US attempt to rule Canadian courts?

[PocketRocket]

On the CBC radio news last night, I heard about the US's "offer" to return Mahen Arar to Canada.

But it had a string attached.

His return was to be on the condition that he be tried, AND CONVICTED, in a Canadian court.

"And convicted"?????

First, since when does the USA decide who is tried in Canada's courts, and secondly, since when do we OR the Americans decide to "convict" someone until all the evidence is in???

Basically, they wanted Arar brought before a kangaroo court, but for appearances, they wanted that court to be held in Canada.

Nice friends.

"He said the Americans said to the Canadians, 'We are ready to give you back Mr. Arar on the condition that you bring him back to Canada, you incarcerate him, you make charges against him,'" he testified.

Luckily for Canada's credibility, the response was...

"And the Canadian party said, 'No, the Canadian Charter of Freedoms does not allow us to do what you're asking. We do not have proper grounds.'"

To Bush et al, ever hear of a thing called "Due Process"???

You can find the story here.....

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...rar-050501.html

[Guest eureka]

"Due Process" has always been a "Red Rag" to Right Wing American governments> Back in 1873, the Supreme Court of the day ruled that there was no requirement for Due Proces.

The Courts there have always struggled with it since it is often inconvenient for governments.

[Fortunata]

Nice friends.

The United States is not our friend. Countries don't have friends, they have convenient alliances.

The United States is interested in only the United States to other countries detriment, arguably more so than any other country in the present day world. If I were cynical I would say that the good they do is paraded shamelessly in front of the world so they appear to be the magnanimous super country it has ceased to be.

[PocketRocket]

EUREKA: Good point.

FORTUNATA :I would find it difficult to argue with your point.

I thought it would be good to post this in light of all the rhetoric going around about how we need to bolster the ties with the USA.

Don't get me wrong, I don't view the USA as some "evil regime" or anything, but, like any other entity, their own self-interest is their top priority.

I do believe that the overwhelming power of the USA has caused recent administrations to step over the line more than a few times to expedite these self interests.

This is only the latest, and the most evident that they could care less about Canadian internal affairs as long as we keep step with their wishes.

[August1991]

The United States is not our friend.

When you say the "United States", who do you mean exactly?

----

As to the thread's title, the source is a CBC report of the words of a Liberal Senator who is describing a briefing he had with a bureaucrat in Foreign Affairs who says what an anonymous American official told him. All rather third hand, it seems to me.

And what did the American purportedly say?

"He said the Americans said to the Canadians, 'We are ready to give you back Mr. Arar on the condition that you bring him back to Canada, you incarcerate him, you make charges against him,'" he testified.

"You make charges against him". That's it.

Americans have as much respect for due process as Canadians do.

[Fortunata]

Americans have as much respect for due process as Canadians do.

I disagree. Americans cross the line more often than most other democratic countries. Why? Because they can. Examples of this is Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, the newly proposed passenger lists even if you go through their air space. There are many more examples. Pick up a newspaper almost any day.

[August1991]

Americans cross the line more often than most other democratic countries.

Have you ever heard of the War Measures Act? Do you know what happened in Canada in 1970?

[PocketRocket]

The United States is not our friend.

When you say the "United States", who do you mean exactly?

For sake of clarity, when I say USA, I mean the American government.

The American people are just people, like anywhere, ordinary people with ordinary hopes and dreams.

I hope that clears up where I stand personally.

And what did the American purportedly say?

"He said the Americans said to the Canadians, 'We are ready to give you back Mr. Arar on the condition that you bring him back to Canada, you incarcerate him, you make charges against him,'" he testified.

"You make charges against him". That's it.

Americans have as much respect for due process as Canadians do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Umm, did you miss the word "incarcerate"???

"Bring charges against him", and "incarcerate him" are the words that were used.

"Incarcerate" means "to jail".

Thay wanted him behind bars, and basically told us to put him there.

"Bring charges" does not bother me near as much, although I would still like to see them say "here's a pile of evidence that he's done wrong, I think you should charge him".

But that was not the tenor of the discussion.

And that's my beef.

As for their respect for "due process", they don't seem to have much respect for OUR due process.

[PocketRocket]

Oh, and in 1970, when asked "How far are you prepared to go", Trudeau responded "Just watch me".

Do I get a gold star on my notebook, teacher????

[Technocrat]

The main difference between canada and the US as far as due process goes is just sheer scale. We held people in canada without charge and a lack of 'due process' on this sketchy little thing called a 'security certificate'. Its intelligence agancies like CSIS and the CIA that have the real lack of 'due process' as if there was any due process for their suspects people would realize that the intelligence organizations pose a real and substantial democratic threat to the people they are supposed to protect.

IMHO withholding evidence for reasons of 'national security' is complete hogwash... as is being revealed by the Arar case. If a goverment is truly 'for the people' why is there any need for secrecy?

CSIS is a bunch of old currupt RCMP agents that have watched too many Bond fliks and suffer from a longstanding bout of paranioa.

btw didn't spell check

[August1991]

Umm, did you miss the word "incarcerate"???

"Bring charges against him", and "incarcerate him" are the words that were used.

"Incarcerate" means "to jail".

Thay wanted him behind bars, and basically told us to put him there.

It is normal to remand someone to jail pending a trial, unless a judge decides otherwise or bail is posted.

I note again though that this whole story is hearsay - we don't know which American said this or if this person was speaking in the name of the American government. We don't even know if the story is accurate.

[PocketRocket]

We don't even know if the story is accurate.

Surely you don't believe that any member of a government agency would be dishonest, do you???