|
Post by achebeautiful on Dec 14, 2006 19:29:27 GMT -5
"Arar Affair 'Would Not Happen Today': Day"
OTTAWA (CBC) - Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day said Wednesday he could assure "with a degree of confidence" that cases such as the wrongful deportation of Maher Arar from the U.S. to Syria could not happen again.
"With the recommendations that we've already accepted from Justice O'Connor just in the last few months ... the situation that happened with Mr. Arar would not happen today," he said in an interview with CBC News.
Among the changes to national security protocol are improvements in intelligence sharing.
"There have to be caveats attached to that information that would say, 'All right, here's some evidence about a particular individual, however, there's a caveat to this,' " Day explained. "A caveat is, for instance: 'We have no firm information that this person is involved with terrorist activity.' "
More careful screening of information would allow other intelligence agencies to know "whether this is something that may be of interest, or something that is a fact," he said.
The government has already welcomed a security mechanism that directs the flow of information toward "an area of central management" while an investigation continues.
"There will be an awareness right at the top so the people at the top ... will know what's going on as the investigation moves along and things can't get pushed to the side," Day said.
New investigation launched
On Tuesday, Day announced the government would launch a probe into the cases of Abdullah Almalki, Muayyed Nureddin and Ahmad El Maati. All three Arab-Canadians claim they were also arrested and tortured abroad because of erroneous information provided by Canadian officials.
The announcement of the latest probe, to be headed by retired Supreme Court judge Frank Iacobucci, came on the same day Justice O'Connor released his second independent inquiry into the Arar matter - this one focusing on the RCMP's role.
The new cases being reviewed by Justice Iacobucci will be treated "as a blank slate," Day said Wednesday.
In September 2002, Syrian-born engineer Maher Arar was travelling back to Ottawa from a family vacation in Tunisia when he was pulled off a plane in New York City, accused of having ties to al-Qaeda and shipped to Syria, where he was tortured for 10 months. Arar's name has since been cleared and O'Connor has recommended the government compensate the family.
|
|
|
Post by achebeautiful on Dec 14, 2006 19:37:27 GMT -5
Leona says:
"I feel that the RCMP and Canadian government are totally at fault for the wrong information being given but the States are at fault for Arar's torture."
Here's where we strongly disagree Leona. You see, I believe that the RCMP and Canadian government were totally at fault for the wrong information and Syria is at fault for the torture. The United States is to blame for trusting Canada with information about their own people. Unfortunately, that isn't something that turned out to be trustworthy. While lessons can be learned from that, blame should not be given. Just my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by ocelot on Dec 14, 2006 23:16:59 GMT -5
Mark, I have a question for you. If you knew that a person molested children and you put a child into his/her care, would you be to blame for that child being molested? I know that you can't control someone else's action but you knowingly put that child into a situation so that the child would be molested.
I know that physically you aren't to blame for the action but situation-wise you are to blame because the situation would have never happened if you had not put the child in that position.
To me, there is fault when there is a 99% chance of something happening because you put the person in the position to be the victim. Syria was a country that was known for torturing prisoners and Arar was a Canadian citizen, why was he sent to Syria when there was probably a 99% chance that he would be tortured. To me either the people who sent him there is extremely stupid and naive or sent him there knowing that he would be tortured.
|
|
|
Post by achebeautiful on Dec 15, 2006 0:18:34 GMT -5
Leona, you asked me a question and I will give you the most honest and heartfelt answer that I can possibly give. Based on the way that you asked me the question, I would have to say that I would have to be responsible for putting that child in harm's way.
I think I understand how you feel about this topic, and from the viewpoint that you seem to be projecting (or perhaps the way I am interpreting what you are stating) it seems that you feel that the United States is at fault for not only being stupid, but also being willing to hand a person over to known torture. I do not at all think that is the case. Nor do I think that Canada would do such a thing. I believe that something was wrong in the system that caused those doing their jobs to secure our borders to give faulty information to one another. Because that happened, and procedure based on that information was followed, someone was wrongly deported and thus tortured in Syria.
I cannot dismiss how terrible something like this truly is. I also do not take it lightly, and believe that something needs to be done to see that this sort of thing does not happen again.
But I do not think that either Canada or the United States is stupid, or even knowingly handing innocent people over to torture situations. If that is your accusation, then you and I will just have to disagree on this subject.
There is a term in management called "critical control points" and it is the ability to trace a problem in the system to its beginning. Here is an example of a critical control point. You go to the store to buy some milk. When you get home you notice that the milk you purchased is out of date. You take it back to the store and they either replace or refund your money. The job now for that store is to find out why there was out of date milk on the shelf for you to buy in the first place. Did the cashier "knowingly" sell you out of date milk? Or was he/she just "stupid"? Or could it be that the stock person in the dairy department didn't rotate the milk on the shelves? Looking back even further, did the dairy company deliver out of date milk from the start? You can blame everyone from the cashier on down the line for being at fault for not recognizing the problem, and in fact you would be right in doing so. But until you get to the reason for why the problem exists in the first place, you will never solve the problem. Blame may satisfy your hunger to make someone at fault, but it does little to fix the problem for the next time if it is not where the problem is truly coming from.
You seem to be saying that the United States is either stupid or willingly handing people over to be tortured. I'm sorry that you feel that way, but I strongly disagree. If you do truly feel that way, there is nothing, not even evidence that other factors may be the reason for the problem, that will change your mind or your heart in this matter.
I do think that on both sides of the border there is the possibility for abuses of power. Unfortunately, there always is. Not all cops are good. But I also think that overwelmingly and for the most part, the people in these positions are trying to do the best job they can with the information they receive.
What a great discussion Leona!
|
|
|
Post by ocelot on Dec 15, 2006 0:34:03 GMT -5
I agree with you that the most important part is that they take this situation and learn from it. I also know that when you have been really hurt by a situation that was caused by someobody else's action it can hurt alot more when there is no apology or guilt from the other side. I know that it can really hurt when you've been damaged so much and all they say is that they did the best they could. Sometimes "the best you can do" is inadequate and simply not good enough.
|
|
|
Post by achebeautiful on Dec 15, 2006 1:30:10 GMT -5
That is absolutely true, Leona, and I couldn't agree with you more. It is different in a personal situation that it is in a broader, more public situation such as this. But I understand where you are coming from, and agree.
|
|
|
Post by ocelot on Dec 15, 2006 10:04:16 GMT -5
Arar still on U.S. watch list: U.S. ambassador Last Updated: Friday, December 15, 2006 | 8:08 AM ET CBC News Despite being exonerated by a federal inquiry, Maher Arar remains on a U.S. government watch list, says the U.S. ambassador to Canada.
In an interview with CBC Radio's The House, Ambassador David Wilkins confirmed Arar remains on the American border lookout system.
"My information is that he is on the watch list and has been since he was deported, yes," he said.
Four years ago, the RCMP mistakenly labelled Arar as an Islamic extremist and asked Washington to place a lookout for Arar. The former Ottawa engineer was detained at a New York airport in late 2002 and deported to Syria, where he spent a year being tortured in a prison.
The RCMP has since apologized for its mistake and its commissioner, Giuliano Zaccardelli resigned after telling a commons committee he gave incorrect information during earlier testimony. Late last week, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day said he didn't know whether Arar was still on the American watch list, telling a Commons committee he had recently posed the question to U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
"Their response was — I'm not saying I was totally satisfied with it — that because it was a matter of privacy that if Mr. Arar or perhaps his lawyers would contact the State Department, they can find that out," said Day.
Wilkins wouldn't comment further because Arar is suing the U.S. government.
A spokesperson for Day said the minister has written Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff requesting the U.S. remove Arar from its watch list.
Maher Arar has called for full accountability from officials involved in his detention. (CBC) But a lawyer for Arar in the U.S. says Canadian officials should do more.
"The excuse being that Canada understands that the U.S. won't accept pressure to take someone off their watch list," said Maria LaHood.
"I mean, I would hope that the Canadian government would put pressure on the U.S. because I don't know what's going to make a difference."
As for Arar's lawsuit in the U.S., a district court dismissed it last February. But LaHood filed new information, including the final report of Arar Inquiry with the second circuit court of appeal this week.
Arar has filed a lawsuit against officials from the RCMP, CSIS, Foreign Affairs and others in senior government positions for their alleged role in his deportation and detention in Syria, said Falconer.
The lawsuit seeks $37 million in compensation for extraordinary injury to Arar and his family.
|
|
|
Post by ocelot on Dec 15, 2006 10:07:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by achebeautiful on Dec 15, 2006 16:24:47 GMT -5
Wow, thank you very much for the wealth of information on this subject Leona. I advise everyone who is reading these posts to click on the link that Leona provided and learn about this still developing story.
As far as the United States operating without an apology or comment and working behind a wall of secrecy, you can expect that trend to continue for some time. As long as there are going to be lawsuits against them, there will not be a liberty to express thoughts or feelings about the matter to the public. So it will be difficult to determine just how sorrowful people may be, or what changes are being addressed until the proper time comes for such notice.
In the meantime, people will have to either be willing to wait this story out with interest and concern, or choose to judge it based on their already preconceived notions and hangups. If people want to find fault with someone, there will always be plenty of stories to support their blame. The same will be true of the US government.
I find it very curious that you would call what the Canadian government did in this story as terribly wrong and mistaken, even willing to find them at fault for their part in this situation. But with regards to the US government, you find them stupid and/or willing to send a person knowingly into a torturous situation. You make it very clear that you have no trust for the US authorities.
Well, if the Canadian government was so trustworthy in the first place, then why are they going through such an overhaul right now? That really puzzles me. You have explained it in a previous post, but I am not yet seeing how all that makes it all forgivable and alright in the Canadian citizen's eyes.
The Canadian authorities not only gave faulty information, but from what I am reading also "dehumanized" their own citizens in this situation. They too are being sued. Why is it that they just get to be "terribly wrong" and "mistaken" and not "stupid" and "willingly sending people to torture" like the United States?
There is nobody who is willing to answer these questions for me as brilliantly as you Leona. Please help me to understand, because I agree with you that a lot of things went wrong, and that a lot of things need to change. But I just cannot agree with you about what I perceive as venomous disregard for the United States.
I know how much you love Canada. It's one of the things I really appreciate about you a lot. You love Canada the way I love the United States. I respect you for it, and even have a greater love for Canada because of you. But I do not see how loving the United States as much as I do in any way has to mean that I think less of Canada. Nor do I think that a Canadian like yourself has to think any less of the United States because of your great effection for Canada.
Now, I realize that I am possibly wrong in my assessment of all this. That's exactly why I am expressing it. If I am wrong, would you please be willing to correct me?
I appreciate this discussion very much, and am learning a lot in the process.
|
|
|
Post by ocelot on Dec 15, 2006 21:44:55 GMT -5
I don't find the Canadian government so trustworthy. I realise the fact that the current government is making changes to make sure that people are held accountable and that the government is held accountable. At the end of the previous government's (Liberals) reign I wouldn't of trusted their word for anything, this is based on broken promises, hiding facts from the public, using tax-payers dollars for selfish reasons, and the lack of a firm stand on almost anything. I like to give a government the benefit of the doubt till I feel that they have proved that they don't deserve my trust. To me the US government has done too many things that have shattered any trust I had in them to treat situations like these in a way that I feel is proper.
Do I feel no trust for the US government, no but regarding this issue it is next to nothing. I feel that they are going so far to fight terrorism that they are crossing the bounds of human rights (this has been said many times before by human rights groups and citizens and leaders from other countries). The reason that I accuse the US so strongly about "willingly sending people to torture" is that they sent these people to Syria (who are well known for torture methods) not to one of their allies with good human rights records. They don't send them back to the country whose passport they carry (which in this case would be Canada) but to a country known for torturing their prisoners. I honestly have a hard time believing that the US didn't know that these people would be tortured.
I realise I'm being quite harsh on the US in this situation, but they also have not given me any reason not to believe as I do. It could be that the Canadian way of doing things is much more in the open and the US government is simply not like this. Especially in Canada, we get frustrated with the way that the US government is acting and this could be alot of my frustration and disbelief coming out. Since Canada refused to go to Iraq with the US, the US government has not felt like our friend as they did before, it more like a distant relation that you put up with.
One thing that I really dislike about the way that the US government handles things is that they almost never apologise for anything. That is one thing that I really respect about the current Canadian government is that they feel accountable for everything and are willing to apologise for the mistakes that they make and tragedies that occur through their influence and the people they put in command. Probably the thing that most upsets me is that they don't seem sorry at all about what Arar went through.
I don't mean to say that the US government and its officials are stupid and a disgrace but the way that they have put it seems senseless. Why would you send a non-Syrian to Syria as a prisoner unless you wanting him to be tortured or threatened with it? I don't think the US is that naive but I always could be wrong.
|
|
|
Post by achebeautiful on Dec 16, 2006 9:57:20 GMT -5
I have to compliment you, Leona, for answering all of my many questions. Too many people become offended too easily whenever asked about the political positions that they hold. I believe that you do not because you are very informed on the subject and arrive at your positions based on a strong conviction from the things you have learned from it.
I share your concern regarding this issue. What happened is terrible and something needs to be done to see that this sort of thing doesn't happen to others.
I now understand where your frustration comes from and appreciate your views. I personally believe that the system failed and needs drastically to be improved. I also believe that it wasn't a matter of anyone being stupid, naive, or willing to send someone into a torture situation. Rather, I believe that this is all part of the very impersonal, robotic age we are now living in. We are relying too heavily on technology today and not enough on human touch. It is becoming a real problem and when the truth finally comes out about all of this I wouldn't be surprised one bit to learn that it was the main reason for the problem. People are going to follow the system, and if the system fails, everything goes with it.
I think it is very important to note that there should also be outrage over Syria treating this man with torture. Just because Syria is known for this sort of thing does not make it acceptable. Wrong is wrong where ever it happens, whenever it happens. There should be worldwide outrage that a country would treat a person in this way. Let's not forget that! If nothing else, at least express it.
I have often heard Condoleeza Rice and President Bush express gratitude towards Canada for their contribution in Afghanistan. But I trust what you are saying about this, and am sorry to hear that it is so. I hope that the United States and Canada can mend these problems between them, because there is a long history of friendship between us.
So, while I do not consider either the US or Canadian governments to be stupid, naive or willing to send the wrong people to be tortured, I do better understand where you are coming from, Leona. Thank you so much for helping me learn as you have.
|
|
|
Post by ocelot on Dec 21, 2006 21:42:14 GMT -5
US Will Into Arar Case: Rice
U.S. security officials will review why Canadian Maher Arar is still on a U.S. terrorist watch list, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Thursday following a meeting with Canada's foreign affairs minister.
"It will of course be looked at," Rice told reporters at a joint news conference with Peter MacKay in Washington.
Rice said she instructed Michael Chertoff, the Department of Homeland Security's secretary, and the Justice Department to look further into the matter.
"He said he would examine it and would get back to me."
But Rice reiterated that the U.S. makes its own security decisions based on independent information.
"We value accuracy in cases but we do have our own process," she said. "It needs to be understood that in the post-Sept. 11 circumstances, we are determined to protect our borders."
MacKay said he brought up Arar's status in the meeting with his U.S. counterpart and reiterated that Arar has been cleared by the Canadian government of any ties to terrorism.
"There's clarity in Canada's position with the findings of Mr. Arar," MacKay said. "I'm very pleased at the decision to revisit the restriction on his case."
Arar, a Canadian citizen born in Syria, was seized at a New York airport in 2002 and sent to Syria, where he was tortured. A judicial inquiry into his case led by Justice Dennis O'Connor was set up after Arar returned to Canada more than a year later.
O'Connor concluded Arar had no terror links and the RCMP had given misleading information to U.S. authorities, which may have been the reason he was sent to Syria.
Parliament apologized to Arar and the government has been asking Washington to remove him from a watch list that prevents him from travelling to the U.S. and makes him a marked man, despite being cleared in Canada.
However, the U.S. has refused and has not explained why.
'Go our own way' The meeting between MacKay and Rice came a day after an American security official bluntly stated the U.S. would follow its own path on Arar without informing Canadians on its reasons.
"With respect to some issues, we're going to have to respectfully but firmly go our own way and the Arar matter, at least for now, is one of those," Paul Rosenzweig, acting assistant secretary for international affairs for the Department of Homeland Security, told reporters in Washington.
"As for the sharing of information with the Canadian government, while I do recognize that in an idealized world we would share every bit of intelligence information with all of our partners, in the real world that is an idealization that isn't achievable."
Prime Minister Stephen Harper told Sun Media that "as near as I can see, we simply have a U.S. government that won't admit it's wrong."
He said he can't compel the U.S. to explain why it still views Arar with suspicion.
"I'm not aware of the U.S. violating any law by not sharing it with us, but I'm obviously disappointed that they don't seem at this point to have responded fully to the conclusions of our own inquiry, and I have no explanation for why they're taking the position that they are."
Arar's lawsuit against the U.S. has been cited as one reason American authorities won't talk about the case.
|
|
|
Post by achebeautiful on Dec 22, 2006 15:14:05 GMT -5
Thank you for sharing this updated information, Leona. While I realize how frustrating and upsetting this must be for Canadians who want reasons and answers for these things, I am very satisfied and even happy with the US government on their decisions. No matter how it may look to the outside world, I want my country protected and secure from terrorism. If there is a legitimite reason for not explaining why the US government has decided the way it has, then I am glad that we have the right people in the right place at the right time. If people want to deem us untrustworthy for it, it's their choice to do so.
This is not the end of the story. If in the end it is found that the US government was involved in willful wrongdoing, I will admit to it. This, however, is far from it. All this says is that the US is looking into it, and as of yet has not given their reasons for taking Arar off its watchlist. Nor have they given their reasons for why they to date have not taken him off their watchlist.
I'm very interested in this story.
|
|
|
Post by achebeautiful on Dec 23, 2006 4:29:03 GMT -5
Remarks With Canadian Foreign Minister Peter MacKay
Secretary Condoleezza Rice Benjamin Franklin Room Washington, DC December 21, 2006
SECRETARY RICE: Good afternoon. I'm pleased to welcome my colleague, the Foreign Minister of Canada, Peter MacKay. Peter, welcome. We've had an extensive discussion this afternoon of a number of issues on the bilateral agenda. Of course, because Canada and the United States share a long border, share extensive trade, share extensive movement of people and indeed share a friendship and a border that's quite unlike any other in the world, we have a lot of issues but they are, of course, issues of neighbors and we've been talking about those.
We, of course, also share a global agenda and we are just delighted to have -- and very grateful to have a friend like Canada, a friend with which we, of course, share values, but with which we are also now sharing many of the duties and responsibilities of the global struggle in the war on terrorism. I particularly want to note the sacrifice of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan, a sacrifice that has been noted for its bravery and for its courage, because the Canadian forces have been stalwart fighters in the war to defeat those who would try and undo the progress that has been made by the young democratic government of Afghanistan.
Peter, I know that for the people of Canada these sacrifices are mourned one by one. I want you to know, too, that in the United States these soldiers are remembered.
We had an extensive discussion of Afghanistan, of NATO's responsibilities there, as well as a number of other issues around the world. But I'm very glad, Peter, that you took the time to come down just here before the holidays so that we could spend some time on this very broad agenda. Thanks very much.
FOREIGN MINISTER MACKAY: Thank you very much, Secretary Rice. And as you've stated, we share not only a common border but we share a common cause in the promotion of democracy and human rights not only in our own countries but around the globe. And we've been very fortunate to have been able to forge a very close working relationship over the years. Our two countries have worked very closely on so many important matters.
The discussions today and the bilateral issues that we touched upon are of importance and significance and by your willingness to greet us here today, and your officials have been very gracious and you yourself always have been very inviting when it came to these discussions, so I appreciate that a great deal. I know the Prime Minister and the President of the United States have also had important discussions of late on these matters of common interest.
And when it comes to the ongoing challenges in Afghanistan, again, I appreciate how forthright you've been and how respectful you've been in expressing the appreciation of the United States of America to Canada. We continue to hope that we will see greater progress in the stability and elevation of the people of Afghanistan to the point where they will be able to walk on their own with our assistance.
And so again, the progress that was made today I know will only continue, and I would take this opportunity to express again our season's greetings and our great thanks. I know we'll continue to work into the new year on these important bilateral and international matters as well.
SECRETARY RICE: Thank you.
MR. MCCORMACK: We have time for a few questions. NBC.
QUESTION: Madame Secretary, thank you. On Iran, do you support the latest UN draft resolution that drops the mandatory travel ban? And will there be a vote at the UN tomorrow with Russian support?
SECRETARY RICE: We are very supportive of the European Union draft. There are some changes that are still to be made to that draft, even though it is in so-called blue, and we're working on that draft. We are going to support a resolution that is a Chapter 7 resolution and that is strong in showing Iran that the international community is not going to tolerate its defiance of the international community's desires and the international community's demands which were stated some time ago.
I think it's been no secret that we would have preferred to have had this happen earlier. Had we been the lone drafters of the resolution, of course, there might have been other things in it. But I am quite satisfied and quite certain that the resolution that will be adopted will be one that both says to Iran, you cannot defy the international community, and imposes penalties on Iran for that defiance.
I just want to underscore a Chapter 7 resolution puts Iran in some very unwelcome company in terms of the international community, in terms of the decisions that people will make about Iran as a partner in the international economy. And that, more than anything, is the importance of this resolution.
QUESTION: Do you have the Russians' support, Madame Secretary?
SECRETARY RICE: I will -- am not following the moment to moment discussions in New York, but since I believe and have heard from the Russians that they want to stop the Iranians from acquiring technologies that could lead to a nuclear weapon and I've heard from the Russians that they're concerned about Iran's continued defiance of the Security Council, continued defiance of the International Atomic Energy Agency, that Russia will support a resolution that says to Iran that defiance is not acceptable.
QUESTION: (Off-mike.) Sorry for the confusion.
SECRETARY RICE: That's all right.
QUESTION: Madame Secretary and Minister, the Canadian Government, as you know, Madame Secretary, has cleared Maher Arar of any wrongdoing, any charges. It made representations to your Department to have his name cleaned from the files. Your Department, however, has said that it was a very deliberate decision taken on behalf of the State Department to keep him on a watch list and as a person non grata to enter the United States.
What information do you have that Canada doesn't have about Maher Arar and have you shared that information with Minister MacKay?
SECRETARY RICE: Well, Minister MacKay brought this question up of Mr. Arar. We obviously value our counterterrorism cooperation with Canada and our information sharing and we value the accuracy of anything that we do. This is a case that we have discussed. And what is more, I've said to Peter that I have asked Mike Chertoff, the Department of Homeland Security Secretary and the Justice Department to examine this and to get back to me so that we can share anything further. I think our Interior, our Homeland Security secretaries are also in touch. But I talked with Mike Chertoff about this just this morning and he said that he would examine this and he will be back to us.
FOREIGN MINISTER MACKAY: On the subject as Secretary Rice has said, we discussed Canada's position on this where there has been a finding by a judicial inquiry. Justice O'Connor's report exonerated Maher Arar. As a result of that information, we acted upon all 23 recommendations. But most importantly with respect to the watch list in Canada, Mr. Arar, his family members, certainly removed from that list; there are no restrictions on his travel in Canada. We've made that very clear to our colleagues.
Secretary Chertoff has also had communications with our Public Security Minister Stockwell Day on the subject. I've spoken about it today, raised the issue, in fact wrote to Secretary Rice and also had our Ambassador deliver a copy of the report. So there's clarity as to Canada's position and the findings with respect to Mr. Arar. We've removed him from our watch list. We've urged the United States to take the same steps. And I was grateful to hear today that the subject will be re-examined by the State Department and Homeland Security.
(In French.)
QUESTION: Madame Secretary, on North Korea, have the financial issues and the BDA designation proven to be an insurmountable stumbling block to making progress in the six-party talks this week?
SECRETARY RICE: Well, we've been very clear that these are two separate issues. The BDA issue arises out of investigation of illicit North Korean activities. The North Koreans asked for and have -- we have granted a working group that will examine these issues. The working group, I think, met twice in Beijing. It's likely to meet again in January. And that's the appropriate track for the examination of issues that are related to Banco Delta Asia.
In terms of the six-party talks, those talks, of course, are related to the agreement that the parties signed in September of 2005 which lays out a very clear set of responsibilities and obligations that should be undertaken, and that is what is being negotiated by Ambassador Hill in Beijing. I have said before that it will undoubtedly -- these are difficult issues -- it will take some time. But I understand -- I see fully that the other countries are very devoted to getting an outcome that is concrete for the six-party talks. No one wants to simply have talks for the sake of talks again. As a matter of fact, when Peter and I were last together in Hanoi, we had a breakfast with all of the ministers there for APEC, and around the table there was a very clear message to those of us who were engaged in the six-party talks to have six-party talks that produced results. Now, diplomacy sometimes takes time, but we should not be diverted somehow by an issue that is clearly in another lane and is clearly being dealt with in a way that the North Koreans themselves asked that it be dealt with. We cannot be diverted from what we need to do in the six-party talks, which is to have the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
QUESTION: Madame Secretary, the Prime Minister of Canada said quite flatly this week that you're wrong about Maher Arar, that this is no way to treat a Canadian citizen, especially a neighbor where the ties and the antiterrorism struggle is so close. What do you say to him and what do you say to Maher Arar himself? How do you explain how he's been treated?
SECRETARY RICE: Well, I would say what I've said to Foreign Minister MacKay, which is that the United States values its counterterrorism cooperation and we value accuracy in cases. But we do have our own processes as well. Canada has its processes. The United States has its processes. That is in the nature of these things.
Our process includes a consultation between the State Department and the Department of Homeland Security about who is listed on what lists. I think it needs to be understood that in the post-September 11th circumstances, we are determined to protect our borders. We're determined to protect the American people on all our borders. We are -- we've been very pleased to receive the information that the Canadian Government has provided. It will, of course, be looked at.
And as I said, just this morning I talked with Secretary Chertoff, who said that he would personally review the information that we have as well as the information that Canada has given us. But I think you do have to understand that the United States has to follow its own processes and has to come to its own conclusion and to its own satisfaction about the nature of these cases.
Thank you.
FOREIGN MINISTER MACKAY: Thanks very much.
QUESTION: Madame Secretary, happy holidays.
SECRETARY RICE: Happy holidays, everybody.
2006/1134
*Here is the full text of the briefing. Emphasis mine.
|
|
|
Post by ocelot on Jan 18, 2007 19:27:46 GMT -5
U.S. senator blasts Gonzales about Arar, demands answers next week
WASHINGTON (CP) - U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, lambasted by an irate senator Thursday over how Maher Arar was treated by American authorities, said he'll try to release more information about the case next week.
Democrat Patrick Leahy, who heads the Senate judiciary committee, told Gonzales that officials knew "damn well" Arar would be tortured when they deported him to Syria and Canadians are "justifiably upset" about a matter that's "beneath the dignity" of the U.S.
He also wanted to know why Arar remains on the U.S. security watch list despite being exonerated of any terrorist link
"This country has not said anything at all, that we made a mistake or had an apology," said Leahy.
"Why is he on a government watch list if he's been found completely innocent by this Canadian commission, which actually had the information from us?"
According to Canada's Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, there's no reason at all.
Day, in town for meetings on security matters, said Canadians have finally seen the Arar file that American authorities refused to share until now and there's "nothing new" to suggest he's a safety risk.
"Our officials recently have looked at all the U.S. information and that does not change our position," said Day, who met with Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.
"We are still maintaining that he should not be on that fly list."
For his part, Gonzales promised a briefing for senators and said he hoped to release the information publicly.
Leahy, who's from Vermont and has an extensive interest in Canadian issues, called rendition cases like Arar's - where a foreign terror suspect is sent to a third country to be tortured - a "black mark" on the country.
And he scoffed at the notion that American officials sought assurances from Syria that Arar wouldn't be tortured.
"We knew damn well, if he went to Canada, he wouldn't be tortured. He'd be held. He'd be investigated," said Leahy.
"We also knew damn well, if he went to Syria, he'd be tortured. And it's beneath the dignity of this country, a country that has always been a beacon of human rights."
It's easy, said Leahy, "for us to sit here comfortably in this room knowing that we're not going to be sent off to another country to be tortured."
Gonzales, who noted that Arar is still suing U.S. officials, said he's willing to answer the committee's questions but suggested he needed to consult with the White House.
"I think we can say a lot more about it, if you just simply give me some additional time," he said.
"In fact, we may be able to publicly say more about this shortly."
Leahy said he'd wait a week for a briefing from Gonzales.
"If we don't get it, I guarantee you there will be another hearing on this issue.
"Canadians have been our closest allies . . . They're justifiably upset. They're wondering what's happened to us.
"I'm somewhat upset," Leahy noted.
"Yes, sir, I can tell," Gonzales replied. "But before you get more upset, perhaps you should wait to receive the briefing."
The tough stand on Arar is a sign of new era on Capitol Hill, where Democrats are now in control and present more challenges for President George W. Bush on all sorts of security issues.
The administration agreed this week to disband a contentious warrantless surveillance program and replace it with one that will be overseen by the secret court that governs clandestine spying in the U.S..
Arar, a Syrian-born Canadian, was seized at a New York City airport in 2002 and sent to Syria, where he was held for more than a year and tortured into making false confessions of terrorist involvement.
Canada's public inquiry concluded RCMP gave U.S. authorities misleading information about Arar before he was deported.
The Americans have maintained they have their own data that justifies keeping him on the watch list.
Last month, Secretary of State Condoleezza said she asked Chertoff and the Justice Department to investigate why the Canadian engineer still can't enter the United States or even fly over U.S. air space.
But Chertoff refused to comment on the case, citing privacy rules and even suggesting it's a hypothetical issue.
"This becomes a relevant issue only if and when somebody presents themselves to come into the U.S.," he said.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has expressed frustation about the case, saying he suspects it's a matter of bureaucrats refusing to admit an error.
The U.S. didn't tell Canada that Arar was being sent to Syria.
Harper demanded an apology from the U.S. but had to settle last fall for a promise to collaborate with Canada on any future deportation cases.
|
|