guyser Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 Arar is trying to pursue a lawsuit against the US government; I believe his demands include financial compensation. It is not clear whether this lawsuit will be allowed to go forward.If Arar is removed from the US no-fly list and the US government offers a public apology, the US government would de facto be admitting to its culpability in the harm he suffered in Syria. The US would then have no choice but to pay him compensation. Given the US government is the defendant, any damages would far exceed the 10 million dollars he got from Canadian taxpayers. This may explain why an official apology will not be extended and his name wil be kept on the no-fly list. Rice's pronouncements would no doubt be used as ammunition in favour of Arar's suit against the US government. You got that right. She did say "I will submit a report since I am not recalling all the details" (paraphrased) She will, as the elections will be over and someone else will be running the show. Leave it for the maid as it were. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) What a load of crap. A senior US official admits that the whole thing was screwed up and you lot still want the guy to be guilty of something and punished for nothing. You want proof Leafless? Where is the bloody proof Arar ever did anything to justify this travesty of justice? Get a grip. Damned right he deserves big compensation, if for no other reason than to make sure it doesn't happen again to someone else. As far as a possible law suit is concerned, as M.Dancer pointed out in another thread, $100 billion is less than 1% of the US economy. How much do you think they're going to have to pay the guy? It's not the money. They just don't want to open the door for the hundreds or more others they have done this to without trial. The Europeans have reported numerous secret flights of this type going through their air space, all of them carrying somebody of to be tortured until they finally squak out whatever it is that the CIA needs them to say. Who cares if its true, as long as they've got some poor bloodied and broken bastard to utter the words. The Ted Kennedy reference shows pretty much where a lot of these arguments belong. Kennedy was on the no-fly list by accident to the great embarrassment of the US government. As for Guyser's assertion that it is "their no-fly list..." Well sure it is, but this shows how loosely the list is connected to reality - sort of like the US drug policy . What am I seeing from you lot is how little is the value you place on citizenship in your own country - except of course Bush_Cheney2004, who appears to be a citizen of somewhere else entirely. I can't believe what I am reading here. Arar gets a formal apology from the Prime Minister in the House of Commons and it is still not good enough for you. Pathetic, the whole bunch of you. Edited October 25, 2007 by Higgly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rue Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) They didn't apologize though. I think Capricorn hit the nail on the head. Rice is limited in what she can say otherwise an admission of culpability exposes the US government to a whopper of a law suit. I would imagine some American Sharks are trying to track him down in BC as we speak. From what I hear he just wants to be left alone. Edited October 25, 2007 by Rue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 But, but ... your ambassador to Syria said Canada had no reaon to believe Arar was being tortured. Nice to know that our idiots mean more to you than your idiots do, though. Canada most definitely was not squeaky clean in this mess, including, apparently, caring more about the information gathered than the interrogation. I noticed I got virtually no comments on Canada's role in the Arar situation. I guess the ten million erases your part in it. Is that it? If we pay off the Iraqis before we leave, will that make us squeaky clean in your mind too? Would you suddenly respect Bush, Cheney, et al? Of course, Canadians know the Canadian gov't didn't act accordly and that's why he was paid 10 million$$ No gov't is squeaky clean and to the US paying off Iraqis, you could never ever afford with the debt you are carrying and Cheney/Bush can never buy their respect, even if they are making millions and billions themselves and families in this war. The more the war goes on the more they make!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 What am I seeing from you lot is how little is the value you place on citizenship in your own country - except of course Bush_Cheney2004, who appears to be a citizen of somewhere else entirely. I can't believe what I am reading here. Arar gets a formal apology from the Prime Minister in the House of Commons and it is still not good enough for you. Pathetic, the whole bunch of you. Doesn't matter if it was "screwed up"...Arar was legally deported to his nation of birth per US immigration law. If the Syrians tortured him (unproven), then he can sue Syria. If he shows up in the US again, deport his ass right back to Syria. This sorry display of a Canadian guilt trip does not mean the US must join in the hand wringing. Questioning my citizenship? I am a citizen of your worst nightmare, except it isn't a dream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fortunata Posted October 25, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 I am a citizen of your worst nightmare, except it isn't a dream. LOL. See that's what we love about you - your sheer arrogant (but dishonest) postings. I'm sure that with "worthy" persons (ie Americans) you probably would share some of your criticisms of your own country, like the rest of us do here, but your supreme nationalism prevents honesty. Carry on, there's more dirt to find I'm sure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikedavid00 Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 I have to wonder what difference it would make if the U.S. took him off our no-fly list or not. Surely he wouldn't want to come here after what happened, would he? Of course he would. The media cherry picked the Arar story yesterday and mislead everyone into a story that wasn't there. I still cannot find a video of the whole questioning. Arar should not be allowed in the US or Canada. I've never heard more mis-truths from the media in my life when it comes to Arar. The CBC calling Arar the 'Canadian telacummications engineer'. I mean the VERY FIRST thing in the story is a lie. Every aspect of Arar has been fabrications and lies. Him and his family have contributed 0 to Canada and has been a major burden on all the people on this forum. Both never working a real job in their lives. (unless you consider running for the NDP and civil servant 'insider jobs due to publicity' to be real jobs (that only the wife worked and never Arar). Arar. A joke of life in my opinion. And he has the wool over all your eyes. Over the CBC's eyes, over our immigration systems eyes, and him and his legal team and laughing all the way to the bank. He's not just a liar, he's a living lie. He's the definition of a lie IMO. And all you 'believers' are just suckers at the end of the day. He's lauging at all of you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikedavid00 Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 The acknowledgement is bupkis if he is still being kept on the no-fly list. You didn't listen to WHAT she acknowledged. You are falling for the media fabricated story yesterday. Now can you tell me WHY Arar is still on the no fly list? I'm waiting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikedavid00 Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 IMO the most they should have offered Arar is 'a cash for life job' as a junior computer consultant in the federal government. His wife got a cash for life job at a University in Vancouver. Arar doesn't believe in working at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikedavid00 Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) Yes...he wants more than $10 million CDN and 15 minutes of fame. I for one don't believe he was "tortured" at all.....prison conditions in Syria do not constitute torture.Secretary Rice simply stated that communications with Canada were imperfect, which could clearly be a reference to the bungling RCMP. No apology can be gleaned from this, and Mr. Arar stays on the list...and AW has indicated, why the hell would he want to come back to the USA. Ban him for life....just because America has the sovereign right to do so. THANK YOU! SOMEONE FINALLY SEES THROUGH THE MEDIA HYPE AND KNOWS THE FACTS ON THE ARAR FILE. Edited October 25, 2007 by mikedavid00 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) THANK YOU!SOMEONE FINALLY SEES THROUGH THE MEDIA HYPE AND KNOWS THE FACTS ON THE ARAR FILE. Right. So the facts are that the guy is guilty of nohing and is being stigmatized by being on the no-fly list even though that idiot Rice acknowledges publicly that the whole process was SNAFU. Just the number of idiot postings in this thread should be sufficient to show the damage he has suffered. We've even got postings related to his personal life (he never works, his wife makes all the money, blah, blah). Mikedavid00 and BushCheney2004. Now there's a team. Edited October 25, 2007 by Higgly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 Arar is trying to pursue a lawsuit against the US government; I believe his demands include financial compensation. It is not clear whether this lawsuit will be allowed to go forward.If Arar is removed from the US no-fly list and the US government offers a public apology, the US government would de facto be admitting to its culpability in the harm he suffered in Syria. The US would then have no choice but to pay him compensation. Given the US government is the defendant, any damages would far exceed the 10 million dollars he got from Canadian taxpayers. This may explain why an official apology will not be extended and his name wil be kept on the no-fly list. Rice's pronouncements would no doubt be used as ammunition in favour of Arar's suit against the US government. How would taking him off the no-fly list be admitting culpability-- when he was on the no-fly list because of information passed on from Canada? I really don't see, in light of the facts as they have come out, how Arar could have a lawsuit against the U.S. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 How would taking him off the no-fly list be admitting culpability-- when he was on the no-fly list because of information passed on from Canada? I really don't see, in light of the facts as they have come out, how Arar could have a lawsuit against the U.S. The Harper government is now asking that Arar be taken off the no-fly list. We'll see what response that brings. As far as the lawsuit goes, you might be right. But why is it blocked by issues of national security? It is rather confusing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 The Harper government is now asking that Arar be taken off the no-fly list. We'll see what response that brings. IMO the Harper request is nothing more than a diplomatic imperative and an attempt to appease the bleeding hearts here in Canada. Nothing will come from it but the necessary intervention was made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 IMO the Harper request is nothing more than a diplomatic imperative and an attempt to appease the bleeding hearts here in Canada. Nothing will come from it but the necessary intervention was made. Since the U.S. says that Arar fell into his situation based on Canada's information, why would an update stating that he should be taken off a no-fly list be ignored? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) Since the U.S. says that Arar fell into his situation based on Canada's information, why would an update stating that he should be taken off a no-fly list be ignored? Maybe it's too little too late. The U.S. initially wanted to deport Arar back to Canada rather than Syria under the condition that he be tried there, and Canada refused. Now it's become a whole media matter and maybe the U.S. questions why Canada has changed its tune about him, and would rather be safe than sorry. This is a man who wants to sue the U.S. government for millions, and at the same time we're supposed to welcome him with open arms? I used to feel completely differently about this situation than I do now. I used to think Arar was going through the U.S. and we, being total bullies and totally acting with no thought to Canada, with no justifiable reason, deported him to Syria. How long did it take for it to come out that it was based on information given to us by Canada? Then how much longer did it take to come out that we offered to send him to Canada first? Then how much longer again before we found out that Canada didn't do anything to stop his being deported and/or do much to try to bring him back-- but was, in effect, more interested in the information Syria was getting out of its interrogation of him? I don't understand how anyone can think the U.S. owes him money. We acted on Canada's information. HIS country's information, and supposidly we are supposed to trust our allies totally and completely. Edited October 25, 2007 by American Woman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 How would taking him off the no-fly list be admitting culpability-- when he was on the no-fly list because of information passed on from Canada? I really don't see, in light of the facts as they have come out, how Arar could have a lawsuit against the U.S. It really makes no difference where the US got the information to brand Arar an undesirable and to bar his entry into the US. Had the erroneous information resulted from flawed US intel, the present outcome would be virtually identical. The fact is the US government, through Secretary Rice, admitted there was a communications problem but still maintains it has reason enough to keep him on the no-fly list. Backing down from this position and making an apology would weaken the government's case should Arar's lawsuit is allowed to go forward. I can't comment on the strength of Arar's lawsuit since I don't know what grounds he invoked as the basis of his grievance against the US government. Yet, I would think he would be challenging why he was shipped to Syria rather than Canada. After all, that's when his troubles really began. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 Maybe it's too little too late. The U.S. initially wanted to deport Arar back to Canada rather than Syria under the condition that he be tried there, and Canada refused. Now it's become a whole media matter and maybe the U.S. questions why Canada has changed its tune about him, and would rather be safe than sorry.This is a man who wants to sue the U.S. government for millions, and at the same time we're supposed to welcome him with open arms? I used to feel completely differently about this situation than I do now. I used to think Arar was going through the U.S. and we, being total bullies and totally acting with no thought to Canada, with no justifiable reason, deported him to Syria. How long did it take for it to come out that it was based on information given to us by Canada? Then how much longer did it take to come out that we offered to send him to Canada first? Then how much longer again before we found out that Canada didn't do anything to stop his being deported and/or do much to try to bring him back-- but was, in effect, more interested in the information Syria was getting out of its interrogation of him? I don't understand how anyone can think the U.S. owes him money. We acted on Canada's information. HIS country's information, and supposidly we are supposed to trust our allies totally and completely. I don't think I mentioned anything about money being owed by the U.S.. I blame Canada for his situation. Now, the Harper government is asking that he be removed off the no-fly list. The U.S. says it is keeping his name in place but I'm not sure why. Congress, which has seen the information, doesn't know why either. I don't think it is about a lawsuit, is it? It seems unlikely that the U.S. will allow a court case anyway so I don't think it is about money. Does the U.S. have other evidence that he is a potential threat? If they do, they are not releasing that information to either the Intelligence Oversight committee or warning the Canadian government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) Yet, I would think he would be challenging why he was shipped to Syria rather than Canada. He was shipped to Syria rather than Canada because Canada refused our terms. He was offfered to Canada first. It really makes no difference where the US got the information to brand Arar an undesirable and to bar his entry into the US. Had the erroneous information resulted from flawed US intel, the present outcome would be virtually identical. It does make a difference that the U.S was acting on Canadian intelligence rather than ours. If we had been acting on OUR intelligence, then WE would have been the ones who were wrong about him. The fact is the US government, through Secretary Rice, admitted there was a communications problem but still maintains it has reason enough to keep him on the no-fly list. Backing down from this position and making an apology would weaken the government's case should Arar's lawsuit is allowed to go forward. The apology would have to be of the 'sorry we listened to Canada's intelllgence' nature. Rice admitted there was a communication problem, but she didn't say it was on our end. I don't think Arar has a case against the U.S. and I don't think the U.S. government's reaction to this situation is being dictated by fear of his desire to sue. Furthermore, as I said, backing down on the no-fly list and allowing him here would not hurt the U.S. should the case go to court; it would, in effect, prove that we were acting on Canada's intelligence. Edited October 25, 2007 by American Woman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 I don't understand how anyone can think the U.S. owes him money. We acted on Canada's information. HIS country's information, and supposidly we are supposed to trust our allies totally and completely. There it is in a nutshell, the US government's defense against Arar's lawsuit. "It was Canada's fault, we owe you nothing so don't go away mad, just go away." Hey, AW, what's wrong with collecting a little booty if you're successful in making a point in principle? It's done every day in both our countries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 (edited) There it is in a nutshell, the US government's defense against Arar's lawsuit. "It was Canada's fault, we owe you nothing so don't go away mad, just go away." Hey, AW, what's wrong with collecting a little booty if you're successful in making a point in principle? It's done every day in both our countries. I don't think he has a point in principle regarding the U.S. and he already collected more than a little booty from the Canadian tax payers. I don't care to pay for Canada's intelligence errors. I'm paying enough for my own country's errors. Edited October 25, 2007 by American Woman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 ...backing down on the no-fly list and allowing him here would not hurt the U.S. should the case go to court; it would, in effect, prove that we were acting on Canada's intelligence. That position could be advanced but it would be up to the courts to decide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 Does the U.S. have other evidence that he is a potential threat? If they do, they are not releasing that information to either the Intelligence Oversight committee or warning the Canadian government. Now there's a worrisome thought. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 25, 2007 Report Share Posted October 25, 2007 I don't think I mentioned anything about money being owed by the U.S.. I blame Canada for his situation. Thank you for clarifying that. I appreciate it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted October 26, 2007 Report Share Posted October 26, 2007 He was shipped to Syria rather than Canada because Canada refused our terms. He was offfered to Canada first. I guess we can agree this is one case where your government should have second guessed our government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.