Canada puts U.S. on torture watch list
January 19, 2008
From Democracy Now!:
The Canadian government has put the United States on a watch list of countries that could practice torture. The mention is made on a secret Canadian government document not intended for public release. The document cites the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay and lists U.S. interrogation techniques including “forced nudity, isolation, and sleep deprivation.” Other countries on the list include Israel, Syria, China, Iran and Afghanistan.
41 Comments
Trackbacks
Comments are closed.
Hmm. Maybe they’ll stop making us protect this hemisphere and pull some of their own weight since they think we’re so bad.
Good analysis there Tim.
INTRINSICALLY EVIL.
Yeah, well forget them. We should put Canada on a human rights watch list, given the chilling things they’re doing regarding free speech. Oh, but it’s OK, because their “Human Rights Tribunals” are silencing the right kind of people.
Not that I approve of Gitmo or torture, I don’t. But coming from Canada? They can kiss my arse.
Thanks, I pride myself on offering superior analysis in your posts…
Anyway, since you currently reside in Canada, and I’m assuming you pay your taxes if you work, you’ll be happy to know that you take direct part in 100,000 murders of children every year. These are provided by the wonderful social medical care system in Canada and paid for by each and every Canadian taxpayer.
Seems to me, abortion is an intrinsic evil and Canada directly funds it. Maybe we should put them on some “Watch list”???
We should put Canada on a human rights watch list, given the chilling things they’re doing regarding free speech.
Please elaborate.
…you’ll be happy to know that you take direct part in 100,000 murders of children every year.
Direct?
Welp, can any of us get out of supporting intrinsically evil acts through taxes? Not if we continue to pay them, I’m afraid. But we CAN make EXCUSES for our countries and the intrinsically evil acts that they commit, like you seem to do when you get defensive about Canada engaging in truth telling. As if that truth telling needs to be done — the entire world knows the U.S. is an expert in torture.
Yeah, America is great. Great at torturing people.
Can you not see you’re only saying the same thing about the U.S. that I’m saying about Canada?
I didn’t get defensive, I merely pointed out that they’re in no position to criticize the U.S. government.
Yeah, Canada is great. Great at funding the murder of children.
They certainly ARE in a position to criticize the U.S. government on the issue of torture. Just as the U.S. government would be in a position to criticize Canada if the U.S. did not allow abortion. But since it DOES allow abortion (and indeed CELEBRATES abortion and freedom of choice), I find that fantasy scenario irrelevant.
You have every right to criticize Canada for its policies on abortion. Just don’t do so as a distraction from the sins of your own nation, which INCLUDE abortion.
So where are your scathing criticisms of Canada? You only sing one tune.
It’d be even more funny if China put Canada on a human rights watch list!
Any criticisms I have of Canada would merely be a reflection of my criticisms of the United States under whose influence Canada seems to slip more and more, especially the ideology that lies behind the solitary issue you seem to care about (who “sings one tune”?): abortion. Insofar as Canada has tended to mimic the U.S., I will criticize it. But frankly, Canada is not my country of origin, and thus I don’t have as much invested in the practice of criticizing it.
It’d be even more funny if China put Canada on a human rights watch list!
Not sure what this means. Not sure what is “funny” about being put on a human rights watch list.
Ironic would a better word.
Last I checked, unless I’m wrong, you wish the U.S. to go more under Canada’s influence and direction…
My guess is that it’s just not “cool” to rip on Canada like it is the U.S.
Last I checked, unless I’m wrong, you wish the U.S. to go more under Canada’s influence and direction…
When exactly did you “check” with me about this question?
Even if I DID make such a claim, do you not comprehend the fact that maybe I admire some things about Canada vs. the United States, but not all? Do you really see things in such black and white terms: Canada OR the U.S. / U.S. is great OR U.S. is evil.
My guess is that it’s just not “cool” to rip on Canada like it is the U.S.
You hit the nail on the head. My central concern is how “cool” I look to Ann Coulter fans such as yourself.
I could make a list of things I
dislikeabhor about Canada but they are the same things I abhor about the United States.I’m done for the evening, k?
Have a good rest.
I see all the mindless nationalists are out in force today. Perhaps you people should for once place the gospel above your of a piece of terrority. The essence of Christinity is telling the truth, and the truth is quite simple: on the issue of torture, the US has joined the status of rogue nations. The US government is directly performing an intrinsicallyu evil act. Not merely enabling, not merely facilitating, not merely funding…. but actively doing. Petty emotional outbursts based on nationalism will not detract from that truth.
I merely pointed out that they’re in no position to criticize the U.S. government.
Last I checked, tu quoque and other forms of ad hominem weren’t considered valid arguments when applied to countries any more than to persons.
Suppose we had country A, the government of which tortures prisoners and has legalized the murder of whole classes of persons. Then suppose we had country B, the government of which didn’t just legalize that class of persons but subsidizes their murder. Does that mean that when country B criticizes the torture practices of country A, that criticism is wrong? Of course not.
Oh wait, this isn’t a hypothetical.
I suspect that the instinct to defend the US here springs from Iafrate using an alleged (obviously hard to verify if its so secret we’re not supposed to know about it) document of the Canadian government to make his point, rather than using something that US Catholic readers might be expected to have loyalty to: like a Church document. That sets up in most people’s minds a “Canadian government good, US government evil” comparison.
Personally, I don’t think we’re necessarily dealing with an intrinsically evil issue when the US is accused of using “isolation and sleep deprivation” on al Qaeda prisoners. I do have rather more of a problem with the use for forced nudity.
What seems interesting about putting the US on a “watch list” is that it suggests a fear that Canadian citizens or residents are likely to find themselves in a position of being marched off to Gitmo. Though some Canadians have indeed gone off to become al Qaeda fighters, the numbers are admittedly rather small.
When people above refer to the current assault on free speech in Canada, they’re talking about the “hate speech” laws which have recently resulted in a magazine editor being called up for questioning before a board and possible punishment for having reprinted in his magazine the Muhammad cartoons that caused such a furor a while back in Europe. Given the current structure of such laws in Canada, one may fairly reasonably they are slouching towards a police state — indeed rather more so than their neighbors to the south.
Michael, I don’t concoct things. Quickly, Here’s some pieces from Mark Shea’s blog, no fan of torture himself: http://markshea.blogspot.com/search/label/The%20Great%20Brown%28shirt%29%20North
MM, I (at least) am no nationalist, and I didn’t mean to come across as one (I was rather , rather grumpy last night. In fact, my students who happen to be in ROTC do not like the things I say about American ideology vs. the Gospel. In this post of mine from a few days ago I wondered if American ideology wasn’t the antichrist: http://catholidoxy.blogspot.com/2008/01/baby-boomlet.html
(Sorry of the HTML is messy…)
Perhaps the real issue I have (now that I’ve had some sleep and coffee and eggs and have come alive and settled down) is with the concept of “human rights”. Like most such terms — “justice”, “freedom”, “equality” — the concept of “human rights” is malleable and means different things to different people. (A problem with which Socrates/Plato wrestled and with which philosophy has been wrestling ever sense; what is justice?) So, for instance, certain liberals have tried to define abortion as a human right (remember the big brouhaha several years back at the UN when the USA didn’t play ball on the issue?), as well as homosexual practice. Wouldn’t enshrining such things as inalienable human rights fly in the face of our Christian faith?
Look, I’m not saying that “justice” and “human rights” and such are empty or useless concepts. I’m just pointing out that not everyone agrees on what they are, and it’s pretty cheeky for Canada to criticize the US, given the state of freedom of speech and religion in that country. Last I checked, free speech was a human right, too.
So the U.S. is somehow a source of the problems and difficulties of other countries, in this case Canada. That is exactly the same U.S.-centric view that the “my country right or wrong” types have. Irony Irony Irony. It’s all somehow about us, isn’t it?
Well, a lot of countries and people and cultures would be just as screwed up no matter if the U.S. existed or not. It is patronizing and self-centered to not recognize this.
I see the usual U.S. haters have come out in force. Constant petty outbursts blasting the U.S. have a tiring effect. I think the real story is that the contributors to this site constantly insert silly, petty childish remarks in discussions where they don’t belong, and bring up any issue where they can make the U.S. look bad.
No discussion of other states’ funded intrinsic evils, no discussion of using children as shields, shooting priests and nuns, silencing free speech, crushing individual rights, and the myriad of other issues that could be focused on.
Maybe this might be some of the reason many don’t take this blog seriously. Hate and bias veiled as serious discussion.
Canada lecturing America on human rights? That is rich beyond belief.
Well perhaps we can have a discussion with Canadian officials about this as soon as we explain to them the quaint American concept called freedom of speech.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NjY1YWJhNDc5ZTkyYzE4NTE3NTYyM2Q1ZTBkZjIxYzQ=
Canadian tax dollars at work policing the internet:
http://fusionistlibertarian.blogspot.com/
Last I checked, free speech was a human right, too.
I’m not fond of rights-talk in general, because I think it has built in tendencies to distort our speech. The less often someone uses the term “rights” in a given discussion the more coherent that discussion is likely to be.
But it isn’t intrinsically immoral to restrict someone’s speech, and indeed the space of all times and circumstances when it is prudent, just, and good to restrict speech is not empty. Yet it is intrinsically immoral to torture someone: the space of all times and circumstances in which it is just to torture someone is empty.
I’m not defending specific Canadian PC tyrannies; but they really are apples and oranges.
I suspect that the instinct to defend the US here springs from Iafrate using an alleged (obviously hard to verify if its so secret we’re not supposed to know about it) document of the Canadian government to make his point, rather than using something that US Catholic readers might be expected to have loyalty to: like a Church document.
1) What “point” do you think I was trying to make? I passed along information with no commentary. If I was trying to make any point, it was not “Canadian government good, US government evil,” but merely that the U.S. government engages in intrinsically evil acts, that the whole world knows it, and that we as Catholics must hope and pray that shining a light on it will somehow help it to cease. If you want to be part of the process of keeping these things in the dark, explaining them away, making excuses, etc., you will have to explain that to God on judgment day.
2) We have seen how much weight Church documents have for folks like you when you disagree with them. The Church calls torture an intrinsically evil act. You seem to disagree with the Church on this. You do “have a problem with” “forced nudity” (though you don’t say it’s intrinsically evil) and I wonder if it’s because it is a type of torture or because of some hang-ups you have about the human body?
Look, I’m not saying that “justice” and “human rights” and such are empty or useless concepts. I’m just pointing out that not everyone agrees on what they are, and it’s pretty cheeky for Canada to criticize the US, given the state of freedom of speech and religion in that country. Last I checked, free speech was a human right, too.
I agree that those terms are ambiguous and can be used for all sorts of purposes.
I don’t see what this has to do with the precise issue of torture, and why you and others bring up abortion or “freedom of speech” policy in Canada when these have nothing to do with the issue under discussion. You’re essentially saying that because Canada isn’t perfect, they have no right to point fingers at the U.S. on the issue of torture. That’s absurd.
Well, a lot of countries and people and cultures would be just as screwed up no matter if the U.S. existed or not.
This is arrogant. I invite you to stop this kind of talk.
Canada lecturing America on human rights? That is rich beyond belief. Well perhaps we can have a discussion with Canadian officials about this as soon as we explain to them the quaint American concept called freedom of speech.
I live in Canada. Free speech is alive and well.
Tim seems to have passed into the “just ignore him” area for me.
Free speech is not alive and well in Canada. It is in trouble, and its death rattle will come not with a bang but with the cold scalpel of detached bureaucracy. Are you familiar with the cases of Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant? The various “human rights” commissions in Canada are an unfunny joke. But, hey, those guys are trouble-makers right? Talking about the many bad things happening in Muslim communities and reprinting cartoons? They probably deserve it. How dare they.
And if it is arrogant to recognize that cultures – and among them ones we Westerns tend to so kindly think of as oppressed by Western domination of some sort – do not need U.S. influence to have problems, then go right on ahead and attach that label.
I think it’s arrogant to refer to other “peoples,” “cultures,” etc. as “screwed up.”
Funny how you will defend “free speech” when it suits you. What did you think of the Chocolate Jesus last Easter?
We have a reading comprehension issue – I did not refer to other peoples, cultures, ect as screwed up in the way you imply – not at all. But let me know if it is necessary to clarify further. And I would also be happy to engage on the actual point should you have any disagreement.
Second, II am not familiar with “Chocolate Jesus.” But if someone was being pursued by a government agency investigating their motives – ie punishing thoughts instead of actions – then I can assure you I would be dead set against it.
jonathanjones02: Well, a lot of countries and people and cultures would be just as screwed up no matter if the U.S. existed or not.
[shrug]
Guess it’s just a “reading comprehension” issue. I’ll work on my deficiencies.
Good. Who likes to be mischaracterized when the point is relatively clear and there is no question of clarification? None that I am aware of.
I wonder if others would “mischaracterize” you by failing to “comprehend” your “relatively clear” statement about screwed up cultures?
Why not address the point? The sentence you highlighted I stand by 100 percent, because it was part of a larger point that directly addressed a statement you made about the U.S. and Canada. But far be it from me to stand in the way of a moral preening. I believe other cultures are screwed up! U.S.A. no. 1 all the way! We are the greatest ever! There you go.
I think you want to de-emphasize and even obscure the extent to which the United States exerts death-dealing influence on the rest of the world. That is not to be “self-centered” as you suggest, but to attend to the facts.
And you know this. This is precisely how the U.S. and the advocates of the War on Terror defend our foreign policy — that someone has to police the world; why not the U.S. since God has graced us with all this power?
From the BBC:
The Canadian foreign minister has apologised for including the US and Israel on a list of states where prisoners are at risk of torture.
Maxime Bernier said the list, which formed part of a manual on torture awareness given to diplomats, “wrongly includes some of our closest allies”.
Mr Bernier insisted the manual was not a policy document and did not convey the official views of his government.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7198435.stm
Bit of a diplomatic faux pas, though the revealed conclusions aren’t actually in dispute. The document wasn’t an official government statement, but a handbook for diplomats undergoing a training course.
Everybody’s right, then. M. Bernier is correct in clarifying that this wasn’t an official opinion of his government. And of course, the document itself is right: the American government is horrendous on human rights. This might clarify matters for individuals on this thread asserting that “Canada is criticizing the US.” They aren’t, though I think they should. Openly and aggressively.
Thanks for the link!
I agree with your judgment. “Aliies” or not, the truth is the truth.
These comments are truly humorous… Canada doesn’t have a right to criticize the U.S…. hahaha… I wonder if the same thought process by these commenters is used whenever the U.S. criticizes other countries for waging war or having nuclear weapons.
It’s really wonderful to see in the comments here the Catholic pro-torture logic at work. And especially from pious pro-lifers!
“Canada doesn’t have a right to criticize the U.S.”
Oh Canada has that right, certainly in the US where we cherish freedom of speech. Now if only the same could be said for our sanctimonius neighbor to the North.
http://volokh.com/posts/1197260709.shtml
Don’t take my word for it. Check out the website of Catholic Insight.
http://catholicinsight.com/online/features/article_772.shtml
Amazing how much energy Donald will expend standing up for “free speech” when the “victims” involved are those who hate homosexuals and Muslims.
Trust me, Donald, they ain’t locking those folks up here in Canada or anything. Your kind are out roaming the streets like everyone else.
Brian – Inspiring, isn’t it?
Someone questioned the necessity of stripping down the prisoners to their birthday suits… This would be a offensive to those of Islamic religion in particular, but it’s probably used mainly as a means of “public” humiliation… though it’s often used a little more subtly… http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0114052pinkcuffs1.html