The 10 million dollar mistake?

Molly · January 21, 2009

That's a hellaciusly huge 'if'.

Whose word are we taking? A guy whose testimony doesn't match his notes, that were taken during the commission of what some folks believe are war crimes.

punked · January 21, 2009

Capricorn, don't you realize that Omar Khadr is a Canadian citizen who just happened to attempt to kill coalition troops in Afghanistan. Some country's would call that treason, unfortunately many Canadian's seem to think he's a great citizen.

Wait I just called you a lair don`t you want to prove me wrong? Wait you can't because you make up facts to prove that what you feel is right. Like I said keep nailing Arar up maybe he can get another 10 million out of us becuase we want to sooo bad be right.

Canadian Blue · January 21, 2009

OR OR it was all made up. I say this becuase our own Canadian investigation showed Arar was never in Afghanistan.

Or the Canadian government just paid out $10 million dollars hoping everything would be hushed up.

85RZ500 · January 21, 2009

CB, he didn't just attempt it, he grenaded a medic and an close ally at that. Who knows what he was doing just before that. Yes it is treason and the reason I will never support his return. He and his family should be outta here, they're simply Canadians Of Convenience.

punked · January 21, 2009

Or the Canadian government just paid out $10 million dollars hoping everything would be hushed up.

because they and you are wrong. Glade we could come back to that fact.

Canadian Blue · January 21, 2009

Wait I just called you a lair don`t you want to prove me wrong? Wait you can't because you make up facts to prove that what you feel is right. Like I said keep nailing Arar up maybe he can get another 10 million out of us becuase we want to sooo bad be right.

I'm not a "lair." However it is an amazing coincidence that Khadr was able to name Arar without being told his name previously. As I've stated before you guys were wrong on the Khadrs.

Canadian Blue · January 21, 2009

CB, he didn't just attempt it, he grenaded a medic and an close ally at that. Who knows what he was doing just before that. Yes it is treason and the reason I will never support his return. He and his family should be outta here, they're simply Canadians Of Convenience.

I wouldn't be surprised if some of the people on the left here feel that he should get a medal for killing an American.

punked · January 21, 2009

I'm not a "lair." However it is an amazing coincidence that Khadr was able to name Arar without being told his name previously. As I've stated before you guys were wrong on the Khadrs.

OK there is the lie again so I ask for a citation on it.

Canadian Blue · January 21, 2009

Refute it if you like. All I'm stating is that it's a very unlikely coincidence. After all we have seen Islamic fundamentalism show it's ugly head in Canada before.

Now I think you have to go and sign a petition to give Khadr a medal upon his return to Canada.

Edited January 21, 2009 by Canadian Blue

punked · January 21, 2009

Refute it if you like. All I'm stating is that it's a very unlikely coincidence. After all we have seen Islamic fundamentalism show it's ugly head in Canada before.

If you make up a lie and someone asks you for a citation to prove it isn't a lie you have to provide a citation. You are lieing he never named Arar, he pointed to him in a picture after several minutes and said "he might be someone I seen" then he went to give details of when he saw him. None of those checked out.

Canadian Blue · January 21, 2009

If you make up a lie and someone asks you for a citation to prove it isn't a lie you have to provide a citation. You are lieing he never named Arar, he pointed to him in a picture after several minutes and said "he might be someone I seen" then he went to give details of when he saw him. None of those checked out.

http://ca.reuters.com/article/domesticNews...lBrandChannel=0

Questioned on Tuesday by one of Khadr's lawyers, Fuller said Khadr had initially said, "The man looked familiar but he could not identify him by name."
"We gave him an opportunity to think about the photograph and where he may have seen him," Fuller said, adding that Khadr remembered the name a few moments later.

Even if the he gave the incorrect date, it's an unlikely coincidence that he could identify him by name. Do you get the point punked.

Smallc · January 21, 2009

CB, he didn't just attempt it, he grenaded a medic and an close ally at that.

Innocence until proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Because of the way things have been done in Guantanamo, even if he did do it, justice may never be served.

As for Mr. Arar, he has been proven innocent as far as the government of Canada is concerned. The government already saw all of the evidence and said they have no reason to believe Mr. Arar is guilty. Also, Mr. Khadr's memory cannot be trusted, not in the best of cases and especially in this case. We don't remember things nearly so accurately as we think. There is really nothing to talk about here.

Edited January 21, 2009 by Smallc

85RZ500 · January 21, 2009

Innocence until proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Because of the way things have been done in Guantanamo, even if he did do it, justice may never be served.
As for Mr. Arar, he has been proven innocent as far as the government of Canada is concerned. The government already saw all of the evidence and said they have no reason to believe Mr. Arar is guilty. Also, Mr. Khadr's memory cannot be trusted, not in the best of cases and especially in this case. We don't remember things nearly so accurately as we think. There is really nothing to talk about here.

Hey now, did you read the inquiry documents? This and other threads have peaked my interest.

Dollars to donuts they don't have any witness's to the alleged torture.

Got some reading to do.

punked · January 21, 2009

http://ca.reuters.com/article/domesticNews...lBrandChannel=0
Even if the he gave the incorrect date, it's an unlikely coincidence that he could identify him by name. Do you get the point punked.

That is funny you would think the FBI would write that fact down which they didn't. All they wrote down was he said he looked familiar. So what do we trust the FBI notes taken at the time by the guy giving testimony or his memory of what "may" have happened. It wont stick and you are still grasping at straws.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Khadr+Ar...7989/story.html

bush_cheney2004 · January 21, 2009

Hey now, did you read the inquiry documents? This and other threads have peaked my interest.
Dollars to donuts they don't have any witness's to the alleged torture.

Correct...using their own logic, allegations of torture have not been proven. Just because Arar did not receive five star hotel accomodations in Syria upon his return as a criminal (skipped out on mandatory military service), is no reason to assume his story has merit or rises to any level of "torture".

The only thing that was tortured was the Canadian taxpayer! :lol:

Edited January 21, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

waldo · January 21, 2009

The only thing that was tortured was the Canadian taxpayer!

I am so torn by your revelation - why, oh why, did the Harper Conservative government cave to these baseless torture allegations? Why, oh why, did Stockwell Day not stop the senseless waste of taxpayer money? Why did Harper sanction the torture of the Canadian taxpayer?

bush_cheney2004 · January 21, 2009

I am so torn by your revelation - why, oh why, did the Harper Conservative government cave to these baseless torture allegations? Why, oh why, did Stockwell Day not stop the senseless waste of taxpayer money? Why did Harper sanction the torture of the Canadian taxpayer?

Because the RCMP had their royal tits in a wringer.

Edited January 21, 2009 by bush_cheney2004

Smallc · January 21, 2009

Hey now, did you read the inquiry documents? This and other threads have peaked my interest.
Dollars to donuts they don't have any witness's to the alleged torture.

Got some reading to do.

I don't seem to have mentioned the word torture. Fact is, human memory in general is extremely unreliable. We don't remember things as they happen even though we often think we do. In a situation where a young person who is most likely afraid is being questioned, they are unlikely to remember things correctly.

Canadian Blue · January 21, 2009

The only thing that was tortured was the Canadian taxpayer!

Dude, it's Canada. You could raise money for Osama Bin Laden, setup IED's to kill Canadian troops, and plot to kill all the Jews, but you can always feel safe knowing that Dalton McGuinty will give you government welfare and social assistance.

capricorn · January 21, 2009

Capricorn, don't you realize that Omar Khadr is a Canadian citizen who just happened to attempt to kill coalition troops in Afghanistan.

Oh yes I do. My observations were intended to present a plausible explanation as to why Khadr may have got his dates wrong about when he spotted Arar in Afghanistan. All indications are that he was not prompted and the name Arar came from his lips, not the interrogator.

Some country's would call that treason, unfortunately many Canadian's seem to think he's a great citizen.

This misplaced sympathy can be traced back to Chretien who put in a good word for the Khadr patriarch. He was subsequently set free on the weight of Chretien's words of praise for the terrorist. Thankfully, Papa Khadr was eventually terminated by our allies. Bleeding heart Canadians don't want the same fate to befall on baby Khadr and feel motivated to protect him.

I fear the quest to bring Omar Khadr to justice is all but lost. One look at those doe eyes in a seven year old picture and the list of potential Canadian foster parents gets longer and longer.

The question will become how much money will Canadian taxpayers have to dole out to console the Khadrs.

punked · January 21, 2009

Oh yes I do. My observations were intended to present a plausible explanation as to why Khadr may have got his dates wrong about when he spotted Arar in Afghanistan. All indications are that he was not prompted and the name Arar came from his lips, not the interrogator.

All indications are that no such name came from his lips and Fuller lied yesterday when he said it did. Seems like something you would write down but Fuller did not he wrote: After a time he said he might know the person in the picture. Weird yet a year later he says he named him weird, and the States is in battle with Arar over a lawsuit weird.

capricorn · January 21, 2009

and the States is in battle with Arar over a lawsuit weird.

Hey, maybe he can best the $10M he got from Canadian taxpayers. Worth a try, eh?

punked · January 21, 2009

Hey, maybe he can best the $10M he got from Canadian taxpayers. Worth a try, eh?

I should think so considering there was no proof he had any terrorist ties eh? Not even a known terrorist knowing him by name although one said he might have saw at a time he was known not to be around.

CANADIEN · January 22, 2009

A member of a terrorist group who kills people for their own groups dogma is hardly an innocent man. Give me a break. You socialists are absolutely spineless. If a group were to attack Canada like 9-11 and we caught them you'd be more interested in whether or not they get pampered than in justice. Makes me sick.
These people are murderers and we need info they have as a matter of national security. Perhaps you'd put a terrorist group ahead of your country and the citizens safety but not everyone shares your views, Thank God.

It should not come to a surprise that you think we should stoop as low as our ennemies. I think we should held ourselves to a higher standard. As for the use of torture, its lack of relability as a way to obtain information is well known, as the usual use by bigots and ignorants of the "if you don't approve of torture, you support terrorism" cr*p.

Speaking of ignorance, that's probably explains why you didn't bother to check the detail regarding the event that M. Dancer described as an accident. Here are the FACTS:

The so-called teerorist was a young Afghani man Dilawar. On December 5, 2002, he was driving his taxi, with three assengers on board, when they were detained by forces loyal to local warlord Jan Baz Khan. Khan, it would later be found, had been the architected of a recent rocket attack on a nearby American base, and was handing innocent men to the Americans in order to both cash a reward promised for the capture of any culprit, and to deflect attention from himself.

Dilawar and his passengers were delivered to U.S. forces and brought to the Dharan prison camps. The passengers were interrogated, sent to Guantanamo and later released as they didn't constitute a risk. Dilawar was not that lucky. His captors started beating him. Soon, they started to find the way he screamed "ALLAH" when struck to be funny. So they beat him more, and more. Between beatings, he was chained to a wall, preventing him from geeting sleep. A guard later testified that, in the first 24 hours of his captivity, Dilawar received more than 100 kicks to the peroneal (a nerve behind the kneeca), most of them delivered just to hear him scream. After four days, his knees were so weak he could not even kneel when ordered. He died on December 10, 2002, after five days in captivity. The initial autopsy report termed his death an homicide.

But the more horrfying aspect of this murder is what was found later, and I'll bold it so that you cannot miss it:

according to notes left by Dilawar's interrogators, they believed right from the start that he was likely INNOCENT.

Are the FACTS clear enough?

CANADIEN · January 22, 2009

In all this commotion, I feel that one question has to be asked and must be answered. Can any supporter of Arar here possibly state he should have still received $10 million dollars if it was very possible that he had terrorist connections.

IF it was very possible that he was a terrorist... Key word is IF. Nobody would argue for monetary compensation to somebody when there is credible evidence that he may be a criminal.

Let me ask a question in turn? if

a - public commission of inquiry, reviewing all information collected by the RCMP about an individual, concluded there was no evidence in there suggesting that the man is a terrorist;

b- a Minister in the federal government, when shown a U.S. file about the same individual, said he saw no evidence in there that the man constitute a danger to the public;

c - if no credible evidence that the man is a terrorist was produced;

would you be arguing that there is a very strong possibility that the man is a terrorist?

Gonna ask, because it's exactly what we get here.