The U.N. Security Council has voted yes on a resolution to impose a no-fly zone in Libya, and said, “all necessary means can be used to protect citizens.”
The vote was 10-0, with 5 countries abstaining. The resolution was drawn up by Britain, France, and Lebanon, with strong input from the U.S. The countries abstaining being Russia, China, Brazil, India, and Germany.
What is most important about this vote, is that the U.N. has not only agreed on a no-fly zone in Libya, they have also agreed that all necessary means can be used to protect citizens.
According to RussiaToday, this includes the use of air strikes on Libyan tanks, and heavy artillery.
Agence France-Presse is reporting that as early as tonight, France, Britain, Qatar, and UAE could begin strikes on Gaddafi forces.
Constitutionalist Ron Paul responded to the U.N.’s decision today saying, “This is not our fight” … “This is simply none of our business” … “We don’t have the money for more military interventions overseas.”
He goes on to say, “It would constitute an act of war against Libya. The no fly-zone “will require troops to engage in combat against the Libyan Air Force, as well as anti-aircraft systems.”
He brings up an interesting point about the decision to use “all necessary means,” asking, “Does this mean a nuclear strike is on the table? Answering himself, “Apparently so.”
Ron Paul will be introducing a resolution in Congress this week, to ensure that Congress decides when or when not to go to war, according to the Constitution, NOT the President.
Maher Arar is a 34-year-old engineer and Canadian citizen born in Syria. According to Arar, in 2002, while he was in transit in New York City’s JFK Airport, after coming back from a vacation with his family, he was interrogated and detained by U.S. Officials alleging presumed links to al-Qaeda. Days later, he was secretly rendered to Syria, where he was held for almost one year under no formal charges, constant torture –including severe beating and the constant threat to be tortured harder— and was forced to falsely confess his links to the organization.
A Canadian citizen is deported from the United States to Syria, where he is tortured and detained for a year in cruel, inhuman and degrading conditions. His story provides a human face to the growing concern about post 9/11 security practices world-wide and their potential to trigger egregious human rights abuses.
Maher Arar is a telecommunications engineer living in Ottawa, Ontario with his young family. He arrived in Canada in 1987 from Syria, where he was born, and became a Canadian citizen in 1991.
On September 26th, 2002 Mr. Arar was taken into custody by the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) at Kennedy Airport on his way home to Canada after visiting his wife’s family in Tunisia. He was questioned about his alleged links to al-Qa’ida for 9 hours without a lawyer and then removed to the Metropolitan Detention Centre in New York. After thirteen days he “disappeared” from U.S. custody. It was later determined that he had been deported to Syria without any hearing, and without the knowledge of the Canadian consulate, his lawyer, or his family.
Deportation to Syria, where torture and incommunicado detention are commonplace for political prisoners, exposed Maher Arar to tremendous risk. Expulsion in such circumstances, without a fair hearing, violates the U.S. Government’s obligations under International law, specifically the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.
The U.S. also violated the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations by failing to inform the Canadian authorities of its intention to deport Maher Arar, thereby depriving him of the assistance of his consulate.
On October 21st, 2002 Mr. Arar was handed over to Syrian authorities after being held briefly in Jordan for interrogation. He remained in custody, in an undisclosed location, for almost a year, without being charged and without being informed of the details of the case against him. Canadian consular officials visited Arar in detention, but were never allowed to speak to him alone. Between April 22 and August 14, 2003 they were not permitted to see him at all despite numerous requests.
On October 5th, 2003, the eve of his trial before the State Security Court, Mr. Arar was suddenly released to the Canadian Consulate in Damascus by Syrian authorities. The next day he was flown home to Canada to be reunited with his wife and two young children.
Upon his return, Mr. Arar provided detailed testimony to Amnesty International about his deportation and incarceration.
Awakened by U.S. officials in the early hours of October 8th, 2002 he was told that he would be deported to Syria. His protests that he would be tortured there were ignored. After a brief stopover in Jordan where he was shackled and beaten, he was then driven to Syria and taken to the “Far Falestin”, the Palestine Branch of Syrian military intelligence, known for the routine torture of political prisoners. While there he was severely beaten with electrical cable during six days of interrogation, and threatened with electric shocks and the “metal chair” – a torture device that stretches the spine. Eventually he says he broke down and signed a document falsely confessing to having been in Afghanistan.
He reports he was held alone in a tiny, basement cell without light, which he called “the grave”, for more than 10 months. A small grate in the ceiling opened up into a hallway above. Through it cats and rats urinated on him. There was no furniture in the cell, only two blankets on the floor. He had no exposure to natural light for the first six months.
I am not the only person this has happened to. Other Muslim Canadian men who were under investigation in Canada say they were later interrogated and tortured in Syria. We know the United States admits publicly to their so-called “extraordinary rendition” program, a program that sends people to other countries to be interrogated. What we need to know now is whether our security and/or law-enforcement agencies are contracting out interrogations to other countries where interrogation methods would be prohibited under Canadian law.
Maher Arar The Globe and Mail
30 April 2005
On November 4th, 2003, Maher Arar shared the story of his ordeal with the Canadian public. He also revealed that in the final two weeks of his incarceration he encountered another Canadian citizen of Syrian origin, Abdullah Almalki. Mr. Almalki recounted to Mr. Arar the extent and nature of the torture he has been subjected to, which Mr. Arar describes as being far worse than what he himself experienced. Mr. Almalki had been in detention without charge or trial since May 2002. He was finally released and returned to Canada in August 2004.
Throughout his detention Maher Arar’s wife Monia Mazigh, as well as concerned organizations, journalists, and politicians from all parties, pressed for answers to the urgent questions raised by his disturbing experience. On February 5th, 2004 the Canadian government established the Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar. This marks the first time that a government has launched an independent review of the post 9/11 security laws and practices.
It is hoped that the lessons learned can address similar issues internationally.
Amnesty International is deeply concerned that the counter-terrorism response of governments around the world has further imperiled fundamental human rights and freedom. Governments have directly asserted or indirectly implied that the imperative of fighting against “terrorism” requires a new understanding of human rights, and that is should be considered legitimate to infringe some rights in the name of bolstering security.
Amnesty continues to assert that human rights do not stand in the way of achieving real global security. Human rights, in fact, stand at the very heart of doing so.
Amnesty has implored the Canadian Commission of Inquiry to examine closely the human rights consequences of Canada’s security laws and practices, both in their own right, and in the manner in which those laws and practices interact with, and rely upon, the laws and practices of other countries.
Seven specific areas have been identified for in-depth examination:
a full explanation of how and why things happened – to achieve justice for Mr. Arar and his family, and to ensure that others do not share his fate
the role of Canadian officials, at all levels of Government, in Mr. Arar’s case – specifically The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), the Department of Foreign Affairs, and the Prime Minister’s Office
the testimony of three other Canadian citizens – Muayyed Nureddin, Ahmad Abou El-Maati, and Abdullah Almalki – who have also recently been detained, and allegedly tortured, in Syria
Canada’s intelligence sharing practices
the understanding of, and commitment to, Canada’s absolute obligation to prohibit torture
Canada’s diplomatic and consular practices
Canada ’s failure to address the disturbing revelations about the nature of Mr. Arar’s treatment in the United States, Jordan and Syria that emerged after his release from detention
For more details, read Amnesty’s submission to the Commission of Inquiry.
The Globe and Mail’s Anthony Jenkins recently interviewed Maher Arar, and this is what he had to say about Julian Assange and WikiLeaks:
Jenkins: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been labelled a “hero,” a “terrorist” and a “provocateur.” How would you characterize him?
Arar: He is someone who is trying to do things differently, given the oversecrecy atmosphere we have been living in after 9/11. He is trying to introduce a new form of journalism. I wouldn’t call him a hero, I wouldn’t call him a villain. I think maybe we should invent a new term for him.
Jenkins: Governments have attacked Mr. Assange, attacked his character, attacked his Wikileaks income. Do you fear for his personal well-being?
Arar: Well, the CIA could do anything. Everything is possible, but I really doubt the U.S. would embark on a physical elimination of Assange.
Jenkins: Has government overreliance on secrecy created WikiLeaks?
Arar: I’m not saying WikiLeaks wouldn’t have existed if governments kept doing business the usual way, but they did give an incentive. Every time you say “secret,” people want to know about it. It is natural. People want to know what is happening behind closed doors. I’m not against secrecy. It is understandable that governments have to keep things secret, but, in a democracy, that should be the exception, not the rule.
Jenkins: Mr. Assange is quoted as saying he has an “insurance policy” against physical harm, imprisonment or a debilitating attack on WikiLeaks – the release of an encrypted “key” to a “thermonuclear device” of new, damaging documents in retribution. Has he gone too far?
Arar: Assange is fighting against a system. I have my own personal experience of this. It is not easy. Whether he is justified in this or whether he is going to do it or not, he is using what he has. There is a vacuum to be filled. The governments leave this for others to fill, and the results can be unpredictable, like we are seeing with WikiLeaks.
Jenkins: Might WikiLeaks’ massive dump of information have the reverse effect and increase government secrecy rather than lessen it?
Arar: I think it is having the opposite effect. There are now other websites starting. Every time governments have done that, it has always backfired.
Referencing an episode of CBC’s “The Border,” the cable says:
In episode one a Syrian terrorist with a belt full of gel-based explosives is removed from a plane in Canada while the Canadian-Syrian man sitting next to him is rendered by the CIA/CSIS team to Syria — a fairly transparent reference to QCIA/CSIS team to Syria — a fairly transparent reference to the Maher Arar case.
