Is he on that list?
At any rate, I think we should let the guy in, as I’ve already said. What I object to is the idea that there is something inherently wrong with not letting people in. No country has an open door policy.
As for the no-fly list and citizens, the deal is that you can’t find out in advance if you’re on the list, but you can challenge being on the list.
Even if that country invites this person?
I’m not sure how you are using the term “the country”. Someone in this country invited them, yes. Are you saying that anyone invited here by someone or some group should or must be let in?
I’m not saying that just anyone should be allowed in. I’m simply amazed that after the grave injustices down to this man by our nation, we’re STILL treating him this way.
That doesn’t upset you?
I already said I thought we should let the guy in. In fact, I’m hoping he is successful in his legal efforts concerning the torture he was submitted to (allegedly, yes, but I find his story to be credible).
Well the sub-head on the story in the OP’s link says he is. Nothing further in the body of the story, though.
I agree; that is an objectionable idea. Could I trouble you to direct me to a post in which somebody articulates that idea as the way things ought to be? In this thread, s’il vous plait.
I’d be grateful for your cite, as well as any cites in contradiction anyone cares to post.
ISTM that an American citizen should generally be able to extend an invitation to visit to someone from outside the borders. I’ve no quibble with the notion that the appropriate governmental officials should have the power to require their endorsement of any given invitation. But simple courtesy would seem to dictate that a reason be furnished in cases where the endorsement is withheld.
And simple decency would seem to demand that such reasons generally not rely on tautologies (such as: “We had to refuse entry because he’s on the border list, and he’s on the border list because we need to refuse entry.”).
From here:
I can’t really provide a more authoritative cite than that, because, y’know, terror watch lists are secret. But apparently, yes.
When flocks of pigs fly over the frozen plains of Hell.
No, we cannot. Because if we do, then, the next thing you know people will expect the Government of The United Sates of America actually avoid being arbitrary and capricious, and where would we be then, huh?
Why do you hate freedom?
Tris
If I read the cites correctly, the RCMP asked for him to be on the list.
So is it not Canada that needs to pull him off?
Meanwhile, Bush as signed in to the Military Commission Act of 2006, continuing to promote torture, detention for indefinite periods, and death penalty for civilians without recourse to cvil lawyers, civil courts, or civil juries.
Silly me for ever thinking that the USA was supposed to fight against this sort of thing.
No wonder that the USA is keeping Arar out – the last thing the American government wants right now is someone who illustrates the way it has sliced away significant human and legal rights.
If I were Maher Arar, I would carry around a laminated copy of a newspaper article about myself, and hand it to people without a word when they said “Sorry, sir, your name is on the no-fly list.” Maybe highlight the bits at the end about “Canada has confirmed that he is not a terrorist.”
I would ask to see a manager, and keep asking to see managers until I spoke to one who could take me off the list. At some point, one of those assholes reports to either the Prime Minister of Canada or the President of the USA.
John, Attorney General Gonzalas invoked the States Secrets Privilage, claiming that allowing Arar’s case to go forward would damage national security. Judges almost always give deferrence to the government on such claims, and his lawsuit was summarily dismissed.
Actually, I can sort of see Gonzalez’ side of things here. After all, if the US sent an innocent man overseas to be tortured for no reason, it does make a twisted kind of sense that the authorities wouldn’t want the guy to show up in Washington DC afterwards. After all, even if the man actually wasn’t a danger to begin with…
Perhaps, even after all he’s endured, Mr. Arar is a decent enough human being that the thought would never cross his mind to hunt down high-profile Justice Department officials in order to exact revenge. But there’s probably a lot of other people who wouldn’t display the same restraint in such a situation. Honestly, if such a thing happened to me, I’m not sure which way I’d jump. Keep the moral high ground, or exercise the lavish freedoms made available in the U.S. courtesy of the Second Amendment? Hmm. America is indeed a land of choices.