Tyranny. Around the Corner?

If I were an American, I would get out while other countries still might take me.

(CALGARY, Alberta) - Where law ends, tyranny begins, said William Pitt, the eighteenth century British Prime Minister. He could have been thinking about the excesses of the G.W. Bush administration when he later said: "Necessity was the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It was the argument of tyrants; it was the creed of slaves."

The central feature of Bush’s antiterrorism policy became known as extraordinary rendition where individuals would be arrested and secretly spirited out of the U.S. to foreign countries or to CIA run black sites where they would be tortured and otherwise mistreated outside the law.

Guantanamo was famously established in Cuba so that the prisoners—most of whom were either innocent, or such tiny fish—could be detained without habeas corpus protections, where a prisoner could be released from unlawful detention.

One of the best known (at least to non-Americans) is the case of Mahar Arar, a Syrian born Canadian citizen. He was on a flight back from a family vacation in Tunisia and the plane stopped over at JFK in New York. He was taken off the plane and held incommunicado in soliary confinement for two weeks. Because he was not an American citizen he was denied access to a lawyer.

Then, without informing even the Canadian Embassy, he was sent to Syria where he was confined in a cell not much bigger than a grave (three feet by six feet and already populated by rats), and tortured for nearly a year before Canadian diplomatic efforts had him released back to Canada.

In Canada, the government set up a Commission of Inquiry where it was established that he was completely innocent. Even Syria, after the fact, admitted Arar’s innocence. But the American government would never admit to any of the independently established facts and Arar and his family are still on a watchlist.

Mahar's amazing return from horrors of torture.

(When the watch lists were first established, Senator Edward Kennedy was denied permission to board a flight because his name unaccountably appeared on the list.)

It was left to the Canadian government to settle. Prime Minister Stephen Harper issued an apology to Arar and he was reportedly awarded a settlement of $10.5 million.

This was only one of many such cases. In 2004 Binyam Mohamed, an Ethiopian citizen, was held at Guantanamo until 2009 when charges were dropped and he was released to the U.K. where last year a Court of Appeal ruled that he had been subjected to "cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by the United States authorities”.

What kind of country is America today where a person can be held without charges or access to a court for five years. (The only explanation I can come up with is that is kind of treatment is more usually meted out to people who have “funny” names.)

The Supreme Court of the United States has added to the precipitous decline in American freedom, in a May 16, 2011 ruling. Five individuals who had been treated similarly to Arar brought suit. The government used the Bush defense, saying that allowing the case to proceed would possibly endanger “national security” and that allowing the torture victims a chance to make their case in court using non-secret evidence would risk divulging state secrets.

A three-judge panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had earlier ruled that the case of the five should proceed, saying that the idea that the executive branch was entitled to have lawsuits shut down with a blanket claim of national security would “effectively cordon off all secret actions from judicial scrutiny, immunizing the C.I.A. and its partners from the demands and limits of the law.”

Last September a full meeting of the Appeals court reversed that decision 6-5 (giving evidence of the extreme polarization of American society at the highest levels). The Supreme Court kowtowed to its Republican masters by declining to review the case and giving no reason for the refusal. Last year, they also refused to hear Mr. Arar’s case. Three years before that, in 2007, the court declined to review the case of Khaled el-Masri, a German citizen subjected to torture in a secret overseas prison.

“What the world sees,” says a NYT editorial, “is rendition victims blocked from American courts while architects of their torment write books bragging about their role in this legal and moral travesty. Some torture victims bounced from American courts, including Mr. Mohamed and Mr. Arar, have received money from nations with comparatively minor involvement in their ordeals.

Here is where Mr. Pitt’s aphorism applies: Where law ends, tyranny begins. If I were an American, I would get out while I still could and while there are still countries that might take me. And for those of you who believe in the Second Amendment, you should now be embarrassingly aware of your impotence as a citizen. Sure, there are places where you can openly carry a handgun. But, for all the good it does you, it might as well be a popgun!

Daniel Johnson was born near the midpoint of the twentieth century in Calgary, Alberta. In his teens he knew he was going to be a writer, which is why he was one of only a handful of boys in his high school typing class — a skill he knew was going to be necessary. He defines himself as a social reformer, not a left winger, the latter being an ideological label which, he says, is why he is not an ideologue. From 1975 to 1981 he was reporter, photographer, then editor of the weekly Airdrie Echo. For more than ten years after that he worked with Peter C. Newman, Canada’s top business writer (notably on a series of books, The Canadian Establishment). Through this period Daniel also did some national radio and TV broadcasting. He gave up journalism in the early 1980s because he had no interest in being a hack writer for the mainstream media and became a software developer and programmer. He retired from computers last year and is now back to doing what he loves — writing and trying to make the world a better place

Salem-News.com Top Stories

2025: Hope for the Best, Prepare for the Worst

Two Wars with No Way Out

No One Owns the Future

The Ugly Origins of Trump's America First Policy

A One-State Solution Could Transform the World

Comments Leave a comment on this story.

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.

Anonymous May 23, 2011 7:30 am (Pacific time)

Daniel regarding the Supreme Court ruling on Corporations, this law is a blow against tyranny and will help in assuring media freedom by allowing for more viewpoints to get out to the public. Salem-News.com and even you are part of this info change. For decades now it has been the print media and major television networks (all corporations by the way) that have reported and slanted the news as they so desired. Actually Daniel a very small group of people have been making the decision on just what news gets out, and slowly the internet and some television networks have exposed this bias. The major networks and print media are fading as more truth gets out. We have also seen this bias slowly creep into not just our university system (private and public), but also are K-12 public school system. Now instead of the left having a complete monopoly on their brand of news (one-sided coupled with significant omissions, aka...propaganda) there are "additional" corporate dollars coming into play to provide counter info. Seriously Daniel, what's the difference between any corporation? Why should one type have more power than another one? This ruling was about balance. Try checking out the FEC (Federal Elections Commission) who compiles political donations and see who are the top donaters. It is unions by a significant margin, so now the other side is getting info parity, a counter-balance that the radicals now see as their Waterloo coming down the pike. "Wha' hoppen?"

What happened to government of the people, by the people and for the people? Or did you miss that meeting?

Colli May 23, 2011 4:00 am (Pacific time)

My apologies. I guess I should have seen that as what you were saying made no realistic sense and I immediately knew you would not take the route you were suggesting.
Getting people to start thinking is certainly what needs to happen. After reading your response to my comment I should be thanking you (and I do) for attempting to stir my countrymen into action or at least watchfulness.
Re: the Supreme Court, it certainly does appear that they are tilting the tables in favor of the rich at the expense of the less fortunate. The fair limits we need (in several areas) will not come about under the current group warming the seats in Washington. A more power-hungry group has never sat the congressional bench before.
Colli

Colli May 22, 2011 8:50 pm (Pacific time)

Dan:
There is no question that the United States has made mistakes under virtually every administration that ever occupied the White House. Over the years, both Republican and Democrat administrations have been guilty of numerous mistakes. However, to suggest we abandon our country rather than fight from within to bring about change is to suggest the coward’s way out. Corrupt, egomaniacal politicians are not people I would choose to surrender my country to thank you very much. Think about it Dan . . . would you surrender Canada to a similar bunch of buffoons?
Will my country ever return to the ideals most of us hold sacred? Only time will tell. Personally, I am not yet ready to crawl under a rock and give-up . . . nor am I not ready to say “Sure, torture whomever you like” or “Tax our people into oblivion and spend like fools on whatever your particular party desires this week”. We have voices, pens, and the courage of our convictions.
You may be correct in saying we cannot win against the vermin populating nearly every political seat in Washington. You may also be correct in saying that they will eventually win and bring our country down . . . but, some of us would much rather go down fighting in whatever way we can rather than roll-over like a cur dog or run and hide like a rat. What you suggest surprises me a great deal, as I do not believe you would do what you suggest if Canada were set upon by a similar group of vermin.
Colli

Colli:

I agree with you. My real intention is not to seriously suggest that people abandon America, just as I would not abandon Canada. My intention is to make people angry and get them thinking about things they might otherwise not consider. I try to do good and contribute useful (even if unsavory) ideas.

For example, are you aware of how the Supreme Court itself is undermining the Rule of Law on which civilized Western nations are founded? It's particularly frightening and only getting worse.

But, I do appreciate your comments here and for other stories.

Anonymous May 22, 2011 6:16 pm (Pacific time)

Yes during times of war things are done to protect Americans, and that's what is called for, to assure that we remain safe. Though if you want to update yourselves regarding who has carried out lethal (and lawful) acts against foreign invaders during time of war, see that democrat FDR was not shy about having immediate executions. Nor was he bashful about setting up internment camps for thousands of Japanese-Americans. If one wants to keep score between democrats and Republicans when it comes to violence (and getting us into wars with significant casualties), then the democrats win hands down. In fact the democrats were the party of slave owners, the KKK's, and the Jim Crow party. If not for Republicans, then the Civil Rights legislation of the 1960's would not have gone through. Sen. Al Gore Sr. sure tried to stop those laws. Regarding today, well after 2 1/2 years Obama has not changed anything other than increasing the deadly Drone attacks killing mostly civilians, and getting us into Libya for heavens knows what. As far as people leaving the states, still Canadians come down here in droves as do millions of others from around the world. Hope they head up to Calgary then you can feed, clothe and educate them...see how your economy does after several generations of social draining costs with it getting worse daily. It is this situation that has been the most vexing for our economy. My prediction that the next major terrorist attack will be in Canada, for you guys are loaded with terrorists, absolutely loaded.

The Supreme Court recently ruled that in politics corporations have the same rights as private citizens so that an avalanche of corporate money is on its way for the next election cycle. In 2012, the president will be elected by the business community, not the citizens. You're losing your vaunted freedoms and the consequences are going to hit you like a runaway truck. I can hear you now, looking up bewilderingly and saying, "Wha' hoppen?" You can't even see it coming.

Janet Phelan May 22, 2011 4:38 pm (Pacific time)

America's influence extends throughout the globe. Depending on the degree of "person of interest" attached to an individual, he or she may find other countries reluctant to get involved in offering asylum or refuge. Mr. Johnson should be aware that Canada is sending the Iraq war resistors back to the U.S. to face court martial and has not taken in any U.S. citizen as a refugee for years. Indeed, the official policy of Canada states that the U.S. is a "safe country" and cannot be producing refugees....Ha!

[Return to Top]

Tyranny. Around the Corner?

Quick Links

DINING

MUST SEE SALEM

AUCTIONS - APPRAISALS

CONSTRUCTION SERVICES

ONLINE SHOPPING

Advertise with Salem-News