Maher Arar 's insane war with the United States

Ok, what the hell is this?

Arar case closed, U.S. ambassador says

Mar 01, 2007 03:11 PM Canadian Press

The U.S. ambassador to Canada says there won't be another review of Maher Arar's place on a security watch list for the time being.

David Wilkins said today that his government completed a review of Arar's case a few weeks ago and stands by its actions.

He said the matter is now closed.

Arar can't fly into the United States even though he was exonerated of any terrorist ties by a Canadian inquiry.

He also received $10.5 million in compensation from the federal government and is currently suing U.S. officials.

The engineer was detained by U.S. officials in New York in 2002 and deported to Syria, where he was tortured while imprisoned for 10 months.

I don't know about you, but I was always taught that it is more graceful to admit when you've made a mistake than to continue to pretend that you are in the right when you have been proven wrong.

Here's what gets me the most:

In January, U.S. Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said a secret file on Arar showed their decision was “appropriate.”

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day said that Canadian officials looked at the file and found nothing to suggest Arar was a safety risk. (http://www.metronews.ca/story.aspx?id=33502)

So, what? They have a difference of opinion? The U.S. definition of "public safety" is more far-reaching and invasive to individuals than the Canadian one? Or perhaps Chertoff and Gonzales have another 'secret file' on Arar, and when they connect the dots between this file and that file, they can see that his family vacation in 2002 was indeed a terrorist operation; with his four-year old daughter as the possible point-person -- but of course, they aren't going to share that information with the Canadian government. That would just be silly.

Only two U.S. senators have come out to say anything about this case that makes any sense; they are Patrick Leahy of Vermont and Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania. Shout-outs to them for speaking up ... but come on guys, what's going on there now?

It seems childish an immature, but I think that this is a typically American attitude that is at work: stick with your original story. No matter how hairy things get. Then they can never accuse you of changing your mind or making a mistake. (Wouldn't want to seem too human, now, would we?)

I'm too upset to lecture on this topic; it's been all over the Canadian media for months (partly because the Canadian authorities actually had the guts to admit that they screwed up), but I'm sure it hasn't made nearly as much of a splash in the U.S. For more info on the Maher Arar Case, check out some of these links.

To read the Canadian Government's Official Maher Arar Commission: http://www.ararcommission.ca/eng/index.htm

For a summary of Maher Arar's story, check out the Maher Arar website: http://www.maherarar.ca/index.php

For an intelligent and poignant interview with Arar on CBC Radio's The Current, go to http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/podcast.html, subscribe to the Current podcast in iTunes (it's free), and download the September 19, 2006 podcast.

Supplies from Seattle?

So. I work at a Starbucks in downtown Toronto. Earlier today, my manager is expecting a shipment of stock and supplies to arrive. It hasn't. He makes some calls and asks around over the course of the early afternoon.

Now, I am only a barista ... but over the next few minutes, I continue to overhear bits of a conversation between my Store Manager and Assistant Store Manager, both of whom are trying to solve this quandary of the MIA supplies. Between making change for over sixty people's twenties and trying my best to properly call each decaf, triple, tall, one-pump, nonfat, hazelnut americano (or other complicated, personalized, foreign Starbucks-language-coded drink), I may have missed out on some of the details. However, I know that by 3:30 pm, enough concern had been generated over the undelivered goods that my managers decided that a call to Seattle -- to Starbucks' head supply office -- was in order. Apparently, we were not the only store in the GTA not to have received its shipment this weekend. None of our local superiors could give us any more information; so, we took our query right to the source.

As I sit there in the back room, counting my till, I hear the following exchange between my manager and the person on the other end of the line:

"Oh ... it's not coming today? ...

"Oh ... not tomorrow? ...

"Ok. Thank you ..."

Apparently, they're not working at the Seattle supply office this weekend. Some sort of holiday.

Why aren't they working, my Assistant Manager asks out loud? The answer, of course, hits me: Presidents' Day.

This weekend is Presidents' Day weekend in the US -- the amalgamation of two holidays that were historically meant to honour Lincoln and Washington's birthdays, and in some states, Jefferson's birthday as well. (For any clueless Canadian readers, Presidents' Day is the American catch-all equivalent of our May 24 long weekend, Victoria Day).

The fact that, for whatever reason, our Toronto Starbucks' location did not know that Presidents' Day would put a wrench in their supply schedule is somewhat amusingly ironic to my ears. Apparently, Canadian operations were too clueless to realize that an American holiday even existed this weekend, or managers and suppliers in Seattle did not think to notify Canadian operations that this would be the case (or perhaps -- a bureaucratic nightmare -- both). And this from a company that is easily the most successful coffee chain in the world -- a corporation that ought to be renowned for its efficiency!

The whole thing reeks of Canadian and American miscommunication.

I think Canadian and American businesses -- especially American businesses -- assume that the culture on either side of the border is so similar, that they can treat the foreign Canadian or American market as simply an extension of their home country's operations without thinking of the logistic, cultural, and technical consequences of doing business internationally.

One thing is for certain: I won't be coming in specially to receive a shipment of supplies on May 24th. If Starbucks and other like-minded corporations want their international operations to run smoothly, they'd better take the time to learn something about the country they are doing business in, and they'd better learn to coordinate information and operations between those countries.

And if they were really smart, they would learn to use the local vernacular, too (See "Sacred Milk" blog entry, 02/08/07).