One one hand they accuse Syria of training terrorists on the other hand they send the same captured terrorists to prisons in Syria for torture and to extract information. This was proved recently with the Canadian Government applogizing to its citizen and giving him compensation for being handed over to the Americans as a suspect and sent to syria for Torture. Do you guyz smell a rat?
2007-02-06 22:13:14 · 9 answers · asked by ash 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Guyz who are disputing the facts can check out cnn a week back.
2007-02-06 22:27:03 · update #1
Smell a rat, see a rat, step in their droppings. Yes, there is definitly a rat.
It's ironic isn't it? "You Syrians are terrorist, interrogate these guys for us." The only way it makes sense to me is if the "War onTerror" is just a smokescreen. Make the public watch your right hand while the left one stabs you in the back.
2007-02-06 22:26:54 · answer #1 · answered by guy o 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Perhaps you'd have less difficulty if you looked up the word politics. The example you cite has nothing to do with politics, but rather with military strategy. Perhaps what you don't understand is the military mindset and the idea of "winning" a war. I'd suggest enrolling in a military academy. Perhaps you'd learn something in some study of military and battle strategies through the ages. They have remained pretty consistent through the centuries, although the weapons have advanced.
If it makes you feel any better, what you are doing IS political. You are giving a small amount of factual information mixed in with misinformation and outright inaccuracies in order to garner an emotional response and produce sympathy for a particular agenda. Perhaps you understand politics more than you let on.
The terrorist suspect that is in question, by the way, IS Syrian, not Canadian. I wonder what he plans on doing with his more than 10 million dollar gift from the Canadian government. That's YOUR tax dollars hard at work.
Oh, and guess WHO supplied the information and pointed the terrorist finger AT this man? Why, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. Arar's case reached new heights of controversy after Juliet O'Neill wrote an article in the Ottawa Citizen on November 8, 2003, containing information leaked to her from an unknown security source, possibly within the RCMP. The secret documents provided by her source suggested Arar was a trained member of an al-Qaida terrorist cell. The RCMP later raided O'Neill's house pursuant to search warrants it had obtained to investigate the leak.
Point your finger back at Canada if you have a problem with what happened.
2007-02-06 22:20:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
There are two major parties in the United States- the Democratic Party and the Republican Party. Each of these parties chooses one candidate to run on the Presidential ticket. At the moment neither party has made this decision as yet, but rather they are debating about who that candidate should be. Both Clinton and Obama are trying to convince people that they are the best candidate for the Democratic Party. Soon (early next year) there will be elections (what are called primaries) in each state, held by each party, to select their candidate. Each party will hold a convention next summer to officially declare which person will be the candidate for each party. In the Democratic Party only one will be chosen to run for President of the United States. Then this Democratic candidate will run against the candidate the Republicans chose (in the same way), to determine who will actually be the President. Obama and Clinton are of the same party- the Democratic Party. They will only run against each other until one of them (or someone else) is chosen as the Democratic Parties Candidate.
2016-05-24 02:30:44 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
You pose an interesting question and then give us a dozen eggs as proof but we have to guess which ones are rotten.
Please...give us some facts that we can check out.
I might be smelling a rat but just who is the rat?????
2007-02-06 22:20:38 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure if that information you have is correct. Syria is on the U.S. of state sponsered terrorism. I know of terror suspects being transported to Egypt to be interrogated, but never to Syria. Why would we send them back to the governments that sponser them? I think your information is not correct.
2007-02-06 22:18:06 · answer #5 · answered by C J 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
My friend it is like this with me. I love my Country with all my heart, and would give my life for it, but when we go to the Polls to Vote, it is having to choose between the lesser of two evils anymore. You cannot believe anything anyone says while running for office, because AFTER they get elected, by some way, all the promises are *forgotten* I hate to admit this, but it is true.
2007-02-06 22:18:46 · answer #6 · answered by Ex Head 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I think will will be getting pretty serious with Syria soon.
2007-02-06 22:20:09 · answer #7 · answered by Mr. Sniggles 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The answer to this question is obvious. American politicians nowadays don't even understand American politics. :)
2007-02-06 22:16:56 · answer #8 · answered by nemesis_breakz 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
you are misinformed,,,and I am the decider
2007-02-06 22:17:02 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋