Watchdog: CSIS uses info gained by torture

[Praxius]

http://www.thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/1037854.html

OTTAWA — An investigation by the watchdog over the Canadian Security Intelligence Service concludes the spy agency "uses information obtained by torture" — perhaps its bluntest assessment of CSIS’s intelligence-gathering practices to date.

The Security Intelligence Review Committee, which began looking into the issue two years ago, stops short of accepting Toronto lawyer Paul Copeland’s assertion that CSIS had shown a "total lack of concern" about evidence possibly gathered through coercive means.

But it finds that CSIS’s concern has focused on the impact that torture might have on the reliability of information it uses, rather than obligations under the Charter of Rights, the Criminal Code and international treaties "that absolutely reject torture."

Questions about Canadian reliance on information extracted from suspected terrorists through brutal methods have arisen in several high-profile cases.

Copeland’s complaint to the review committee, which reports to Parliament, stemmed from evidence CSIS entered in the case of client Mohamed Harkat who is slated for deportation to his native Algeria under a national security certificate.

CSIS contends Harkat, a former pizza delivery man, is an Islamic extremist and collaborator with Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network — a charge he denies.

During bail proceedings for Harkat in 2005, Copeland questioned a senior CSIS analyst, identified only as P.G., whether he ever asked if information he handled was obtained through torture.

P.G. insisted he would usually try to corroborate such material through independent sources.

So.... um.... where did it state that CSIS used information gained via torture and what examples proven?

It stated that:

But it finds that CSIS’s concern has focused on the impact that torture might have on the reliability of information it uses, rather than obligations under the Charter of Rights, the Criminal Code and international treaties "that absolutely reject torture."

Maybe they were not concerned about the Charter of Rights when looking at the topic of torture, because it should be a given? And the fact that they determined that information may not be reliable from torture more so then the basic rights protecting from torture would also kinda help state that they don't torture to begin with..... to me it kinda shows common sense towards torture, AKA: it's not a valid source of gaining important information.

So because CSIS focused attention on the practicality of torture over the charter of rights reason not to do so, that alone makes them conclude that they do in fact get information from torture?

What?

..... During bail proceedings for Harkat in 2005, Copeland questioned a senior CSIS analyst, identified only as P.G., whether he ever asked if information he handled was obtained through torture.

P.G. insisted he would usually try to corroborate such material through independent sources.

That doesn't mean CSIS directly tortured anybody or made anybody else torture for them.

Case in point would be if CSIS gained information from the US about an attack which they gained from waterboarding. CSIS didn't do it, but the information was provided from torture.... therefore as PG. stated, he would usually try and corroborate such material through independant sources.

Why? Because above they also stated that CSIS has questions about the information provided by torture.... the above example would be a good way of explaining this.

Confused?

 

[MikeyDB]

Canada through CSIS and the RCMP collaberated with American "intelligence" services to highjack Mahar Arar off to Syria where he was tortured. It should come as no surprise to Canadians that intelligence agencies in this country goose-step to the fascist drumbeat of our American neighbors. I don't really care about the "nationality" of the people practicing torture as means to extract information, if the issue is "we have to do this because we don't have human intelligence strategically placed that is capable of verifying information gathered through alternate means..." amounts to rationalization of precisely the same behavior as Abu Ghraib and Islamic terrorist organizations that employ the same practices of torture. Either torture is wrong and accepted as morally reprehensible by our grand western democracies or it isn't. If we're happy to torture people in the name of national security as it seems we're as content to supply information to American intelligence agencies who use torture and kidnapping as routine...what's the difference between the "enemy" and us..?

 

[CDNBear]

1) For the most part, CSIS couldn't find its collective ass with a map, a flashlight and a hooker for moral support.
2) But this might be a step in the right direction.

 

[Praxius]

Canada through CSIS and the RCMP collaberated with American "intelligence" services to highjack Mahar Arar off to Syria where he was tortured. It should come as no surprise to Canadians that intelligence agencies in this country goose-step to the fascist drumbeat of our American neighbors.

Brzzzurp.... if you wanna twist your information like that go right ahead, but you're skewing the details.

The US nabbed him, they contacted the RCMP and other Canadian organizations, they claimed that he was a potiential threat.... the US took over from there since he was in their country and took off to Syria with him to get him to confess, which most likly would be to get him thrown into Cuba. Canada screwed up, but it was the US who made the decision to send him to Syria to be tortured, rather then to properly question him and let him go with some common sense or at the very least, send his arse back here for questioning.

If CSIS and the RCMP are all for Torture for information, then they're doing a hell of a better job keeping it under wraps then the US.

I don't really care about the "nationality" of the people practicing torture as means to extract information, if the issue is "we have to do this because we don't have human intelligence strategically placed that is capable of verifying information gathered through alternate means..." amounts to rationalization of precisely the same behavior as Abu Ghraib and Islamic terrorist organizations that employ the same practices of torture.

Agreed. Ever since this whole 9/11 fad, it's been some how justifiable to stoop to the same level in which our leaders tend to claim are evil.... but for a greater good..... which is?

Either torture is wrong and accepted as morally reprehensible by our grand western democracies or it isn't.

Well that's the thing.... one... most people from the US like to correct people and say that the US is not a Democracy but rather a Republic (So why does Bush run around the world trying to be the spokesman for Democracy, I dunno)

And second the US or the Bush Administration in specific, have been trying to downplay the types of torture they use as not actually being torture... another 9/11 fad: to twist information to suit your needs.

If we're happy to torture people in the name of national security as it seems we're as content to supply information to American intelligence agencies who use torture and kidnapping as routine...what's the difference between the "enemy" and us..?

Well I still have yet to see any major information or evidence supporting any claims thus far that CSIS or any other of our organizations have directly been involved with torturing anybody, except their screwup of Arar, but to my knowlege they were unaware of the US's intentions of torturing him.

At least, I know if I was in the CSIS at that time, I sure as hell wouldn't want to turn a blind eye to the US kidnapping and torturing one of my citizens if I was told that was going to happen. I know that it would only come back and bite me in the ass.... which it ended up doing.

But one point I'd like to make, is that at least our government and those in the positions to make what happened to Arar happen, actually publically apoligized and compensated him and his family.... it doesn't actually make things right, but it's at least something.

The US still won't even let him fly or enter their country, and have yet to actually admit they did something wrong, when they were the ones who made the decisions and actions.

 

[lone wolf]

My one and only experience with them - a few months after 9/11 - showed me CSIS are quite capable of torture. I damn near piddled my pants and split a gut laughing at their attempts to inconspicuously observe my window from a dark sedan in a snow-covered church parking lot. Should have seen the looks on their faces when, after a couple of hours of sitting out in the cold car, I came up from behind with a coffee apiece for them. Maxwell Smart.... Secret agent 86 must have been proud....

Woof!

 

[Praxius]

My one and only experience with them - a few months after 9/11 - showed me CSIS are quite capable of torture. I damn near piddled my pants and split a gut laughing at their attempts to inconspicuously observe my window from a dark sedan in a snow-covered church parking lot. Should have seen the looks on their faces when, after a couple of hours of sitting out in the cold car, I came up from behind with a coffee apiece for them. Maxwell Smart.... Secret agent 86 must have been proud....

Woof!

I think I remember hearing that a while back.... but how does that show you they are capable of torture?

I wouldn't label peeing your pants and laughing as torture. Perhaps if you had to sit in the pants you peed in for a few months, but even then that's questionable.

 

[lone wolf]

I think I remember hearing that a while back.... but how does that show you they are capable of torture?

I wouldn't label peeing your pants and laughing as torture. Perhaps if you had to sit in the pants you peed in for a few months, but even then that's questionable.

It was torture not laughing at them. Sorry, I didn't realize humour isn't welcomed in some parts of the universe.

Woof!

 

[Praxius]

It was torture not laughing at them. Sorry, I didn't realize humour isn't welcomed in some parts of the universe.

Woof!

Humour is welcome, but sometimes requires explination coming from an already serious accusation, based on the original topic. I'm arguing for the point that the above report did not even remotely prove that CSIS does gather intelligence based on torture, let alone was involved in getting that intelligence via torture.

You came on and claimed you personally had experience proving they do torture, then explained the above story..... which didn't prove anything relating to torture, and didn't really connect with the punchline to relate to the topic at hand. The story was funny originally, but I saw no connection here or the humor which also relates.

Yes, I'm aware that I am about as much fun as Spock at the Just for Laughs Festival.

 

[lone wolf]

My apologies for interrupting your monologue....

Woof!

 

[Praxius]

My apologies for interrupting your monologue....

Woof!

Jeez man, I'z just nit pickin relax. No apologies required.