Afghan Detainee Mega Thread

[McG]

He's not allowed to advocate for a cause as a "lawyer", because his status with the Law Society is "Not Practising Law- Employed". 

So, how would the Law Society view this statement:

“I also have a super-added obligation as a lawyer to be vigilant of possible illegality; lawyers are officers of the court.  ..."

 

[cplcaldwell]

I bet Niner Domestic will be by soon to sort that out for us....

 

[niner domestic]

I am working on it...give me a day to do my research and finish my letters.  Suffice to say, I am very vexed over the conduct of this professor.

 

[hank011]

Access to information shows that captured insurgents all contracted colds while in custody. Perhaps this systematic problem shows a clear cycle of abuse...the PMed guys had to have been performing biological warfare with detainees...I am outraged...get me a lawyer!

 

[garb811]

More commentary on the issue from the National Post.  Original article is here, shared under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.  I find it very interesting that thiat Mr Martin is able to provide quite a bit more detail regarding the circumstances of the captures, something the original (and other?) reporter(s) probably had access to but he, or his editor, didn't feel the need to include to put the issue into better context.  Emphasis' are mine with comments following:

Bruises don't warrant a military inquiry
 
Don Martin in Ottawa
National Post

Thursday, February 08, 2007

So let's put off hunting down the Taliban, the better to scour Kandahar for three Afghans who may have been injured while resisting arrest by Canadian forces --or may well be dead after a successful stint as suicide bombers.

And in lieu of concern for soldiers being killed or wounded, let "a political storm" (to use one newspaper's breathless hyperbole) erupt at some cuts, bruises and a couple of black eyes that allegedly appeared on a detained trio of suspicious dudes.

In a theatre of war that has claimed 45 Canadian lives and maimed dozens of soldiers for life, the overstretched military is about to waste time and resources defending itself against the hypothetical prospect it may have beaten up several resistant suspects 10 months ago.

A board of inquiry into three men's alleged injuries was called on Tuesday, and military police have been ordered to search for the missing Afghans, who were handed over to local authorities for further questioning.

But try to imagine being the soldiers now accused of mistreating prisoners last April. Your Kandahar deployment has endured the fiercest fighting of a Canadian mission in three decades and suffered three deaths in the previous month.

The Taliban enemy is on the move back into the region by night and sheltered by locals during the day.

You bust down the door of a house fingered by informants as suspicious and find bomb-making devices and fertilizer used in making explosives. You order a "fighting age male" to hit the floor. He refuses. It takes four soldiers to force the yelling, kicking suspect to his knees.

On the same day, a young Afghan is seen watching troop movements from a nearby hill. He tries to flee, but is apprehended and searched. A cellphone, address book, car keys and signal mirror are found. He escapes, is recaptured the next day and refuses to answer any questions.

Fast forward to Tuesday when revelations about upper torso injuries on the above suspects puts Chief of Defence Staff Rick Hillier under the media interrogation lights and facing comparisons with the 1993 death of a young Somali in Canadian military hands. Oh, puh-LEEZE.

This all started when Ottawa university professor Amir Attaran connected a random series of dots on documents released by the military to produce a picture of alleged brutality even he admits -- and indeed hopes -- may be wrong.

This is not comparable to the torture-to-death of a young Somali, the hellish humiliations of Baghdad's Abu Ghraib or even on par with some victims of nasty RCMP custody.

Mr. Attaran, to the internationally acclaimed academic's credit, is willing to give the armed forces the benefit of considerable doubt. He admits his formal request for an inquiry was based on "guesses" or "inferences" and includes "the possibility of ambiguity and error."

Drawing such tenuous conclusions is not entirely his fault. The military served as its own worst enemy by censoring the documents Mr. Attaran obtained under an Access to Information request to the point where almost any academic hypothesis fits the sketchy field facts provided.

If our secretive armed forces want to force an inquiry rather than release the evidence to prove it's all so unnecessary, well, I guess that's their own damn fault. Still, it seems like such a waste for military brass to shift into damage control for a prolonged inquiry if there's proof of a legitimate explanation for the detainee bumps and scrapes.

Now, I'm the furthest thing from a soldier, but if someone described as a "fighting age male" is caught with material for an "improvised explosive device," ignores verbal and physical commands, yells "belligerently" and moves in an "aggressive" manner toward four stressed-out soldiers, he's asking for injuries. The fact a limb wasn't broken or a skull cracked only suggests the soldiers were being gentle.

Of course, it's possible there's a cover-up happening here, which might be a more egregious development than the physical abuse. When military information disappears, it's usually missing for a reason.

But even the worst possible scenario based on a creative analysis of the released documents -- that a few soldiers used too much muscle in making some Afghan apprehensions -- is not enough to justify the hysterical attention this matter has received.

Only in Canada could the cuts and bruises suffered by a few suspected terrorists give the entire Canadian military a black eye. The murderous take-no-prisoners Taliban can only be laughing at the insanity of it all.

Dmartin@nationalpost.com

© National Post 2007

COMMENTS

This is not comparable to the torture-to-death of a young Somali, the hellish humiliations of Baghdad's Abu Ghraib or even on par with some victims of nasty RCMP custody.

Not a fair shot at our horse riding brethren but the analogy stands up.  Persons arrested by civilian police (but not MP ) end up with worse injuries under far less hostile conditions when the subject resists and must be subdued.

This all started when Ottawa university professor Amir Attaran connected a random series of dots on documents released by the military to produce a picture of alleged brutality even he admits -- and indeed hopes -- may be wrong.

Mr. Attaran, to the internationally acclaimed academic's credit, is willing to give the armed forces the benefit of considerable doubt. He admits his formal request for an inquiry was based on "guesses" or "inferences" and includes "the possibility of ambiguity and error."

Drawing such tenuous conclusions is not entirely his fault. The military served as its own worst enemy by censoring the documents Mr. Attaran obtained under an Access to Information request to the point where almost any academic hypothesis fits the sketchy field facts provided.

These are extremely relevant quotes which, if the initial reporter had them, or similar statements, should have been included in the initial reporting.  Those quotes would have put the the allegations by Mr. Attaran  into much better context and would have served to emphasis the fact that the his entire case was circumstantial at best.  These later quotes certainly give him an out if his hypothesis is proven false and makes me wonder what grade the good professor would give one of his students who presented a paper to him in which the student was unable to support their thesis through facts and instead relied upon circumstance and innuendo. 

The more I read about this, the more I have to admire the Professor's manipulation of the MSM to make this story bigger than it is.  At this point, my gut is telling me he may have had a lukewarm reaction from the MPCC along the lines that the issue may be outside MPCC jurisdiction and they would need a legal opinion before making a decision and he forced the issue by finding a reporter who would assist in sensationalising the story.  This would certainly explain the ongoing delay in announcing whether or not the MPCC would initiate a Public Interest investigation as if the MPCC Chairman was sure of the applicability of his mandate to this issue and was as concerned as the MSM has made him out to be, he should have initiated a Public Interest investigation without seeking submissions from anyone.

But even the worst possible scenario based on a creative analysis of the released documents -- that a few soldiers used too much muscle in making some Afghan apprehensions -- is not enough to justify the hysterical attention this matter has received.

Amen to that.

 

[niner domestic]

Well, a little more digging and I found a letter that the learned professor had penned to the MND on April 7th, 2006.  http://www.ceasefire.ca/atf/cf/{0A14BA6C-BE4F-445B-8C13-51BED95A5CF3}/Attaran_7%20April%202006.pdf

The most telling paragraph of the whole letter is the last one:

My capacity to provide advice on this issue
I write in my individual capacity as an expert in constitutional human rights law. I am an
associate professor and Tier 2 Canada Research Chair at the University of Ottawa, in the
Faculty of Law and Institute of Population Health. Prior to my appointment in Ottawa, I have
held teaching positions at Harvard University, Yale University, and a fellowship at the Royal
Institute of International Affairs. I have experience in public interest and constitutional
litigation, while on the staff of the Sierra Legal Defence Fund in Vancouver.


IOW, he sent an unsolictied letter to the Government and now a year later, is still trying to get onto (in my opinion) the paying portion of any inquiry as counsel or advisor. 

Letter sent to:

Canada Research Council
Law Society of Upper Canada
Dean of University of Ottawa Law School (in receipt of reply - one sentence to thank me for "expressing my opinion". )
Globe and Mail
National Post

 

[dapaterson]

9er Domestic:

Reading that letter, I can only say "Wow."  A rather incredibile attempt to expand the scope of the Charter to well outside Canada.

Legally, there is no difference posed by the detention taking place inside Canada, as in the Suresh case, or inside Afghanistan, as with the Arrangement.
(page 3)

Interestingly, he wrote that letter on University letterhead, implying an endorsement of his position by U of O.  I wonder if the Faculty of Law and the University Board of Governors are aware of the University taking this position...

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

If a few cuts and bruises while trying to escape equals torture the good professer hadn't want to be an Ontario inmate then...........which joint did he not wish to use for a good month or so?

 

[MarkOttawa]

Two posts at The Torch, the first by Babbling Brooks and the second mine:

Desperate fabrication
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/02/desperate-fabrication.html

Afstan: Internal battle at The Globe and Mail
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2007/02/afstan-internal-battle-at-globe-and.html

And one at Flit:

Damned if you do...
http://www.snappingturtle.net/flit/archives/2007_02_08.html#006056

Mark
Ottawa

 

[Weinie]

  I say good on ya Cdr Laviolette, for asking the same question, directly,  that many on here have as well. What is your agenda, Professor?

 

[Bigmac]

9er Domestic:

Reading that letter, I can only say "Wow."  A rather incredibile attempt to expand the scope of the Charter to well outside Canada.

Interestingly, he wrote that letter on University letterhead, implying an endorsement of his position by U of O.  I wonder if the Faculty of Law and the University Board of Governors are aware of the University taking this position...

    He actually gave a presentation 24 Mar 06 at the U of O on the subject at hand and posted his views on the University website. The University obviously is aware and endorse him.
http://www.commonlaw.uottawa.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1328&Itemid=76

 

[Edward Campbell]

     He actually gave a presentation 24 Mar 06 at the U of O on the subject at hand and posted his views on the University website. The University obviously is aware and endorse him.
http://www.commonlaw.uottawa.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1328&Itemid=76

I'm not sure one can assume that U of Ottawa endorses his views.  I'm sure the university supports his rights to hold and express opinions on a variety of issues.  One of the reasons we want to defeat the Taliban is so that Afghans in Afghanistan might be able to do the same.

 

[hotelquebec9er]

Check out this link:

http://splatto.net/blog/?p=415

This guy has been at it long before this!

I want either his mailing address, or his email address.  This Man nitwit needs an angry letter or three.

Hey, turns out he's slagged the World Bank innapropriately too:
http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2006/05/attaran_at_it_again.php

*shudder*

 

[The Bread Guy]

My humble comments bolded in brackets.....

(Also, a bit more of the latest MSM because of my insomnia:
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/57138/post-525395.html#msg525395 )

Shared in accordance with the "fair dealing" provisions, Section 29, of the Copyright Act.

Detainee briefings routine in '05
Issues relating to Afghan captives were a high priority during his tenure as defence minister, Graham says
Paul Koring, Globe & Mail, 9 Feb 07
Article Link - Permalink

Official Canadian documents show that General Rick Hillier and former defence minister Bill Graham were routinely briefed in 2005 on the transfer and medical condition of Afghan detainees.

The documents -- originally marked "Secret (Canada/USA Eyes Only)" -- have been declassified, and although heavily edited, released under access-to-information legislation.

"These would have been routinely received in my office," Mr. Graham confirmed yesterday. The documents include not only details of the capture and transfer but also the detainee's medical condition and whether he had been injured.

The Canadian Forces didn't respond yesterday when asked whether Gen. Hillier, the Chief of Defence Staff, and current Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor were similarly briefed 10 months ago about the injured detainees, now at the centre of a criminal investigation into possible abuse by Canadian soldiers.

This week, Mr. O'Connor said: "Senior management is not aware of every activity going on inside the department."

(True when it comes to minute operational details, but my own experience leaves me guessing both political and bureaucratic staff are always on the alert for things that the Minister SHOULD know, even if just to brace for any possible flap.)

However, if documents detailing briefings from Gen. Hillier to the then Liberal defence minister represent a pattern that continued once the Conservatives took office, then both the Chief of Defence Staff and the minister would have been briefed within days of the capture and transfer of suspected Taliban fighters.

(Never worked in DND/NDHQ, but as a small cog in the huge government wheel myself, I'm guessing that if every transfer wasn't reported, somethign of this magnitude would be reported on periodically.  Now, how far up the food chain such reports went, or how many may or may not have gotten where, is a question I can't even guess at.)

"If there was a lapse in a process or policies, we'll find that out and correct it," Gen. Hillier said this week after ordering a military board of inquiry to probe the handling and transfer of detainees.

Mr. Graham said not every detainee transfer came to his personal attention. "If there was a red flag, it would have come to me," he said.

At least one of three Afghans captured on April 7 near Dukah suffered injuries while in Canadian military custody. The military says only "appropriate force" was used.

Two investigations are under way: a criminal probe by a special military police unit into possible detainee abuse and a broader board of inquiry.

A third investigation, a public-interest inquiry, may be launched today by the Military Police Complaints Commission.

Mr. Graham said yesterday that he didn't recall seeing every "detainee-transfer situation report" but that detainee issues were a high priority.

(Hence, my guess on at least periodic updates on how many were bagged in any given period, with particularly high-value or unusual circumstances highlighted as required.  Also, keep in mind that Minister and even senior bureaucrats can ask for briefing notes/briefings/decks/whatever to be drafted if they're interested in an update - how often that happened, I can't guess.)

The pattern of documents and briefings, at least as recently as 2005, suggests that the highest-ranking officers and their political masters were advised about detainee issues in a timely fashion.

Mr. O'Connor and Gen. Hillier indicated this week that they knew nothing about the suspicious patterns of facial injuries on three detainees at the centre of the investigations until Ottawa law professor Amir Attaran brought them to the attention of the MPCC.

Prof. Attaran has been accused of behaving "unprofessionally" by a senior Canadian Forces spokeswoman, Commander Denise LaViolette, a judgment the military declined to disavow yesterday despite written questions from The Globe and Mail asking whether Gen. Hillier shares those views.

The hundreds of fragmentary documents released under access law to Prof. Attaran don't include any ministerial briefing notes from Gen. Hillier pertaining to the April 8, 2006, transfer of the three detainees.

The Canadian Forces didn't answer written inquiries from The Globe asking whether the same briefing pattern that existed for Mr. Graham continued for Mr. O'Connor.

However, another document suggests that information on detainee transfers remained a high priority and were brought to the attention of high-ranking officers at Defence headquarters.

A briefing note, dated April 12, 2006, and originally marked "Secret," but since declassified, notes the transfer to Afghan National Police of the three detainees captured in Dukah. Under the heading: "Task Force Afghanistan; Commanders Comments" a note reads: "Detainee transfer went well, even through it was not as fast as we would have liked. All regulations were followed and all reporting is now complete."

There is no mention of injuries.

And despite the commander's notation that all reporting was complete, the document trail is missing several usual items.

The medical report is blank. The normal procedure is for detainees to be pronounced "fit for transfer" or "fit for release."

Similarly, the inventory of one of the detainees' personal belongings wasn't completed. A notation says it wasn't done because the Afghan was injured.

 

[concerneddad]

Cold? Bored? Here's something to occupy your time. Access to Information Requests (AIR). Here's a hypothetical. You ask Customs Border Services to mail copies of all arrest reports in which officers injured travelers they arrested Windsor ON in January 2007. You receive a reply that two officers indicate in one report of arresting an individual with a 357 Magnum after he pointed it at them. They report they pepper sprayed him and used their batons to subdue him. He was hit on the head and across the face, he received a cut above his left eye and two teeth were knocked out. The officers explained that the individual, (6'4' 230lbs.), was uncooperative even after being subdued and handcuffed. He kicked one officer in the groin and hurt his own wrists trying to free himself from the 'cuffs. The officers explained that after being treated by medics the suspect was turned over to local police. Normal practice before the court appearance.

Now your fun starts. You ask for the name of the officers, pictures of suspect and his name. You receive a reply that due to privacy laws this information can't be given out. Now you have your "proof" the suspect was abused. Why are the refusing to name the people involved? Where are the pictures? How can you believe it was his left eye that was cut? Why was he turned over to police so quickly? You demand an investigation of abuse on this individual and are told that yes your complaint will be investigated because such charges are so serious that they are all investigated whether they are true or not. Now you have them on the run. Isn't the fact that they are investigating proof that something is wrong? Why wasn't the public told about this abuse in January? Is the Minister aware of this abuse? If not why not? Isn't he aware of what goes on at border crossings? Can Customs Officers investigate themselves? They are a team after all aren't they? Is the media aware of this "abuse"?

See how easy it is? With any luck the media will pick this up and you'll have your 15 minutes of fame, post it on Youtube and you'll get 30.

Next, ask Fisheries and Oceans how many lobsters are sold in markets with one claw missing. Pictures please..

 

[BernDawg]

Interesting read I found this AM.

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=af9e68d7-f0f5-4a21-a8a9-7ae11e266d07

Not all reporters suck, it seems.

 

[George Wallace]

Interesting!

The conspiracy continues to get more interesting as more information comes to light.  Although not named in this link, the good Professor as a member of U of Ottawa's Law Faculty is implicated through association in this CAIR fund raiser for "University of Ottawa, Arar-Mazigh Scholarship."  Other links in this article may even be more incriminating.

http://www.caircan.ca/ann_more.php?id=2821_0_9_0_C

It seems this Professor has a very defined course that he set out to follow.  Quite a Fifth Columnist.

 

[McG]

The conspiracy continues to get more interesting as more information comes to light.  Although not named in this link, the good Professor as a member of U of Ottawa's Law Faculty is implicated through association in this CAIR fund raiser for "University of Ottawa, Arar-Mazigh Scholarship."  Other links in this article may even be more incriminating.

I'm not sure what I'm supposed to be looking at in that site.  I don't see his name let alone a "very defined course."

 

[George Wallace]

Interesting!

The conspiracy continues to get more interesting as more information comes to light.  Although not named in this link, the good Professor as a member of U of Ottawa's Law Faculty is implicated through association.............

Does this make any more sense? 

 

[McG]

You will have to spell this out for me.  "Implicated" in what?