bush_cheney2004 Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Why not just give us the top 10? Because they are all the same.....hint: Queen Elizabeth II Why does Arar care if he is on the list or not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Because they are all the same.....hint: Queen Elizabeth II And so we enter... one fleshy morsel at a time.... into the twilight zone.... Bwa hah ha.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 And so we enter... one fleshy morsel at a time.... into the twilight zone....Bwa hah ha.... Hard to tell, but does this mean that Arar doesn't care but it is face saving time for Ottawa? Maybe that was part of the settlement...you know....get Arar access to US airspace so he could visit terror cells in Cleveland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 The bottom line is that any country in the world has a right to refuse anyone entry if they so desire. Canada chooses to keep people with DUI's out. Should our government intervene on behalf of an American citizen with a DUI and expect Canada to let them in? The U.S. chooses to keep anyone who they think has a questionable history regarding possible terrorist ties out. Seems to me we have as much a right to keep them out as Canada has to keep people with DUI's out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 The bottom line is that any country in the world has a right to refuse anyone entry if they so desire. Canada chooses to keep people with DUI's out. Should our government intervene on behalf of an American citizen with a DUI and expect Canada to let them in? The U.S. chooses to keep anyone who they think has a questionable history regarding possible terrorist ties out. Seems to me we have as much a right to keep them out as Canada has to keep people with DUI's out. DUI? You must be joking. Are we your closest trading partner and ally or not? WTF. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 DUI? You must be joking. I assure you I wasn't joking about anything, and can't for the life of me figure out just what you think I would be joking about. Are we your closest trading partner and ally or not? WTF. And are we not yours? So what's your point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) DUI? You must be joking.Are we your closest trading partner and ally or not? WTF. No closer than Mexico.......U.K. is "closest" ally, politically speaking. Edited October 27, 2007 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) I assure you I wasn't joking about anything, and can't for the life of me figure out just what you think I would be joking about.And are we not yours? So what's your point? The point is that when our pro-US Prime Minister gets up in the House of fucking Commons and fucking apologizes you'd better well fucking listen. Is that fucking plain enough for you? Edited October 27, 2007 by Higgly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 The point is that when our pro-US Prime Minister gets up in the House of fucking Commons and fucking apologizes you'd better well fucking listen. Is that fucking plain enough for you? Yes...it is plain enough that Canada boofed it and chose to apologize. The apology didn't get much airplay in the USA, as that was not the intended audience or voters. Is that plain enough for you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) Yes...it is plain enough that Canada boofed it and chose to apologize. The apology didn't get much airplay in the USA, as that was not the intended audience or voters. Is that plain enough for you? Airplay=Bush policy. Thanks. Edited October 27, 2007 by Higgly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) Airplay=Bush policy. Thanks. "Our PM apologized....that plain enough for you ##$%^&*$#!!!" America: "who is your PM again?" Edited October 27, 2007 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter F Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 The Americans had a sovereign right to deport Mr. Arar to Syria regardless of the RCMP circle jerk and soap opera in Canada. Regardless of the RCMP circle jerk and soap opera in this country, I still find it very odd that the USofA would deport a suspect in the war on terrorism to one of the Axis of Evil country's. Would the US send Osama back to the Taliban? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Regardless of the RCMP circle jerk and soap opera in this country, I still find it very odd that the USofA would deport a suspect in the war on terrorism to one of the Axis of Evil country's. Would the US send Osama back to the Taliban? Now this I agree with, and have said the very same thing myself. It really does make no sense in that regard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) Regardless of the RCMP circle jerk and soap opera in this country, I still find it very odd that the USofA would deport a suspect in the war on terrorism to one of the Axis of Evil country's. Would the US send Osama back to the Taliban? Arar was deported to his nation of birth per US immigration law after Canada hosed him....he was not sent to Gitmo'. Syria wanted him back for skipping out on mandatory government service. Osama is a Saudi expatriate..."Taliban" is not a sovereign state. Edited October 27, 2007 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Arar was deported to his nation of birth per US immigration law after Canada hosed him....he was not sent to Gitmo'. Osama is a Saudi expatriate..."Taliban" is not a sovereign state. So why aren't we sending all terrorist suspects back to their nation of birth? Would we send bin Laden back to Saudi Arabia? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 So why aren't we sending all terrorist suspects back to their nation of birth? Would we send bin Laden back to Saudi Arabia? Bin Hidin' is wanted by the FBI for conspiracy and bombings...he would be extradited, charged / arraigned in a US court, just like Conrad Black....LOL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter F Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) Arar was deported to his nation of birth per US immigration law after Canada hosed him....he was not sent to Gitmo'. Syria wanted him back for skipping out on mandatory government service. Osama is a Saudi expatriate..."Taliban" is not a sovereign state. Yes, you're right regarding a sovereign state. Saudi Arabia then. But for Arar and his deportation under US Law...If the immigration authorities would send him to Canada under certain conditions (arrest) would not they also send him to Syria under certain conditions (arrest)? If so, then the Syrians met the condition Canada couldn't and off to Syria he went. Syria the terrorist supporting country. Granted, US immigration law allows immigration officers to bundle the illegal onto a plane back to his home country. But does that law include clauses for arrangements of how the deportee is to be treated? It would seem that that is what happened here. I allege that US authorities asked both Syria and Canada to arrest and squeeze the suspect for information. Syria agreed, Canada didn't, so off to Syria he went. I don't think this was the innocent and routine case of deporting an undesireable. But then that is/is not a problem for the US to figure out. Its quite obvious that Canada has its own steaming heap of horseshit to get down. Edited October 27, 2007 by Peter F Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 "Our PM apologized....that plain enough for you ##$%^&*$#!!!"America: "who is your PM again?" Our prime minister is the guy on first and his name is "Who's". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) I don't think this was the innocent and routine case of deporting an undesireable. I think you are correct, but the legal mechanism was INS and immigration law, and even then, Jordan had to function as the go-between precisely because relations between Syria and the US are not fully normalized. To be fair, Arar went a lot more quietly than John Lennon, who had a lot more cash to lawyer up. Absent Canada's actions (or lack thereof), Arar is home in time for dinner and bomb making class. Edited October 27, 2007 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) bump Edited October 27, 2007 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter F Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 Leafless: The U.S had their own their own file on Arar and like you said and Canadians cannot arrest a person without nothing to arrest him for.Let's be clear if Arar was not also a citizen of Syria he would have been deported to Canada. The U.S was under no specific mandate not to deport him to his homeland Syria. There's the goon. Why would the USofA export a potential/possible terrorist to, as you say, a terrorist supporting country? Also, the reason the US did not send Arar to Canada was because Canada could/would not arrest and imprison him. Since when doe's USimmigration give a shit what happens to deportee's? Thier job is to not allow the illegal into the country and send him packing. What was with the US asking Canada to incarcerate the man? That comes nowhere within the immigration powers you earlier cited. Its very bizarre. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 (edited) ....Jordan had to function as the go-between precisely because relations between Syria and the US are not fully normalized. Jordan is saying they acted according to Arar's interests. [Jordanian officials] ... told UN investigator Manfred Nowak that "Mr. Arar arrived in Amman as a normal passenger on a Royal Jordanian Airlines flight," and that he was asked to leave the country because his name was on a terrorism watch list. Arar picked several destinations, but because there were no flights available, "he ultimately asked GID [Jordan's General Intelligence Directorate] to bring him to Syria by car, which GID did," Nowak reported earlier this week. Jordan's role in Arar deportation questioned Edited October 27, 2007 by American Woman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moxie Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 He was one of ours, we shipped him out for torture because the Liberals are so tolerant and they love appeasement. Harper was smart enough to know we are libel for what happens to our citizens when we hand them over to a foreign government. Excuse me I have a horse poop shovel to find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Higgly Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 He was one of ours, we shipped him out for torture because the Liberals are so tolerant and they love appeasement. Harper was smart enough to know we are libel for what happens to our citizens when we hand them over to a foreign government. Excuse me I have a horse poop shovel to find. Huh? I am going to quote you on this one. Personally I'd like to put you in a hotel in Yangon for a week and cancel your Mastercard account just before you are about to check out. It will make you a much better journalist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted October 27, 2007 Report Share Posted October 27, 2007 He was one of ours, we shipped him out for torture because the Liberals are so tolerant and they love appeasement. Harper was smart enough to know we are libel for what happens to our citizens when we hand them over to a foreign government. Excuse me I have a horse poop shovel to find. Agreed...Canada hosed up....Canada pays...next case! 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.