To: zonder who wrote (16035 ) 3/22/2005 12:59:31 PM From: Sully- Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 20773 Well, well, well, a glimpse of a hint of info from the gov't........U.S. officials said Tuesday that Arar was deported because he had been put on a terrorist watch list after information from "multiple international intelligence agencies" linked him to terrorist groups ... That's it. Not a single other piece of evidence from the gov'ts perspective on this case. And then the rest of the story reverts to a slanted, one sided story with almost all of the so called evidence coming from unnamed "officials" that all supports your POV. How utterly convenient (and slanted, biased & unbelievable too). <...Officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said....> . I just love how the liberal MSM loves unnamed "officials", don't you? Well, OK, you do since the unnamed "officials" are telling you what you want to hear.<...A senior U.S. intelligence official discussed the case in terms of the secret rendition policy....> Another unnamed "official" adding to the slanted, almost completely one sided report from the liberal MSM.<...The U.S. government officially rejects the assertion that it knowingly sends suspects abroad to be tortured, but officials admit they sometimes do that....> And yet another unnamed "official" adding to the slanted, almost completely one sided report from the liberal MSM.<...One senior intelligence official said Tuesday that Arar is still believed to have connections to al Qaeda. The Justice Department did not have enough evidence to detain him when he landed in the United States, the official said, and "the CIA doesn't keep people in this country."...> And yet another unnamed "official" adding to the slanted, almost completely one sided report from the liberal MSM.<...With those limitations, and with a secret presidential "finding" authorizing the CIA to place suspects in foreign hands without due process, Arar may have been one of the people whisked overseas by the CIA....> LOL! A "secret" that apparently isn't a "secret". And it's stated as "fact" without a hint of evidence where the Post got it.So this is your way of providing me with objective reporting from both sides of this story that presents credible evidence from reliable sources? LOL! I'm so thoroughly nonplussed! But I'm not surprised in the least. I'm sure you honestly believe you set me straight with genuine, objective, unassailable evidence. NOT! :-)