For all the fans and cheerleaders of 'torture':

Status
Not open for further replies.

Heist

Moderator
http://articles.news.aol.com/news/_a/innocent-man-sent-to-syria-and-tortured/20060918232609990016?ncid=NWS00010000000001

Innocent Man Sent to Syria and Tortured, Probe Finds
Canadian Report Faults Mounties, U.S. for Deportation

TORONTO (Sept. 19) - The United States "very likely" sent a Canadian software engineer to Syria, where he was tortured, based on the false accusation by Canadian authorities that he was suspected of links to al-Qaida, according to a new government report.

"I have waited a long time to have my name cleared. I was tortured and lost a year of my life. I will never be the same," said Maher Arar, who was wrongly accused of having al-Qaida ties.

Syrian-born Maher Arar was exonerated of all suspicion of terrorist activity by the 2 1/2-year commission of inquiry into his case, which urged the Canadian government to offer him financial compensation. Arar is perhaps the world's best-known case of extraordinary rendition -- the U.S. transfer of foreign terror suspects to third countries without court approval.

"I am able to say categorically that there is no evidence to indicate that Mr. Arar has committed any offense or that his activities constitute a threat to the security of Canada," Justice Dennis O'Connor said Monday in a three-volume report on the findings of the inquiry, part of which was made public.

Arar was traveling on a Canadian passport when he was detained at New York's Kennedy Airport on Sept. 26, 2002, on his way home from vacation in Tunisia.

Arar said U.S. authorities sent him to Syria for interrogation as a suspected member of al-Qaida, a link he denied.

He spent nearly a year in prison in Syria and made detailed allegations after his release in 2003 about extensive interrogation, beatings and whippings with electrical cables.

O'Connor criticized the U.S. and recommended that Ottawa file formal protests with both Washington and the Syrian government over Arar's treatment.

"The American authorities who handled Mr. Arar's case treated Mr. Arar in a most regrettable fashion," O'Connor wrote. "They removed him to Syria against his wishes and in the face of his statements that he would be tortured if sent there. Moreover, they dealt with Canadian officials involved with Mr. Arar's case in a less than forthcoming manner."

The U.S. is already under intense criticism from human rights groups over the practice of sending suspects to countries where they could be tortured.

U.S. and Syrian officials refused to cooperate with the Canadian inquiry.


Most Popular Stories


· Innocent Man Sent to Syria and Tortured, Probe Finds
· 'Swift Boat' Money Man Targets Indiana Candidate
· Couple Kidnap Daughter for Abortion, Police Say
· Desperate Home Sellers Bury Statues of St. Joseph
· Researchers Find Underwater Lost World (ABCNews.com)


The commission found the Royal Canadian Mounted Police shared information about Arar with American anti-terrorist agencies both before and after he was detained.

The RCMP asked the U.S. to put Arar on a watch list as an "Islamic extremist individual" suspected of links to the al-Qaida terrorist movement, the report said.

The request was issued after Arar met with another man who was under surveillance, a meeting Arar has said was about how to find inexpensive computer equipment.

"The RCMP had no basis for this description, which had the potential to create serious consequences for Mr. Arar in light of American attitudes and practices," the report said.

The RCMP described Arar as the "target" of a domestic anti-terrorist investigation in Canada when in fact he was a peripheral figure who had come under suspicion only because he had been seen in the company of the man who was under surveillance, the report found.

O'Connor said that much of the material shared with U.S. authorities had not been double-checked to ensure its accuracy and reliability -- a violation of the RCMP's usual rules for divulging information to foreign agencies.

O'Connor concluded that the inaccurate information passed by Canadian police to U.S. authorities "very likely" led to their decision to send Arar to Syria.

"It's quite clear that the RCMP sent inaccurate information to U.S. officials," Arar said at a news conference in Ottawa. "I would have not have even been sent to Syria had this information not been given to them."

"I have waited a long time to have my name cleared. I was tortured and lost a year of my life. I will never be the same," Arar said. "The United States must take responsibility for what it did to me and must stop destroying more innocent lives with its unlawful actions."

The commission concluded there was no evidence Canadian officials participated in or agreed to the decision to send Arar to Syria. But O'Connor recommended that in the future, information should never be provided to a foreign country where there is a credible risk that it will cause or contribute to the use of torture.

Most of the judge's 23 policy recommendations centered on the RCMP and emphasized the need to improve the force's internal policies for national security investigations and the sharing of information with other countries.

Arar's case has been regularly featured on the front pages of Canadian newspapers and public outcry led to the government calling an inquiry. Canada's federal government established the inquiry in 2004 to determine the role Canadian officials played.

O'Connor also found "troubling questions" about the role played by Canadian officials in the cases of three other Canadians of Arab descent -- Ahmad El Maati, Abdullah Almalki and Muayyed Nureddin. All claim they were tortured in Syria after traveling there on personal business, and all suspect that the RCMP, Canadian intelligence or both collaborated with their captors.

O'Connor said he could not get to the bottom of those cases because of the limited nature of his mandate. But he urged the government to appoint an independent investigator -- something short of a full-fledged public inquiry -- to look into those cases.

O'Connor sifted through thousands of pages of documents and sat through testimony from more than 40 witnesses. He delivered two versions of his report to the government: one classified, the other public. But portions of even the public edition of the long-awaited document were withheld due to security concerns.


9/19/2006 06:23:35

I'm going to be up front here: Each and every individual involved in what happened here should be executed. Period.
 
Yea, about this torture...

Does he have all his fingers?... his toes?
Were his fingernails pulled off?
Did they cut his tongue out?
Does he still possess both eyeballs?
Any bruises that will never heal?

I'd ask if THEY CUT HIS HEAD OFF, but since he wasn't held by Islamic Fascists (the enemy about which we need information), that doesn't apply.

I'm really sorry for the guy, but life isn't pretty, and it ain't fair, and you do what you gotta' do, and sometimes mistakes are made.
I learned all of that by the time I was 12 years old.

Now those Canadians... what's the deal with that?

Carter
 
Yea, about this torture...

Does he have all his fingers?... his toes?
Were his fingernails pulled off?
Did they cut his tongue out?
Does he still possess both eyeballs?
Any bruises that will never heal?

Carter, Syria is infamous for its torture of prisoners. And there are a lot of torture methods that don't involve any of the above. Ask Sen. John McCain regarding his time as the "guest" of the North Vietnamese.

I doubt you'd be so cavalier if it had been you that had been the recipient of this. I usually agree with what you post, but this time? Sorry, but your response is a "swing and a miss".

Springmom
 
Now that torture is becoming a little more mainstream and accepted, I can't help wonder when domestic sentences will start to include it.
 
One thing has been left out. This Canadian of Syrian anscestory has Dual citizenship. He is Canadian-Syrian.

Since when is it illegal to deport somebody to the country they choose to retain citizenship in?

I like Canada's attitude "We just told the Americans we thought he might be an Islamic terrorist, we never suggested they do anything with him!" What a load of horse manure. Did Canada cry that they wanted him back from Syria when they thought he was a terrorist? I don't think so.

THis guy has lousy luck, and I feel sorry for him. Perhaps he should renounce his Syrian citizenship if he is going to live in the west.
 
"based on the false accusation by Canadian authorities that he was suspected of links to al-Qaida, according to a new government report."

A Canadian government report at that.

"The RCMP described Arar as the "target" of a domestic anti-terrorist investigation in Canada"

It's Bush's fault obviously.

John
 
I doubt you'd be so cavalier if it had been you that had been the recipient of this.

The thing is, Springmom, there are some really bad people out there who have information that is needed in order to save lives.
So I don't think a lot of people disagree about the judicious use of "torture", which is nothing more than making things really unpleasant for people who would otherwise refuse to supply that important information, as long is it yields information that saves lives.

The part of this that is so reprehensible is not that the guy got beat up, but that he was beat up for something that he did not have and therefore couldn't give if he wanted to.
And by the way, the Canadian himself said that he was "beaten and whipped with electrical cords" and that's about all. It's a good thing he wasn't an American in the hands of Muslims in Iraq because we have already seen that those guys don't bother with such ineffective methods.

I think of it like a criminal case prosecuted by a District Attorney. A really good DA doesn't even bring a case unless he KNOWS the defendent is guilty of the crime. In fact, there are cases where the DA knows the defendent is guilty but drops the case because he is doubtful that the evidence isn't strong enough to convince a jury.

Torture is like that. You don't put someone through that unless you already know that the person for sure has the information you need. In fact, the best use of the technique might be to know beforehand some of what the subject knows so you can compare that against part of what is divulged.
Putting people through that just to see "if" they know something is both brutal and cruel, and that's what happened to the guy we're talking about.
So shame on those Canadians for screwing him around like that.

There are some terrible things in this world, and there are people who we depend on to protect us from those things. There are people who would like nothing better than to detonate a nuclear bomb in the middle of Houston and other major cities. There are people who cut other people's heads off for sport. There are people who would put a bullet in your head and just think to themselves: "There goes another American". There are people who do those kinds of torturous things to people that is real torture, like cutting off eyelids and genitals and fingers and forcing chemicals down throats, and even a well known method of throwing people into huge shredders... alive (a favorite of Sadam Hussein I understand).

So there are terrible people in this world who have terrible plans for others like us, and then there are people who we depend on to protect us from those things. To do that, they are good people who have to give up some of their humanity in order to serve a greater good.
If you imagine Jack Nicholson saying "You can't handle the truth", you get an idea of what is necessary to make sure that you can go to bed at night and be safe from all of the most terrible things people have planned for you.

That's why when I say "torture" in the context of how we make our enemies cooperate, I think of the kinds of things we did at Abu Graib like "scaring" terrorists with dogs and humiliating them and making them go hungry and worst of all, making them listen to Rolling Stones music while wearing panties on their head. But I haven't yet heard where we cut off any body parts because we are, after all, a civilized country, and "torture" in the context as used by us is very different than in the context as used by our vicious enemies.

All this says is that life is not fair and bad things happen. Reality bites, eh?

All in all, I am disappointed that physical torture is even considered anymore because there are some really smart people who can properly apply phsychological techniques much more scary than a mere beating.

Carter
 
That's why when I say "torture" in the context of how we make our enemies cooperate, I think of the kinds of things we did at Abu Graib like "scaring" terrorists with dogs and humiliating them and making them go hungry and worst of all, making them listen to Rolling Stones music while wearing panties on their head.

I've always considered listening to the Rolling Stones torture even without wearing panties on my head :D The sort of stuff that went on in Abu Ghraib wasn't torture, it was more a matter of being very insulting within the context of the culture of that country. And in no small part, it was the involvement of women in those incidents that made it so degrading to the recipients.

I agree: there are psychological methods that are far better and we do not need to result to beatings and waterboarding. :barf:

Springmom
 
Bottom line, the people who we are fighting don't abide by any agreements. We need to consider that before we decide to start tying hands behind our back.

As for McCain, well Vietnam ratified the geneva convention, and it sure did him alot of good.
 
Bottom line, the people who we are fighting don't abide by any agreements.

That's why we're the good guys, and they're the bad guys.

When we stoop to their methods (and your attitude seems to be that it's OK as long we aren't quite as bad as the Jihadists), then nothing separates us from them morally.

It's not about "tying hands behind our backs", it's about retaining our humanity. Do you really want to become like the people we are fighting?
 
I agree with CDH here. Theres alot of bad people out there. The sooner the folks in this country realize that we are not dealing with civilized people the better off we'll be. As a Marine who is leaving for the the war in a couple weeks, I say "torture their a##es"! If theres good reason to be belive that you have intel that will save one of my Marines, I'll torture you myself. This country is at WAR, and war is not a beautiful thing just take a look at those people who were slaughtered @ the WTC on 9/11. Im sorry this message is politically un-correct <sneers:mad: > but its true.

SEMPER FI America...
 
Yep, life is just like Jack Bauer's crappy tv show where you'll get to torture a terrorist to prevent a nuke from going off. :rolleyes:
 
That's why we're the good guys, and they're the bad guys.

When we stoop to their methods (and your attitude seems to be that it's OK as long we aren't quite as bad as the Jihadists), then nothing separates us from them morally.

It's not about "tying hands behind our backs", it's about retaining our humanity. Do you really want to become like the people we are fighting?


Here's my problem.

On this board and at pretty much any training school everywhere you hear people who teach self defense say that a person needs to do everything they can to neutralize an attacker. Everything is a weapon. If its stupid and it works its not stupid.

If you are walking down the street and someone starts to attack you, no one here would look down upon you for throwing sand in their eye, giving them a knee to the nuts or any other method that has been considered "below the belt fighting" in eras gone past.

Why is it that on a personal level fighting dirty is an asset, but at the national level it's verboten. :rolleyes:

We are the good guys not because we don't fight dirty, but because we don't go around and start fights.
 
Would you rather see an innocent man tortured or millions of Americans incinerated in a mushroom cloud heist?

There.

Fixed to make the question just a tiny little bit closer to reality.

pax
 
I dont know pax, Id rather write one suspected terrorist off as collateral damage to prevent the apoclypse. sad fact of war is, kill them before they kill you.
 
False dilemma. (Look it up under "Logical fallacies".)

There are more options here than either allowing torture or getting nuked.

This one's going nowhere fast.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top