0
   

Canadian sent to Syria for torture...

 
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:46 am
There is the little problem that he was not coming to the United States, and that he was on his way to Canada when he was detained. As he is a Canadian citizen who was travelling through New York to Canada, why was he detained, and why was he not sent to Canada, the nation of which he is a citizen?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:46 am
As far as I know it is that Syria ALLOWS harder interrogation tactics.

Or does Syria employ CIA agents?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:47 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:
Or does Syria employ CIA agents?


Definitely not . . . they consider CIA methods too brutal . . .
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:48 am
Further foolishness.

Quote:

Perhaps it's because he was FROM Syria? It's hardly the fault of the US that Syria has tougher interrogation tactics than Canada or the US now is it? It's hardly the fault of the US that Canada declared he was a terrorist now was it?


Perhaps if you had read the article, you would have seen that he is a Canadian citizen. The fact that he was born in Syria is immaterial. Why would we send him for questioning to Syria?

Quote:
You have your brithes in a knot because the US deported a person to their home country when that person was declared a terrorist.


His home country was Canada. We did not deport him to Canada.

Quote:

What am I missing here Cycloptichorn?


Apparently, Reading Comprehension and commons sense.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:49 am
Setanta wrote:
There is the little problem that he was not coming to the United States, and that he was on his way to Canada when he was detained. As he is a Canadian citizen who was travelling through New York to Canada, why was he detained, and why was he not sent to Canada, the nation of which he is a citizen?


Exactly.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:50 am
Setanta wrote:
why was he detained,


Question

It's like you aren't even paying attention.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:50 am
This is our fault because we shouldn't be torturing people who may be innocent.

The US imprisoned and tortured this guy without being sure that he was guilty of anything. Canada is to blame for implicating him, but they didn't torture anybody.

This is the reason civilized countries follow human rights principles including due process.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:51 am
McGentrix wrote:
You have your brithes in a knot because the US deported a person to their home country when that person was declared a terrorist. Are you suggesting that we should no longer trust Canadian intelligence? That we should ignor warnings of terrorist suspects?


I am suggesting that maybe being as a terrorist is something that should take more than a declaration. I am also suggesting that we shouldn't torture anyone, including terrorists, and we shouldn't send people to be tortured by others either.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:52 am
(Busily trying to find my brithes so I can unknot them, anyone know what brithes look like?)
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:54 am
ebrown_p wrote:
Canada is to blame for implicating him, but they didn't torture anybody.


But they've send him to the USA ... perhaps to get tortured?

I suggest - as Set already did earlier - that it should be paid attention to the discussion in Canada as well.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:56 am
Quote:

The RCMP contact, Inspector Michel Cabana, "was under the impression that Mr. Arar would only be detained for a short time," O'Connor's report said. "In his view, Mr. Arar was being held in a country with many of the same values as Canada."
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 11:59 am
Just so I'm clear, the folks that implicated him are rat bastards and should be punished. My focus is on how my own country set up a system whereby rat bastards can cause an innocent man to be tortured with little or no recourse. Crucible, anyone?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 12:01 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Setanta wrote:
why was he detained,


It's like you aren't even paying attention.


No, it's as though you aren't paying attention. Why was he detained? Why was he not allowed to proceed to Canada? If there were a problem with a Canadian citizen, why was he not deported to Canada?
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 12:06 pm
I saw McGentrix with the Devil.
0 Replies
 
jpinMilwaukee
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 12:06 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
Setanta wrote:
There is the little problem that he was not coming to the United States, and that he was on his way to Canada when he was detained. As he is a Canadian citizen who was travelling through New York to Canada, why was he detained, and why was he not sent to Canada, the nation of which he is a citizen?


Exactly.



Exactly, we should ignore information given to us by a friendly country pertaining to a potentially dangerous terrorist in our country because the suspect said he was just passing through. Spending money on a ticket to Canada would just be waste of money and no self-respecting terrorist would do that.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 12:07 pm
From the Arar Commission - Press Release:

Quote:
"No evidence that Canadian officials participated or
acquiesced in the American's authorities decision to detain and remove Mr. Arar to Syria (…)
and there is no evidence that any Canadian authorities - Royal Canadian Mounted Police
(RCMP), Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) or others - were complicit in those
decisions." However, the Commissioner also notes that: "It is very likely that, in making the
decisions to detain and remove Mr. Arar to Syria, the U.S. authorities relied on information
about Mr. Arar provided by the RCMP. Although I cannot be certain without evidence of the
American authorities, the evidence strongly supports this conclusion".

[...]


About the cases of Messrs. Almalki, El Maati and Nureddin, three men who were also
detained in Syria and have alleged they were tortured, the report states that the cases of these
three men raise troubling questions about the role of Canadian officials and recommends that the
cases be reviewed through an independent and credible process that is able to address the
integrated nature of the underlying investigations.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 12:11 pm
jpinMilwaukee wrote:
FreeDuck wrote:

Exactly.



Exactly, we should ignore information given to us by a friendly country pertaining to a potentially dangerous terrorist in our country because the suspect said he was just passing through. Spending money on a ticket to Canada would just be waste of money and no self-respecting terrorist would do that.


No. We should question within the law and give them due process. We should not be sending people to foreign countries to be tortured.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 12:20 pm
Absolutely.

I think that no one should be tortured-- period.

But, even if you don't believe that, it seems excedingly clear that people shouldn't be tortured without due process.

It is obviously clear that innocent people should never be tortured, and to prevent this it is imperitive that torturers should be absolutely certain they are torturing the right guy.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 12:26 pm
What is supremely witless is the fact that experienced, effective interrogators know that torture serves no useful purpose, other than to make the victim say what he thinks you want to hear. It does not provide useful information, even if your subject actually has useful information, in which case torture only confuses and frightens the subject, and delays or defers the revelation of the useful information as the subject tries desparately to figure out what you want to hear.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 19 Sep, 2006 01:41 pm
McGentrix wrote:
Why would they send him to Syria.... Hmmmmm.... that's a tough one.

Perhaps it's because he was FROM Syria?


He was carrying a Canadian passport. The Americans should not have sent him to Syria. Canada should have handled it better once it happened.

Lots of stupidity to share between the two.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/24/2025 at 09:04:42