Was Arar Victimized Or Had Terrorist Ties?

[Morgan]

The following is a lengthy new article[ Nov. 8] written by Juliet O'Neill published in the Ottawa Citizen. It updates facts and events regarding the Arar case and I encourage everyone to read the full text.

Canada's dossier on Mr. Maher Arar

I believe the Arar case presents an array of talking points for forum members. Some areas that come to mind:

a) US-Canada relations

This highly publicized, emotionally charged case has added extra strain to already tense Canadian-USA relations, with the press implying that the US authorities seized and deported a Canadian naturalized citizen to be brutalized by Syrian authorities, for no good reason other than because of his being of Arabic ancestory and because Ashcroft paranoia has infected US law enforcement's judgement.

The US, on the otherhand, has said that they were only responding to signals and actions from Cdn. authorities and that Cdn. agencies and Cdn. politicians are working at cross purposes. Colin Powell said it was Canadian authorities passing on warnings to the US in the first place that caused them to question Arar and when Canada refused to allow Mr. Arar back to Canada, that gave the US no choice but to deport Arar to Syria, his birth country and whose citizenship Arar still kept.

Canadian citizens in trouble abroad -is Cdn. gov't assistence given fairly or is it the squeaky wheel that gets more attention?

There are questions about whether or not there has been fairness and consistency regarding to what lengths the PM and other gov't officials will go to argue on behalf of Canadians jailed abroad. Comparisons can be drawn between the cases of Mr. Arar vs Mr. Sampson for example.

c)does a well respected military give diplomacy a psychological advantage?

Are Canadian citizens when travelling on business or pleasure at greater risk if they run into problems with foreign governments because our country has no "muscle" to back up displomatic demands? That is to say, does having a respected military contribute a psychological advantage to a country's diplomatic efforts?

Example, Mr. Sampson credits the UK government for getting him out of Saudi Arabia, along with a Brit cell mate and said the Cdn. gov't's diplomatic negotiating efforts were next to useless. Did it help the UK diplomats' negotiations with the Saudis to have 35,000 troops sitting next door in Iraq? Yes, no?

d) gov't intelligence agencies vs politicians

There's also a question of whether or not politicians are eroding the anti-terrorist efforts of Cdn. law enforcement agencies like CSIS and RCMP by their personal interventions on random cases. Or is that what politicians are supposed to do ie. be more responsive to the individual needs of each citizen, as they come up, even if it means over-riding the info gathered by "experts" in the field.

e) national security/trusting open immigration policy

Also, this case may generate a debate about Canada's national priorities and responsibilities to its citizens and to the global fight on terrorism. For example, is Canada being too lax in its immigration policies at the expense of national security? Or is an open trusting immigration policy what makes Canada an strong, diverse multi-cultural nation, even if it means there might be a small chance of attracting some potential "bad guys" from Islamic immigrant source nations, in particular, who may compromise national security? Does diversity trump security?

[cknykid]

Mr. Arar says he confessed to training in Afghanistan when he was tortured.

The guy was tortured. Humm How long will it take to torture you in a Syrian prison when you admit you were the second gunman on the grassy knoll. It was your gunshot that took President Kennedy out. My estimate is 30 minutes if you are really brave