The Mahar Arar Affair

One thing I don't understand is why the United States would deport a suspected terrorist to Syria. Has the U.S. administration not declared Syria to be a sponsor of terrorism? If that is the case, would not the Syrians welcome him with open arms instead of jailing and torturing him for a year? I may be naive when it comes to international politics and skulduggery, but is it possible there is a working relationship between the two countries? Why would the Syrians want to interrogate Arar? If some one can help me here, please click on "comments" below.

Arar is a Syrian born Canadian and was traveling on a Canadian passport, returning to Canada when he was apprehended on a stopover in New York and shipped to Syria, via Jordan. Misinformation provided to the CIA or FBI by the RCMP may have been responsible. (We used to be so proud of our national police force!) A commission set up by the government has cleared Arar of any suspicion and the Prime Minister has issued a public apology and provided him with $10 million compensation. The commission had requested any incriminating evidence the U.S. may have had, but none was forthcoming. Our foreign minister McKay recently traveled to Washington to look at what the Americans had on Arar but came away empty handed.

For all that, the U.S. refuses to take Arar off their watch list, citing independent evidence which they will not share. When McKay suggested Arar be removed from the watch list, in jumps U.S. ambassador Wilkins telling McKay to mind his own business, the U.S. will decide for itself who can or cannot travel to the U.S. He is technically correct of course, but the insult to McKay and Canada is hardly diplomatic. Prime Minister Harper, to his credit, has replied that the Canadian government has every right to protect its citizens. U.S. ambassadors have often been known to stick their noses into Canadian affairs. If Wilkins opens his mouth again I would hope we would request his recall.

President Ford.

Nothing better illustrates the theme of my December 30th posting, (see below) than the weeklong funeral extravaganza honouring Gerald Ford. To believe the eulogies, he was a giant among men, not the every day polititian that he really was. To be sure, he, along with Jimmy Carter, was perhaps the only decent president in living memory. If he stands as a momument to decency, then it's to the eternal shame of the incumbent.
Jay Leno joked that Ford was the only unelected president, other than Bush.

Death of Saddam

Videos of the hanging of Saddam are available on the net. I'm not going to look for them, not because I'm squeamish, which I'm not, but because I believe that the people who want us to witness this thing are beneath contempt. Speaking of whom, I imagine that Cheney and Bush will get their rocks off on it. The following is lifted from Shakespeare's Sister's blog:

This whole endeavor, from the very start, has been about taking tawdry, cheap acts and dressing them up in a papier-mache grandeur -- phony victory celebrations, ersatz democratization, reconstruction headed up by toadies, con artists and grifters. And this is no different. Hanging Saddam is easy. It's a job, for once, that these folks can actually see through to completion. So this execution, ironically and pathetically, becomes a stand-in for the failures, incompetence and general betrayal of country on every other front that President Bush has brought us.

...This is what we're reduced to, what the president has reduced us to. This is the best we can do. Hang Saddam Hussein because there's nothing else this president can get right.

How could anyone put it better?