Maher Arar

by Brian on January 12, 2004

Katherine at Obsidian Wings has three good posts up (one two three) about the Maher Arar case I mentioned yesterday. I’m feeling a little guilty about that post because I let my outrage over the administration’s treatment of allied citizens get in the way of proper scepticism about the story. Obviously I don’t know that Arar was innocent, for example, though if what’s reported is true it’s still outrageous even if he’s guilty. I’m still of the old-fashioned school of thought that says a fair trial and all that is a good thing even for the most vicious of criminals. But we need to know a lot more about the case before leaping to conclusions, and Katherine is doing a very valuable service in putting together the available evidence from all sides.

UPDATE (13/1): Katherine has three more links up (four five six) which are again recommended.



Stu 01.12.04 at 9:22 pm

Why on earth would you feel guilty about that post? You say “…we need to know a lot more about the case before leaping to conclusions.” The facts are in, and have been reported by our (Canadian) Media, your media, Amnesty International, and even some blogs back when the original “arrest” was made.

This guy isn’t guilty of anything. If he was, why would he be moving heaven and earth to get an investigation? It’s to his credit that he’s doing so much in an attempt to prevent similar things from happening to others.

As a Canadian, I’m glad this is getting more blog coulmn inches in the States. I’m really surprised that more people don’t know about it.


Katherine 01.12.04 at 9:35 pm

Aha. I wanted to find a Canadian and ask what sources there had the best coverage.

(I’m not exactly unbiased either, as is probably clear from my first post.)


Stu 01.12.04 at 9:59 pm

Our media has been covering it on a regular basis. It looks as if you’ve already found a lot, but here’s a few sources:

CTV, CTV again, the Globe and Mail.

Doing a news search from Google’s Canadian news site is pretty reliable.


Brian Weatherson 01.12.04 at 11:39 pm

I was feeling guilty for leaping to conclusions. I might have been leaping to correct conclusions, but that makes me lucky not smart.


James 01.13.04 at 6:53 am

Brian, in your earlier post, you expressed an interest in the responses of pro-War, pro-Bush bloggers in this case. Can I refer you to Iain Murray’s place? , of course.
I would like to point out, though, that the reaction of other bloggers whose politics is not your own is scarcely the most urgent question here. Surely Crooked Timber is well established enough now to discuss this on its own terms without the constant finger-pointing at others?


dsquared 01.13.04 at 6:55 am

“I do not know he was innocent” …. something has changed, and not for the better, if the burden of proof is on anyone who doesn’t want to be tortured …


andrew 01.13.04 at 7:24 am

Does he float?


Katherine 01.13.04 at 1:14 pm

There’s a fairly despicable article about this in the current National Review. (Actually, just a fairly despicable paragraph or two, though calling Chretien’s departure “a victory in the war in terror” suggest the whole thing is as bad.


indignant post:


Stu 01.13.04 at 4:43 pm

Hmm. Y’know, Canadians have always had this whole love/hate thing going with America, but things have soured recently. To illustrate, our largest TV network is running ad for a news piece on whether Martin (our new PM) will be able to make up with Bush. They show a map of North America, with Canada and the US slowly drift apart as text appears in the gap between them. It goes something like this:

Soft-Wood Lumber
Cheap Canadian Drugs
Gay Marriage
Marijuana Decrimilization
Iraq War

That last one floored me. It refers, of course, to a comment made by a senior aide to the PM in reference to Bush, which caused a mini-scandal. The way they slip it in like this should give some insight into the feelings of most Canadian viewers.

Comments on this entry are closed.