

[idd]

btw, if someone comes from a country, and is deported for some reason, I have no problem sending them back to the country they came from (regardless of where they claim residence or where they're a citizen).

Yeah, especially if he has dark skin and a funny religion...hell, claiming to be "Canadian" canyoubelieveit? We all know that Arabs are just terrorists and that Canadians are mostly a buncha of commie gun-grabbers, anyway. And he actually claims to have rights to due process? A right not to be sent to some totalitarian hellhole where torture of dissidents is routine? Sheesh, what will these furriners think of next?

In the words of that one deep-thinker named Mr. Benchley over at DU, "what a pantload!"

It's not as if the state is trampling the rights of decent, God-fearing, Christian, white folks....oh wait....
Never mind (http://ktla.trb.com/news/local/la-me-sherburne21jan21,0,142568.story?coll=ktla-home-3) and also this (http://www.libertyroundtable.org/projects/freehunter/index.html) and this (http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/cst-nws-letter22.html) and here (http://www.clairewolfe.com/wolfesblog/00000526.html) and...well, you get the idea.

----

Each time they chip away at anyone's freedom, they are chipping away at everyone's freedom. It saddens me when I read members of THR engaging in apologetics for the emerging Police State.

[bountyhunter]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"And in a speech last fall, President Bush condemned Syria, alongside Iraq, for what he called the country’s “legacy of torture and oppression.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ahhhh. There it is right there. He clearly states "Syria is a member ot the Axis of Evil".

Thanks for the clarification.:

Semantics: the final frontier for those with no ammunition left.

Let's hear what clever replies you have to the point I made which you are tap dancing around (I will write it out explicitly to avoid being semanticized):

George Bush KNOWS AND HAS STATED PUBLICLY that Syria tortures it's own citizens. His appointee (John Ashcroft) authorized that a canadian citizen was sent to that country after telling the Syrians that the US believed he was Al Qaeda and wanted them to obtain information.

*** did they think the Syrians were going to do to the guy?

[Cool Hand Luke 22:36]

Textbook LEFTWING responses to criticism.

Choose one or more of the following:

"He's a Nazi."
"He's a Christian Fundamentalist."
"He's a wing nut."
"He's a disgruntled former employer."
"He's a racist loser who doesn't have a Master's degree."
"He's got a confederate flag on his pickup truck."
"He's a racist."
"He's a racist."
"He's a red neck ."
"He's a gap toothed yokel."
"He's a Klu Klux Klanner."
"He's a Southerner."
"He's a gun nut."
"He's a racist."
"He's another McCarthy."
"He's questioning my patriotism."
"He's a homophobe."
"He's a neo-Con."
"He's a racist...

One doesn't need intellectual rigor or logic. The only thing necessary to dismiss your opponent is to call him names.

Too true.

[fallingblock]

that "Sixty Minutes" is an extremely unreliable source for factual information.:D

As to the deportation of an 'innocent' Canadian citizen....

It is my understanding that under international law, should one be facing
deportation and be in possession of more than one valid passport, it is the discretion of the nation issuing the deportation order which determines the destination. At least that's how it was explained to me by the U.S. Consulate in Canberra as well as both the Australian and New Zealand immigration folks. I hold passports for all three nations, and it can be a bit tricky travelling between any two of them, especially in these days of heightened paranoia at ports of entry.

Now, as to any legal action which Arar is seeking....

"Arar seeks compensation"

I bet he does, and he's got lots of help with this one, it seems:) .

I think it is unfortunate that Arar got caught up in the system, but I wouldn't myself claim to know that he is without blame.

All the folks who are deep in hatred of Ashcroft could do with taking a few deep breaths now and again....:)

Y'all are liable to pop if you dont':eek:

[jimpeel]

Semantics: the final frontier for those with no ammunition left.se·man·tics
n. (used with a sing. or pl. verb)

1. Linguistics. The study or science of meaning in language.

2. Linguistics. The study of relationships between signs and symbols and what they represent. Also called semasiology.

3. The meaning or the interpretation of a word, sentence, or other language form: We're basically agreed; let's not quibble over semantics. You are a bit confused. We are not talking "semantics" we are talking misquotation.

You stated: What's sickening is that Bush is well aware that Syria uses torture, and accused them of it outright and labeled them one of the members of the "axis of evil".He has never used the words "Syria is a member of the Axis of Evil". YOU MADE THAT UP!

When I called you on it, you posted some cocamamie quote from an article you claimed meant the same thing as saying "Syria is a member of the Axis of Evil". BULLS---! It wasn't even a quote by Bush at all, simply a quote from the article on what he said.Here's the quote from the article regarding what Bush said about Syria in his speech:

"And in a speech last fall, President Bush condemned Syria, alongside Iraq, for what he called the country’s “legacy of torture and oppression.”

There are no semantics here, just downright fabrications, misrepresentations, and prevarications.

[jimpeel]

Yeah, especially if he has dark skin and a funny religion...hell, claiming to be "Canadian" canyoubelieveit?Nice job of calling nico a racist without having to actually toe the line and say it out loud. Talk about surreptitious name calling by implication. Keep up the good work.

Now there's semantics, bountyhunter! Take that as a lesson. :rolleyes:

[JitsuGuy]

LOL, instead of addressing the subject this has turned into the likes of a 1st grader recess. I think I'm going to tell the teacher on all of you!

J

[nico]

Yeah, especially if he has dark skin and a funny religion...hell, claiming to be "Canadian" canyoubelieveit? We all know that Arabs are just terrorists and that Canadians are mostly a buncha of commie gun-grabbers, anyway. And he actually claims to have rights to due process? A right not to be sent to some totalitarian hellhole where torture of dissidents is routine? Sheesh, what will these furriners think of next?


For the record, being a mix of japanese, english, italian, spanish, and native american, I have relatively dark skin:rolleyes: Even as dark as some [gasp:eek:] Arabs I know. Apparently, my skin is so dark that I've been mistaken for a "God Damn foreigner" by some jerk despite the fact that I speak perfect (well, average) english. You should really be sure of the person you're talking to before you call them a racist.
Personally, I could care less about what the guy looks like or what color his skin is and I really don't care what religion he is. If someone is flying from ANY country, and there is a reason to deport them, I see no reason not to deport them to the country they came from. As for your complaining about the man's right not to be sent to a "totalitarian hellhole," if he never wanted to go there, why was he there in the first place?


BTW, I don't appreciate being called a racist any more than being called a God damn foreigner, no matter how indirectly you try to do it.

[jimpeel]

You are, of course, correct. We should not feed the trolls; but they're so cute and cuddly we simply can't resist the temptation.

[JitsuGuy]

bountyhunter... Thank God history shows that only about 5% of the total poplulation are the ones who make the social changes in the world. Else we'd trapped man.

J

[kentucky bucky]

For one thing I don't put much crediblity in what spews out of the "Clinton Broadcasting System" ( remember "The Guns of October"?) So.......now the Bush Adiministration is in cahoots with the terrorist state Syria, and they are George W's Mideast lap dog. Yeah that makes perfect sense.....the terrorists are torturing fellow terrorist for the President of the country of infidels that they are sworn to destroy with the blood of their children, and then give any pertinent information to said infidel leader. WHAT A PLAN!!!

If GWB did pull this one off he is the man!!!!! HE"S GOT MY VOTE!!!;)

[idd]

The US Department of Justice headed by Ashcroft said it believed Arar was a member of al-Qaeda, the radical Islamic group blamed for the Sept. 11, 2001, plane strikes and other attacks.

From Canadian sues Ashcroft for deportation to Syria (http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2004/01/24/2003092416)

If the US government believed that Maher Arar was involved in terrorism, then it should have arrested him, indicted him, and tried him.

We are being told that because of the "war on terrorism," we can no longer afford the rights and freedoms that we once heralded before the world.

I don't buy it.

[JitsuGuy]

In all seriousness... Once you step back and actually ponder what happened in this situation... It's pretty freaking scary. Is this what America is about? Absolutely not! What happened to the rights of this individual that are granted to him by the US Constitution? A person's Constitutional rights, EVEN in the name of "terrorism" should not be denied.

Talk about a slippery slope.

J

[VNgo]

What happened to the rights of this individual that are granted to him by the US Constitution? A person's Constitutional rights, EVEN in the name of "terrorism" should not be denied.

I really don't see what the big deal is. Arar is not a U.S. citizen; hence, he has no right whatsoever to claim any Constitutional protections.

[WvaBill]

Rightisright,

But wasn't that nice Reno lady loved by all?

[mattx109]

I really don't see what the big deal is. Arar is not a U.S. citizen; hence, he has no right whatsoever to claim any Constitutional protections.

There is sometimes a difference between what can legally be done and what is right.

This isn't necessarily about constutional rights. It's about human rights.

[VNgo]

There is sometimes a difference between what can legally be done and what is right.

There is, and the U.S. did exactly the right thing in deporting a Syrian to Syria.

As fallingblock pointed out, under international law the U.S. had every right to decide whether he was sent to Syria or Canada; he's simply having a big 'ol pity party so he can drum up enough sympathy to win his frivolous lawsuit.

[mattx109]

...the U.S. did exactly the right thing in deporting a Syrian to Syria.

Possibly. Yet if this had been a child, legally returned to an abusive family away from which he'd run because of a lack of persuasive evidence, one might feel differently.

A good friend of mine was born in Syria. For him to be returned there do to evidence that the authorities claim cannot be released to the public would be an outrage. Think "due process."

[NC Shooter]

You consider 60 minutes a credible news source? You've got to be kidding!!

They are so bad my kids don't even believe them.

Got to be more to this story than you saw. These guys are masters at smear journalism.

[Omega_7]

Is that today the "bad guys" are arab muslims.. so you think it's OK to torture them and you turn a blind eye.

What you do not realize is that some day soon the "Megiddo" project Federal goons will put their monstrous plan into action and it will be Christian patriot gun owners who will be locked up and tortured. If you don't think it can happen here you have the rose colored glasses on:

This monstrosity was put together with the help of the psychotic creep Morris Dees of the "Southern Poverty Law Center" a socialist think tank and advocate for the end of America is as we knew it:

http://www.sweetliberty.org/fbimegiddo.htm

[VNgo]

A good friend of mine was born in Syria. For him to be returned there do to evidence that the authorities claim cannot be released to the public would be an outrage. Think "due process."

It's quite simple, in my opinion: you don't have a right to be in this country unless you're a citizen of it. That doesn't mean we don't allow foreigners to visit, but it does mean we have every right to withdraw our hospitality at any time, for any reason.

[LawDog]

Mud-slinging.

Accusations of lying.

Knee-biting.

And if that wasn't enough, we get Project Meggidio.

Enough. Take it to e-mail, take it to PM, take it to snail mail - I don't care. Take it somewhere else.

Lights out.

LawDog