CNN uncritically reported Gonzales' defense of sending suspect to country that tortured him
On the January 18 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, CNN justice correspondent Kelli Arena uncritically reported Attorney General Alberto Gonzales' defense of the Bush administration's decision to send Canadian-Syrian citizen Maher Arar to Syria, where he was tortured and falsely confessed to terrorist affiliations, according to the findings in a Canadian judicial report that was released on September 18, 2006. During her report on Gonzales' January 18 appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Arena reported that "Gonzales and other U.S. officials have said that they got assurances from Syria that Arar would not be tortured." Arena did not challenge or question Gonzales' assertion; she made no mention of Syria's reputation -- documented in the State Department's Human Rights reports -- for using torture in interrogations or that the Canadian inquiry noted such assurances often have little credibility.
As Media Matters for America has noted, according to the Canadian "Arar Commission" inquiry, Arar's saga began on September 26, 2002, when, based [Page 142] on information provided by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), Arar was detained by U.S. officials at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City. The inquiry found that the RCMP neither requested nor anticipated Arar's detention by the U.S. government. U.S. authorities -- after reportedly [Page 31] ascertaining that Canada would be unable to detain Arar further -- subsequently sent him to Syria on October 9, 2002, in a practice known as "rendition." During the first few weeks of his imprisonment, Syrian Military Intelligence (SMI) reportedly tortured [Page 57] Arar, beating him with a "black cable"; by November 2002, he had falsely confessed to receiving terrorist training in Afghanistan in 1993. SMI held Arar until early October 2003, in what the inquiry called "abysmal" [Page 47] and "atrocious" [Page 58] conditions; eventually SMI released [Page 47] Arar to Canadian diplomats. Neither Canadian nor Syrian officials ever charged Arar with a crime, and the inquiry found [Page 11] that "that there is no evidence to indicate that Mr. Arar has committed any offence or that his activities constitute a threat to the security of Canada."
Gonzales' defense that the administration received assurances from Syria is undermined by a State Department Human Rights report on Syria released months before Arar was rendered there. According to the State Department's 2001 Syria report, issued on March 4, 2002, "there was credible evidence that security forces continued to use torture." The report continued, stating that "torture is most likely to occur while detainees are being held at one of the many detention centers run by the various security services throughout the country, and particularly while the authorities are attempting to extract a confession or information regarding an alleged crime or alleged accomplices." The Arar Commission, citing the State Department's substantially similar 2002 and 2003 reports, stated [Page 181] that "[w]hen Mr. Arar arrived in Syria in October 2002, Syria had a well-established reputation for committing serious human rights abuses."
The Arar Commission also stated [Page 178] that, according to testimony from Human Rights Watch, "diplomatic assurances from totalitarian regimes that they will not torture detainees are of no value and should not be relied upon for the purposes of article 3 of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment." That article of the Geneva Conventions prohibits countries from "return[ing]" or "extradit[ing]" a person to "another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture."
In October 2006, the Canadian government filed an official complaint with the United States over the treatment of Arar, with Prime Minister Stephen Harper saying the United States should acknowledge ''inappropriate conduct'' in the case. The Globe and Mail reported on October 30, 2006, that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's written response "contain[ed] no apology for the deportation that led to a harrowing year in a Syrian jail as a suspected al-Qaeda terrorist." Arar, who has been completely cleared of any wrongdoing, still remains on a U.S. database of terror suspects. The Gazette (Montreal) reported on December 22 that Rice has pledged to review the Bush administration's intelligence file on Arar "after a personal appeal from [Canadian] Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay."
From the January 18 edition of CNN's The Situation Room:
BLITZER: First this hour, a vivid reminder that the new Democratic leaders in the Congress have plenty of bones to pick with the Bush administration. It happened on Capitol Hill today, just a few hours ago, when the attorney general of the United States, Alberto Gonzales, appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee. That's when the questions and the fur started flying.
Let's turn to our justice correspondent, Kelli Arena -- Kelli?
ARENA: Wolf, this was the first time that the attorney general appeared before the Judiciary Committee since the Democrats took over control of Congress. And I can tell you, it was hardly a friendly reception.
Democrats pounced on several of the administration's anti-terror policies, including domestic wiretaps and the detention of terror suspects in Guantánamo Bay [Cuba].
But the most heated exchange came when Judiciary Chairman Senator Patrick Leahy [D-VT] brought up a man named Maher Arar. Now, he's a dual Canadian and Syrian citizen, and he was deported from the U.S. to Syria, where he says he was tortured. Arar was allegedly on a watch list for suspected terrorist ties. He's since been cleared by the Canadian government. Listen to this, Wolf.
[begin video clip]
LEAHY: We knew damn well if he went to Canada he wouldn't be tortured. He'd be held, and he'd be investigated. 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, to send somebody to another country to be tortured.
GONZALES: Before you get more upset, perhaps you should wait to receive the briefing be --
LEAHY: How long?
GONZALES: I'm hoping that we can get -- we can get you the information next week.
[end video clip]
ARENA: Now, Gonzales and other U.S. officials have said that they got assurances from Syria that Arar would not be tortured. Leahy promised Gonzales that if he didn't get the information that he wanted within the week that he promised that he would hold a hearing on the issue, Wolf.
BLITZER: He's been cleared by the Canadian government. But is there still suspicion in the Justice Department in the U.S. government that this individual may have had some links to terrorism?
ARENA: Yeah. Actually, Senator Leahy today said that he is still on a U.S. watch list, and he wanted to know why from the attorney general. But the attorney general refused to give any details about that case, at least in a public forum, Wolf.
BLITZER: All right. Maybe that's what he's talking about; next week, they'll have a private briefing. All right, thanks very much.
the little Eddie Munster look-alike. If not to be tortured, why then was he SENT to Syria.
"Well, Attorney General, I’ll tell you what I’ll do. I’ll meet you halfway on this. I’ll wait next week for that briefing. If we don't get it, I guarantee you there will be another hearing on this issue."
Let's see what happens next week. Granted CNN coverage was weak here.
This is a typical Gonzo tactic 1. Promise the information and then provide nothing.
Tactic 2 is saying he already provided the information when he didn't. Gonzo suggested he answered the question about how many US Attornies have been fired in a letter to Senator Feinstein. She shot back she read the letter and still did not have the answer. Gonzo then reverts back to tactic 1, promise the information.
This is a deeply dishonest and disingenious man. It's all the more troubling because he acts so smug. And when he smirks while giving an obvious boatload of BS to the senators is just overthe top.
For what it is worth, NPR (National Public Radio) reported that Sen. Leahy missed a security briefing on these matters, last week I believe. Don't know it that is true -- or if the briefing was scheduled for a time the Bushies knew the senator could not attend ...
But this is refreshing: The traditionally conservative Manchester Union Leader(New Hampshire) on Friday blasted the Bush administration -- and in particular our very smug AG -- for its abrupt, duplititous reversal of its longstanding (pre-election) refusal to go to a court before wiretapping terrorism suspects.
A must read, I believe.
Please see "TSP, R.I.P.: Bush surrenders credibility" ([link to www.unionleader.com] edibility&articleId=fe65985d-b9af-4c3d-807d-5547234ddc65)
I don't remember how these outside links are supposed towork. But, here goes: [[link to www.unionleader.com] edibility&articleId=fe65985d-b9af-4c3d-807d-5547234ddc65]
U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would have Americans believe that, after years of asserting that national security depended upon the administration's ability to tap terror suspects' phone lines without waiting for the slow Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to OK the spying, the court suddenly became capable of instantly approving such wiretaps the very same week Democrats took control of Congress. [...] The administration is backing out of a program and a constitutional argument it previously labeled essential to national security. It is doing so in such a way as to make its previous assertions appear entirely disingenuous. [...] Retreating from a program that until now he has claimed was absolutely essential to stopping terrorist attacks on U.S. soil is either an inexcusable dereliction of duty, or a tacit admission that his previous claim was utter baloney.
[link to www.unionleader.com]
With all the BS flying around in the media at a dizzying rate the obvious escapes us.
But as you said Leahy did bring it up, but it was ignored. Is exposing this obvious contradictions in our foreign policy between what we say and what we do considered unpatriotic? I wonder how much the sentiment "My country right or wrong" play into this selective reporting.
If Syria is a terrorist supporting country which is so bad we can't negotiate with them, then why did we hand over an alleged terror suspect to them and expect them not to torture him? (Another point Leahy made, and CNN omitted to report.)
The Corporate Media Oligopoly endorses torture - so long as it is performed in service of their Corporate/Repugnant agenda. That is why, after the initial burst of Abu-Ghraib prattle, lacking any serious inquiry as to how or why even then, the issue faded completely from the media; and why there was never any follow-up on the numerous fatal episodes, from Abu to Afghanistan to Guantanamo. That is why it is hard to uncover the outcomes of the few criminal investigations that public outcry has necessitated: most have already been dismissed.
Of course, Saddam's torture was deemed sufficient grounds for regime change in Iraq, once the WMD lies were no longer deniable.
backed by Raygun 15-20 years ago, was deemed worse than the much more recent Bush supported tort---, I mean "fraternity pranks".
but how picky do you think Satan will be about granting admission to those who were torturers, just not quite as bad as some other torturers?
Or, to turn that query on its head, will St. Peter step aside if one is only a third degree torturer (say, less than 5% fatalities)?
Either question, even though I am not particularly a believer in either personification; for I AM a firm believer in the tendency of the universe to return to us in kind, and *I* don't want our current interrogation fatality rate on MY tab.
The Canadian media has reported that Canadian officials, like our Foreign Affairs minister, has looked at the US file on Arar, and there is nothing new. In other words, there is no reason to keep Arar on the no fly list. So why does he remain on the list?
There was no reason for Gonzales to refer the hearing to a "private" briefing, because there is nothing secret to reveal, unless it is a screw up by US security. Americans need to start asking themselves if the Bush administration is using extra constitutional methods to detain/torture/spy on terror suspects, is it more to cover up its own screw ups or is it actually more effective? In the case of Arar, someone was detained and tortured for a year, where he was interrogated with intelligence provided to Syrian police from Canadian/US sources.
What was unique in the Arar case is that he did have Canadian citizenship and the Canadian government was willing to stand up for him and get him released. How many have been detained who don't have citizenship in Britain, US or Canada who have simply been disappeared in the system?