Germany (catch all, incl. terrorism)

[120mm]

I'm sorry you misunderstood my post. I never wanted to even imply that there should be no compensation.

Note that I said there needs to be a mechanism for this. That mechanism would need to include compensation for real loss of income, inconvenience and may even be punitive in nature (accounting for pain/suffering).

On the other hand, when we pick up a bad guy and then return him/her into the wild for whatever reason, we need to avoid rewarding them for "not being prosecutable just yet."

I think the phrase "kidnapped" is being thrown around pretty loosely, here, as well.

[tequila]

I see --- so we are actually pretty much in total agreement about compensation, then.

I would not use the word "arrested" because these men were taken into a system that was explicitly extra-legal and were not accorded due process. Also, given the warrants issued in both Italy and Germany, it appears that the local and national authorities were not made aware (odd that this does not appear to have occurred in Canada, where the local authorities were complicit and have recently paid millions in compensation to Arar). "Detained" sounds, frankly, a bit too neutral given the ultimate fate of these and many other men. We did not take them to Syria for interrogation of the usual sort, for instance.

[marct]

Hi 120mm,

Note that I said there needs to be a mechanism for this. That mechanism would need to include compensation for real loss of income, inconvenience and may even be punitive in nature (accounting for pain/suffering).

I think that this lack of a streamlined mechanism is one of the problems; lawsuits just don't, to my mind, cut it. Every time we see a lawsuit, it just creates too many problems by re-interpreting the legal situation. In the Arar case, I think a lawsuit was justified since the RCMP certain appear to have acted in a manner that was, and is, illegal. I would honestly like to see a much more clearcut mechanism for detention / investigation.

On the other hand, when we pick up a bad guy and then return him/her into the wild for whatever reason, we need to avoid rewarding them for "not being prosecutable just yet."

Yupper. I think that clearer legal guidelines would help immeasurably as well in making the decision to pick them up.

I think the phrase "kidnapped" is being thrown around pretty loosely, here, as well.

In the Arar case and in the el-Masri case, it is the correct legal terminology. Under existing Canadian law, Arar could have been quite legally picked up and detained for questioning for an indefinite period. This would not have been "kidnapping". Instead, the RCMP contacted the CIA and gt them to do the dirty work. What always bothered me about the Arar case was that the RCMP didn't have the guts to arrest him themselves. If they believed he was guilty, they should have investigated and arrested him. If they thought there was an imminent danger, they could have held him indefinitely. They didn't.

I would not use the word "arrested" because these men were taken into a system that was explicitly extra-legal and were not accorded due process. Also, given the warrants issued in both Italy and Germany, it appears that the local and national authorities were not made aware (odd that this does not appear to have occurred in Canada, where the local authorities were complicit and have recently paid millions in compensation to Arar). "Detained" sounds, frankly, a bit too neutral given the ultimate fate of these and many other men. We did not take them to Syria for interrogation of the usual sort, for instance.

I have to admit that a lot of my anger over these cases is based around the breach of law at the same time as we keep hearing rhetoric about the rule of law. Situations like this just serve to reduce overall social trust in government agencies. Sure, there are times when a government agent, LE, Intel, military, etc., will have to break the law in order to achieve their mission. This should end up as a situation where the law then comes under scrutiny as well as their actions; for example, arresting someone without proof and sweating them to stop a bomb plot. It's the legal concept of "immanent danger" that should be used to decide whether or not to breach the law, not convenience, and those breaches should be examined afterwards.

Marc

[Tom Odom]

My fundamental concern is like Marc's but with a strategic self-interest:

If GWOT is COIN then the target is the global population. Short term benefits get overwhelmed by larger and longer lasting negative effects.

It is basic risk versus gain analysis.

Tom

[pcmfr]

My fundamental concern is like Marc's but with a strategic self-interest:

If GWOT is COIN then the target is the global population. Short term benefits get overwhelmed by larger and longer lasting negative effects.

It is basic risk versus gain analysis.

Tom

I think this is the most compelling argument against these types of activities, if in fact they are occurring. That said, if there is an immininent threat, and other countries aren't dealing with their own problems, I see a need for this type of rendition. There is a reason they call it "covert."

[tequila]

Goesh,

I grew up in a part of Brooklyn that most NYPD cops will not venture into alone. Let's just say that when I saw the French "riots" on TV, I laughed pretty hard. Burning cars? Are you serious?

How many French people got killed in that riot, or even got their ass kicked? Let's just say it's a lot fewer than if certain types walked around my old neighborhood in the wee hours, or if my friends walked around other neighborhoods at similar hours. What's the homicide rate in France or the Netherlands? Come talk to me when it gets above the number of homicides in, oh, I don't know, Finland.

[goesh]

This sad turn of events only reflects the general state of affairs of Europe. From the Jerusalem Post came an interview with Prof. Bernard Lewis, a prominent islamic historian, who made the following comment taken from the Post article:

"...He dismissed Europe in a few sentences, a continent doomed to Islamist domination by dint of its own "self-abasement... in the name of political correctness and multiculturalism."

- that pretty much sums it up IMHO.

[tequila]

I believe it pretty much sums up Bernard Lewis' level of hysteria and detachment from the real world.

This is a man who proclaimed that the proper solution to our Mesopotamian governance problem was to impose the brother of the King of Jordan as the new King of Iraq. I think that would have made for an interesting contest as to who would have dragged the sword-hacked corpse of King Hassan through the dust first --- the Mahdi Army, the Badr Brigades, or the Islamic Army in Iraq?

[goesh]

seem collaberated with the thousands of burned cars in France and the drastic increase in assaults and the protection racket offenses in Nordic countries, Tequila. Some even say it is not safe to walk in any islamic enclave in most large European cities if one is not a true believer but who am I to challenge rumors of increasing violence amongst the ummah?