« Why Jacob Levy Is Wrong About Pope Benedict on Islam | Main | And Down The Stretch They Come . . . »

September 19, 2006

Oh, Canada . . . Not So Glorious and Free

A
newly released Canadian judicial report finds that Canadian intelligence officers, under pressure after 911 to find terrorists, gave bad information to the FBI (and other US officials) about a Muslim Canadian citizen named Maher Arar. The FBI told the Canadian Royal Mounted Police they planned to question the subject. Instead, when he arrived at Kennedy Airport from Tunisia to change planes, US officials secretly took him into custody, sent him to Syria--yes, SYRIA!!!, which apparently is participating in America's rendition program--where he was then tortured. All the while, US officials kept their Canadian counterparts in the dark. While being tortured in Syria to reveal his and his coconpirators' terror plans, Arar admitted, among other things, to having trained in Afghanistan -- where he never has been in his life. (This is just another example of why torture is an especially ineffective tool at getting to the truth.)

The United States refused to participate in the inquiry. You can find newspaper accounts here, here, here, but not here.

Arar, after being returned to Canada, filed suit in federal court in Brooklyn against several former and current U.S. officials. His case was dismissed based on the administration's invocation of the state-secret privilege.

When did the Bush Administration establish such cozy relations with Syria? Is the rendition agreement we apparently have with Syria a step toward establishing a democracy there? What message does this send to Israel? Can we take seriously anything this Administration says about its support for Israel and mid-east democracy, when we secretly are using Syria to torture terror suspects? And if we're in bed with Syria -- Iran's new best friend -- does our presence in Iraq have anything to do with building a democracy there or anyplace else.

Imagine if Arar had been sent to Gitmo. He'd still be there. If he were really lucky, he'd be awaiting trial before the Bush-style military tribunal. And, if the Bush Administration has its way with Congress, Arar could have then been convicted based not only on secret evidence, but his own confession to something that never happened.

What the hell is happening to us?

Posted by shertaugh at September 19, 2006 8:13 AM

Comments

So after his ordeal, does this man have ANY legal recourse in the USA?

Posted by: paul yamada at September 19, 2006 2:38 PM

So, I know I hassle you a lot when I post here, so I wanted to make sure I told you this: I agree 100%. This entire incident is appalling and illustrative of the sort of path Bush is leading us down.

I'm not fond of terrorists, but that doesn't mean we should put up with this kind of fascism. (I don't think "fascism" is the right word, strictly, but it's the closest to what I mean.)

Posted by: Michael Heinz at September 19, 2006 2:58 PM

Let's consider the lawsuit that was dismissed "based on the administration's invocation of the state-secret privilege." I have several points: (1) I am sceptical that the administration would have to reveal state secrets to defend the lawsuit, but the more important point is (2) The administration should not defend the lawsuit. Having done wrong, it should settle it, and settle it generously. (3) Because the administration will not settle the lawsuit, Congress should enact a law to compensate the Canadian and other victims of Bush's terrorism. But Congress will not do so, for two reasons: (a) to do so would be to acknowledge that Bush tortures people, and (b) the torture victims are not constituents who can vote for members of Congress. (4) The solution, therefore, is for the American people to compensate Bush's victims directly, rather than through Congress. People could contribute just a dollar each until we have enough to send $1 million to each victim; all that it would take would be for someone to collect the money and write the checks. Perhaps someone will start a group called "AAB" (Americans Ashamed of Bush, or Americans Appalled by Bush, whichever you prefer) for this purpose. It would be good to let the rest of the world know that we are ashamed of and appalled by our current government.

Posted by: Henry at September 20, 2006 2:07 PM

If you read the opinion, you'll discover that the case was in fact *not* dismissed on state secrets grounds.

Posted by: Brian at September 26, 2006 4:29 PM