Canada is secretly adding names to US security

[Topaz]

One would think that one would learn lessons of the past, but Canada is still giving names to the US for their crime on terror. Maher Arar had his name on that list which turned out to be false and Canadians ended up paying over million for it. These people are never told that their names on a list and if they travel to the US, they may never get back into Canada. I thought a person was innocent until proven guilty, but not anymore. IF they were allowed into Canada in the first place, why? Why weren't they rejected instead. It also seems the US is continuing to add fuel to the fire over in the Middle-East and creating these people who want and need to revenge for the killings in the Middle-East. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/canadians-secretly-added-u-security-list-wikileaks-093325567.html

[Tilter]

Why?--- Because we are too chicken to do anything about the terrorists in our midst. Let them go to the States & we will be rid of them.

[Saipan]

Canada is secretly adding names to US security

If it's secret how do YOU know?

[Tilter]

Because, unlike you I guess, I read the papers & watch the Canadian & American news. (and am disgusted by the actions of our (miss)Judges In our (chickenlivered)Courts.

Edited May 18, 2011 by Tilter

[Dave_ON]

I've noticed that the CBC has had a lot of "WikiLeaks" articles of late. Does anyone actually know how credible WikiLeaks is or where they source their information. They seem to have access to a rather unusual number of sensitive items, which to me makes their information suspect.

[RNG]

I've noticed that the CBC has had a lot of "WikiLeaks" articles of late. Does anyone actually know how credible WikiLeaks is or where they source their information. They seem to have access to a rather unusual number of sensitive items, which to me makes their information suspect.

Aren't the majority of the Wikeleaks stories for abou the past 6 months from the diplomatic cables given to them by that imprisoned US forces guy?

[bloodyminded]

I've noticed that the CBC has had a lot of "WikiLeaks" articles of late. Does anyone actually know how credible WikiLeaks is or where they source their information. They seem to have access to a rather unusual number of sensitive items, which to me makes their information suspect.

From their site:

1.4 How WikiLeaks verifies its news stories

We assess all news stories and test their veracity. We send a submitted document through a very detailed examination a procedure. Is it real? What elements prove it is real? Who would have the motive to fake such a document and why? We use traditional investigative journalism techniques as well as more modern rtechnology-based methods. Typically we will do a forensic analysis of the document, determine the cost of forgery, means, motive, opportunity, the claims of the apparent authoring organisation, and answer a set of other detailed questions about the document. We may also seek external verification of the document For example, for our release of the Collateral Murder video, we sent a team of journalists to Iraq to interview the victims and observers of the helicopter attack. The team obtained copies of hospital records, death certificates, eye witness statements and other corroborating evidence supporting the truth of the story. Our verification process does not mean we will never make a mistake, but so far our method has meant that WikiLeaks has correctly identified the veracity of every document it has published.

Publishing the original source material behind each of our stories is the way in which we show the public that our story is authentic. Readers don’t have to take our word for it; they can see for themselves. In this way, we also support the work of other journalism organisations, for they can view and use the original documents freely as well. Other journalists may well see an angle or detail in the document that we were not aware of in the first instance. By making the documents freely available, we hope to expand analysis and comment by all the media. Most of all, we want readers know the truth so they can make up their own minds.

At any rate, we know that the controversial leaked diplomatic cables are genuine, because the targeted governments have conceded the fact.

[RNG]

From their site:

At any rate, we know that the controversial leaked diplomatic cables are genuine, because the targeted governments have conceded the fact.

Plus the fact that the US announce they had made preemptive apologies to many governments.