Canada official: Torture can be tolerated
- Thread starter gh0st
- Start date
Icarusintel
Newbie
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2004
- Messages
- 5,302
- Reaction score
- 0
my respect for Canada just jumped 3 points... to a grand total of 3 points
Ikerous
Newbie
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2004
- Messages
- 5,622
- Reaction score
- 0
CptStern
suckmonkey
- Joined
- May 5, 2004
- Messages
- 10,303
- Reaction score
- 62
Ikerous said:
that's the source? you're kidding right? that's a complete distortion of what the Globe and Mail said:
"A federal lawyer says Canadian diplomats were right to try to find out what Syrian interrogators learned from Maher Arar while he was in a Damascus prison.
Barbara McIsaac told a public inquiry that it is clear, in hindsight, that Mr. Arar was not part of any terrorist plot.
At the time, however, she said, it was legitimate to ask the Syrians what information they had obtained from him.
Lawyers for Mr. Arar have accused Franco Pillarella, then the Canadian ambassador to Damascus, of putting a higher priority on intelligence-gathering than on getting Mr. Arar released from prison and returned to Canada"
the real source
how is that anywhere near officially sanctioning torture? why do you think there's an inquiry into his kidnapping? CSIS is guilty of handing over Ahrar to the americans knowing full well that he would be tortured but that doesnt mean they publically endorse torture ..when the inquiry finds CSIS guilty, heads will roll
the entire article is kneejerk reactionism and outright lies:
they claim this:
"He claims he was tortured during interrogation there, until he lied that he was trained in Afghanistan by al-Qaida."
from Maher Arar's statement:
I have never been to Afghanistan. I have never been anywhere near Afghanistan and I do not have any desire to ever go to Afghanistan.
from his testimony at the inquiry:
"So, on the third day when they didn't find anything, so, of course, they -- in my view, they just wanted to please the Americans, and they had to find something on me. So, because I was accused of being an al Qaeda member, which is nowadays synonymous with Afghanistan, they told me, ‘You've been to a training camp in Afghanistan.’ And I said, “No.” And they started beating me. And I said -- well, I had no choice. I just wanted the beating to stop. I said, “Of course, I've been to Afghanistan.” I was ready to confess to anything just to stop the torture."
that article completely distorted the truth
here's something closer to the truth on Canada's role in the torture of Maher Arar
ComradeBadger
Tank
- Joined
- May 15, 2003
- Messages
- 1,723
- Reaction score
- 2
Torture doesn't work. Just makes people say what they think you want to hear.
It's immoral and sickening.
We are beyond this barbarism, surely.
Oh, and the politics forum has decended into meaningless childish points-scoring.
It's immoral and sickening.
We are beyond this barbarism, surely.
Oh, and the politics forum has decended into meaningless childish points-scoring.
Korgoth
Newbie
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2003
- Messages
- 3,233
- Reaction score
- 0
It doesn't have to be that way, its just for some odd reason, a few people feel the need to defend the federal government as opposed to their fellow country men and women, as if the federal government doesn't have the think-tanks, and cash to do it themselves.
CptStern
suckmonkey
- Joined
- May 5, 2004
- Messages
- 10,303
- Reaction score
- 62
gh0st said:
no the original source is the Globe and Mail ...which that article distorted to mean something completely different
ummm...
gh0st said:
that's a big stretch even for you gh0st
this entire sentence is a lie, let's examine it shall we?
"He claims he was tortured during interrogation there, until he lied that he was trained in Afghanistan by al-Qaida"
they cast doubt on whether he was tortured ...this is not even up for debate ..the canadian government, his doctors, his own statements prove that he was tortured
"He claims he was tortured during interrogation there, until he lied that he was trained in Afghanistan by al-Qaida"
again they're implying he lied about the torture because he lied about training in afghanistan ..which is appallingly inaccurate
"He claims he was tortured during interrogation there, until he lied that he was trained in Afghanistan by al-Qaida"
the wording is such that it implies that he was trained by al qaida and that he was in afghanistan which has never been in dispute because IT NEVER HAPPENED. The first inquiries with the RCMP revealed that in 2003. The article falsely claims it was a lie, that he had been to afghanistan and trained with al qaida as fact when it isnt. Very sloppy journalism at best ..at worst they intentionally spinned the story to suit an agenda ....hmmm I wonder what that could be?
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,316
- Reaction score
- 16
If you're using the terrorists' methods you're as bad as them.
baxter
Newbie
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1,074
- Reaction score
- 0
Maher Arar: statement,full text
maybe it's just me but I'm kind of appalled by the US's role in this.
Human rights report
ComradeBadger
Tank
- Joined
- May 15, 2003
- Messages
- 1,723
- Reaction score
- 2
For example:CptStern said:
Canada official: Torture can be tolerated
President Bush says he takes responsibility for the federal government's failures
3 Strikes and You Are Out Mr. Bush
New Study: 39,000 Iraqis killed since 2003 ...by small arms alone
Watch him squirm...
:dozey:
All the same. Bash Bush/Iraq or Defend Bush/Iraq. Both sides being completely mindlessly devoted to their own cause that they can't see one shred of good in the either's point. I'm not getting at anyone in particular, nor am insulting anyone, but the world isn't black and white. No matter how much you want it to be.
CptStern
suckmonkey
- Joined
- May 5, 2004
- Messages
- 10,303
- Reaction score
- 62
ComradeBadger said:
but ...it's not like any of you brits post topics on british politics ..it's mostly us north americans that debate ..naturally there being a war this sort of thing would be the main focus
americans are very polarised they're either staunchly republican or democrats ..whereas the rest of the world seems not to have such a clear cut political affiliation
and you're right it's not all black and white ..I'm a staunch believer in infinate shades of grey but I deal in facts ..the facts speak for themselves. There's a few people here who rely on "Talking points" with little to no facts to back up their annoyingly partisan agenda ...believe it or not but before debating the legality of the war I never really considered myself a staunch liberal ..I'm just me ..some of ideology just so happens to coincide with humaniatianism ..which can be seen as liberal
ComradeBadger
Tank
- Joined
- May 15, 2003
- Messages
- 1,723
- Reaction score
- 2
See, I'd classify myself as liberal- I like the welfare state etc
Yet I supported the war in Iraq
Yet I am appalled at the torture of prisoners
Yet I can still hope that some good comes out of Iraq, and still believe that going in was the right thing to do.
Mechagodzilla
Tank
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2003
- Messages
- 6,973
- Reaction score
- 0
Stern, I believe you misread the sentence.
The only thing false with that particular sentence was that it mentioned 'claims' of torture, when it's basically documented fact by this point.
However, that article is a quite untrue. As pointed out, the Arar case is a national embarassment and torture is not supported by the canadian government.
And what's up with all you sick mothers who think torture is okay, let alone when it occurs in secret to a civilian without a trial?
Seriously, what?
I agree with badger. No-one in politics forms their own opinions . Everyone just posts a news article and says "TORTURE IS GOOD SAYS THAT NEWS" or "NEWREPUBLIC BLOG CLAIMS REPUBLICANS ARE 'AWESOME'" or "BUSH IDIOT SAYS MANY POLLS" accepting it without any thought.
It's all a knee-jerk reaction, and everyone's trying to convey 'intelligent' political conversation through nothing but misinterpreted quotes from a blog in Utah.
Do you know why no-one here agrees on anything?
It's because at ANY GIVEN TIME the stupid people are posting something retarded and struggling to defend its retardedness against the other side, who waste their time futilely trying to convince them that it's wrong to base your political understanding off what you would have read on a bar napkin if you were old enough to go to a bar.
The division here isn't between republican and democrat or right and left.
It's between the staggeringly immature and those who have apparently gone insane because of having to deal with them.
For once, I'd like to see a thread without ghost or stern or no limit or icarusintel.
You're all terrible at politics and should leave.
The Republican Party and the Democratic Party don't give a shit about what you say. So all this one-upmanship serves to do NOTHING.
The only purpose of the politics forum are those that show that you are a sensible person who can engage in sensible discussion.
This is something you have ALL failed at.
It might as well be two brick walls screaming at eachother.
The only thing false with that particular sentence was that it mentioned 'claims' of torture, when it's basically documented fact by this point.
However, that article is a quite untrue. As pointed out, the Arar case is a national embarassment and torture is not supported by the canadian government.
And what's up with all you sick mothers who think torture is okay, let alone when it occurs in secret to a civilian without a trial?
Seriously, what?
I agree with badger. No-one in politics forms their own opinions . Everyone just posts a news article and says "TORTURE IS GOOD SAYS THAT NEWS" or "NEWREPUBLIC BLOG CLAIMS REPUBLICANS ARE 'AWESOME'" or "BUSH IDIOT SAYS MANY POLLS" accepting it without any thought.
It's all a knee-jerk reaction, and everyone's trying to convey 'intelligent' political conversation through nothing but misinterpreted quotes from a blog in Utah.
Do you know why no-one here agrees on anything?
It's because at ANY GIVEN TIME the stupid people are posting something retarded and struggling to defend its retardedness against the other side, who waste their time futilely trying to convince them that it's wrong to base your political understanding off what you would have read on a bar napkin if you were old enough to go to a bar.
The division here isn't between republican and democrat or right and left.
It's between the staggeringly immature and those who have apparently gone insane because of having to deal with them.
For once, I'd like to see a thread without ghost or stern or no limit or icarusintel.
You're all terrible at politics and should leave.
The Republican Party and the Democratic Party don't give a shit about what you say. So all this one-upmanship serves to do NOTHING.
The only purpose of the politics forum are those that show that you are a sensible person who can engage in sensible discussion.
This is something you have ALL failed at.
It might as well be two brick walls screaming at eachother.
CptStern
suckmonkey
- Joined
- May 5, 2004
- Messages
- 10,303
- Reaction score
- 62
hmmm apparently I've gone insane! ....yay! for mental deficiencies :E
anyways I'm glad my hard work at researching issues is dismissed so easily by saying I'm wasting my time ...I think I should be the judge of that ..although I agree that 90% of the time it falls on deaf ears ...but I post as much for myself as for my detractors ..I've learned quite a bit over the last couple of years
anyways I'm glad my hard work at researching issues is dismissed so easily by saying I'm wasting my time ...I think I should be the judge of that ..although I agree that 90% of the time it falls on deaf ears ...but I post as much for myself as for my detractors ..I've learned quite a bit over the last couple of years
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,316
- Reaction score
- 16
Liberal politics cause injustices and huge gaps between the rich and the poor. Liberal politics means that only rich people can afford quality health care and education. As far as I'm concerned, the difference between Liberalism and Conservatism only lies in moral issues, and such issues have no place in politics anyway.
Teta_Bonita
Tank
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2004
- Messages
- 1,827
- Reaction score
- 2
Is torture acceptable if it really does save lives?
/deep pondering
/deep pondering
ComradeBadger
Tank
- Joined
- May 15, 2003
- Messages
- 1,723
- Reaction score
- 2
Liberal politics means.. that healthcare and education is free....
The Monkey
The Freeman
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2004
- Messages
- 16,316
- Reaction score
- 16
But private options exists. Hospitals where people with money can get better health care, schools where kids with rich parents get better education. Fundamental rights, like health care and education, are nothing that should be bought and sold.ComradeBadger said:
The question itself is a red herring.
All it does is distract and confuse the average thinking person into a dead-end debate. Meanwhile the spectrum of acceptable ideology is moved away from peace-time human rights and into a pseudo war-panic .
The case for the invasion of Iraq was based largely on waving the spectre of "WMD`s" in the faces of u.s citizens, and it worked.
The most shameful thing for so-called "liberal" democracies is that the same tactic is now being used to wipe away decades of human rights advances, and with the same likely outcome.
Similar threads
