Fighting Release Of Arar Data Normal, PM Says

In related news, 44% of Americans favour restricting the civil liberties of Muslims. Yes, it has come to this. <br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?id=f5f149e8-6621-48ba-bf3f-09c2b0d35a1a">http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?id=f5f149e8-6621-48ba-bf3f-09c2b0d35a1a</a> <br />
<br />
<p>---<br>"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill <br />

Canadians have had it too good for too long, and do not at all appreciate the value of those liberties my father's generation fought and died for, and for which those seeking justice for Mr.Arar are putting themselves at considerable risk. Since they don't seem to care very much, maybe Canadians don't deserve the freedoms they have thoughtlessly enjoyed for so long.

I noted a recent poll in a mainstream online Ottawa newspaper,which suggested that over 60% of those surveyed did not believe the "security certificate" process was too secretive, or that it unfairly infringed anyone's rights.
I could not help wondering who would speak up for these individuals when their turn came to be arrested and jailed without trial, or if they are suddenly seized for no good reason and shipped off to be tortured in some far away dictatorship.

Politicians are often apt to say, when they are contemplating some unpopular measure, "freedom isn't free". And that is also true in this instance. It is concievable that Mr. Arar may have been involved in something improper (although not one shred of credible evidence to that effect has ever emerged, to my knowledge) Thus it is likewise concievable that releasing all the information surrounding his mistreatment could benefit someone unsavoury. (Although after all this time, that doesn't sound very credible any more either) But that is one of costs of freedom, which we rightly acknowledge isn't free. We must learn to cheefully pay this price, irregardless of what other countries may think or do. Otherwise, the bad guys have won, and we might as well pull down our flag.

I think on some visceral level, even beyond all the politics and posturing, the Prime Minister realizes this. That's why the Arar enquiry was called. Now he should do what ever it takes to rein in the fanatics inside the security bureaucracy and release whatever information the enquiry feels should be made public. That was his promise, and he should move quickly to keep it. That would be good for all of us. We could then get on with the job of protecting our country in a way we can all accept rather than fear, and that we can be be proud of.

Arar the terrorist should be deported to his home country where he's a citizen, Syria. Radical Islam should be defeated in Canada before we give them more data as to how to defeat us.

Arar ALSO holds Canadian citizenship. He was arrested and detained for suspected ties to terrorism, without due process or access to legal representation. It could happen to you. <br />
<br />
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maher_Arar</a> <br />
<br />
Repeat after me: racial profiling is wrong. A syrian is not automatically a terrorist. Due process must be followed no matter what the situation. <br />
<br />
<br />
<p>---<br>Canadians are asking, why do americans hate us? They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to disagree with each other.

Oh please. You do racial profiling everyday and every social studies course teaches it. Go to school.

What? I don't recall a social studies module entitled "all arabs are terrorists, deport them without cause". I also do *not* partake in such activity; having neither the power nor inclination to be that discriminating.

---
Canadians are asking, why do americans hate us? They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to disagree with each other.

<p>"If the world is to avoid a descent into anarchy, in which the only rule is ‘might makes right,’ every ‘retaliation’ provokes a ‘counter-retaliation’ and a genuine ‘war of civilizations’ is ignited, the world must recognize that <u>‘terrorism’ is simply a word, a subjective epithet, not an objective reality</u> and <b>certainly not an excuse to suspend all the rules of international law, domestic civil liberties and fundamental fairness which have, until now, made at least some parts of our planet decent places to live.</b>" - <a href="http://www.pugwash.org/september11/whitbeck.htm">John Whitbeck </a> </p>

Social studies is all about categorizing and grouping people. Economic this, ethnic that - creating 'profiles' in other words. Advertisers don't blindly spend millions of dollars on campaigns - they have a target market that the social studies types identify.

Millions of people come in and out of Canada every year and some are up to no good. But if 'person' is the only category that gets a second look, then that would include by definition a baby perhaps, or an old heart attack victim on a stretcher, or any number of patently stupid things. Race, age, sex, religion, disability - are all legitimate factors, it is stupidly naive to think they're not.

If I were to call you a terrorist would I be correct? If I was not correct would you object? If I was accusing you of being a radical Islamist and a terrorist would you want me and the courts to show proof of my accusations?

No matter how you respond to the above questions I object to your calling Mahar Arar a terrorist unless you personally have proof that he is. And to then suggest that radical Islam and Mahar Arar also go together is also something you need to give proof for. There are laws in Canada that can hold people liable for making slanderours statements about others. So you better get your proof ready.

---
"Yeah, well, [Mr. President] we used all five fingers because that's the way our mittens are made." Antonia Zerbisias

<p>Targeting ads at a particular group is completely different. For one thing, there's actually a decent amount of research being done to back it up; sure there are some generalisations, but on the whole they actually try to gather data first. </p><p> Racial profiling, on the other hand, is based on someone "looking" like a terrorist. No actual data to back it up, other than some terrorists having been arabic. But then, the oklahoma city bombing was done by a white guy. A little old lady could be a terrorist. So can an albino midget. If airport security was actually detaining/deporting people because they <b>had ties with terrorists</b>, that's not racial profiling, that's proper security. </p><p>---<br>Canadians are asking, why do americans hate us? They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to disagree with each other.

Knock, knock! Hello!!! - if every one of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia - how much more research do you have to do before you take a closer look at Saudis??? The answer is - none! you just have to pull your head out of your a....

If that is true, then why is the US still so friendly with Saudi Arabia, and WTF are they doing deporting Syrians?

---
Canadians are asking, why do americans hate us? They hate our freedoms: our freedom of religion, our freedom of speech, our freedom to disagree with each other.