Wikipedia

Talk:Diane Ablonczy

Latest comment: 6 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified
Learn more about this page

Untitled

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Quite a slant in the paragraphs about Arar, this does go against the neutrality principle of Wikipedia.

  • I've adjusted the wording. Feel free to make further changes if you think the current wording is POV (it's entirely accurate as a description, though, and a source has been provided). CJCurrie 21:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)Reply

Remove Question

edit

I would like to see the reference to the question on Arar removed. I don’t know the appropriate way to put this up for discussion, so I am putting this message on the discussion page as well as my talk page. I invite CJCurrie to read and consider this before doing another split-second revert. My reasons for the removal are as follows:

  • Taking one out-of-context question made in a fourteen-year career that covers thousands of Hansard pages full of questions, statements, and speeches, and inserting it in the middle of a factual “CV” is inappropriate. Isn’t this supposed to be an “encyclopedia?”
  • The fact is that AT THE TIME the question did NOT create any great political controversy. Only with hindsight about the terrible injustice done to Mr. Arar is the question raised by Ms. Ablonczy controversial, made to look even more so because of editorial slant.
  • AT THE TIME information had just come to light (during a visit by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell) that the FBI provided information about Maher Arar to the RCMP weeks ago. This seemed to confirm earlier allegations that there was a terrorist connection. I am giving you several newspaper sources to back that up. [1] [2] [3] [4]. Ms. Ablonczy undoubtedly had her own sources.
  • It is in the above CONTEXT that the questions were asked and the thrust of Ms. Ablonczy’s (and other MPs’) questions – as anyone who reads them in context can see for themselves [1] - was on the adequacy of the government’s screening and security checks process. These are the types of questions opposition MPs legitimately ask when trying to hold the government accountable and get to the bottom of things. Ms. Ablonczy was doing her job, although with the wisdom of hindsight her choice of words was unfortunate.
  • The tragic story of Mr. Maher Arar is well documented in a full Wikipedia page – this out-of-context reference has no place here. TapuyoGN 22:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Further Comments re: above

edit

As the above user (Tipuyo) mentions, Mr. Arar did suffer a terrible injustice. However, the issue at hand is that the commentary may be written in such a way as to only marginally avoid full violation of the neutrality principle. Using such verbiage as "Ablonczy accused......", followed by the Arar case information may lead the reader into speculating about Ablonczy's intent during that particular QP. I also agree that the commentary, as it is currently written, seems incongruent given the overall context of the article. If the statement in question must remain, perhaps some further context / qualification would be useful to potenital readers? Firstpastthepost Sept 28, 2007

References

edit
  1. ^ Cheney, Peter,"Allegations against Canadian revealed, "The Globe and Mail, October 18, 2002 page A13
  2. ^ Trickey, Mike, “FBI told RCMP Ottawa man had terror link: Embarrassed officials admit U.S. sent evidence about Maher Arar”,“The Ottawa Citizen”,November 18, 2002 page A1
  3. ^ Naumetz, Tim,“Manley won't discuss Arar case: Liberals accused of losing control after FBI says RCMP knew about terror allegations, kept mum”,“The Ottawa Citizen”, November 19, 2002
  4. ^ Trickey, Mike, “Red-faced officials admit to having terror suspect data: Canada claimed U.S. withheld information”,“Calgary Herald”, November 18, 2002 page A6


Per Request

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Ottawa not helping deportee, NDP says PETER CHENEY 19 October 2002 The Globe and Mail Metro A6

Prime Minister Jean Chretien has come under attack for his government's "dismissive response" to the case of a Canadian who was deported to Syria by the United States.

NDP leader Alexa McDonough says that Mr. Chretien and the Liberals have not done nearly enough to find out what happened to Maher Arar, an Ottawa telecommunications engineer who was sent to Syria after being arrested by U.S. immigration officials during a stopover while flying home to Canada.

Mr. Arar's family have not heard from him since Oct. 3, shortly before his deportation.

"Canadians cannot trust their government to defend or protect their rights abroad," Ms. McDonough said in a statement that was delivered to Mr. Chretien's office yesterday. "I am deeply distressed by your dismissive response to the United States's illegal imprisonment, interrogation and deportation of a Canadian citizen of Arabic origin."

Mr. Arar, who lived in Ottawa with his wife and two children, was arrested at New York's John F. Kennedy Airport on Sept. 26 and subjected to a series of lengthy interrogations in which he was accused of belonging to al-Qaeda. He was later deported to Syria, even though he was carrying a Canadian passport.

Please note that this article was published a full month before Ablonczy made her statements in the HoC. I trust that other editors will not longer use the excuse of "she was only doing her best with the information she had at the time". CJCurrie 20:10, 8 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oct 8 to CJCurrie

edit
Latest comment: 17 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion

On Sept 10 you stated “the questions are accurately portrayed” – yet 5 minutes later you removed the most slanted section, tacitly admitting that they were NOT accurately portrayed. As Firstpastthepost suggests, there is still editorializing even in the remaining wording.

Actually, I chose to remove the assertion that Ablonczy supported America's decision to deport Arar (it's fairly obvious that she did, but she didn't say so explicitly -- therefore, the claim had to be removed). CJCurrie 21:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

On Sept 24 you conceded that her comments “were strongly criticized in a later period” which is exactly the point I had been making on this discussion page. As Judge Benotto said in her tainted blood judgement: “Discipline is required to ensure that subsequently acquired knowledge is not imported into the analysis.” Or to quote your own words on Bob Rae’s page on Sept 23 when you deleted someone else’s contributions: “I trust you are not a political neophyte. Something can be “factually correct” and still be presented out of context.” I suggest you apply that wisdom here.

On Oct 2 you stated: “At the time Ablonczy made her statement, some members of the NDP were already calling for the govt to intervene and secure his freedom.” I challenged you to supply sources for that from that EXACT time period (middle of November), when allegations of a terrorist connection were gaining new support (I have supplied several sources above). Instead you supply one from a month earlier – further mixing up the time line.

Ablonczy was questioning the government’s security processes, based on the situation of November 18. It should be noted that this was a one time question and supplementary, and neither she nor the Opposition Caucus did pursue the matter any further. You are trying to blow it up into a controversy, which it was not. It took the O’Connor inquiry to finally – years later - establish the facts. TapuyoGN 20:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm not going to respond to all of this, but since you've asked for clarity as regards the timeline, you may find this interesting ...

Foreign Affairs distances itself from Maher Arar 18 November 2002 CTV News - PM

Host(s): LLOYD ROBERTSON

LLOYD ROBERTSON: The shadowy case against a Syrian Canadian is shrouded in mystery and innuendo. Maher Arar, who is a citizen of both Canada and Syria, was arrested in the US, declared a terrorist and deported to Syria. At the time, Ottawa cried foul, but now suddenly it's done an about-face, and as CTV's Roger Smith tells us, the question is why?

ROGER SMITH (Reporter): Maher Arar was first portrayed as a victim of US injustice, now he's fingered as an alleged terrorist who slipped through Canadian hands.

DIANE ABLONCZY (Canadian Alliance MP - Alberta): The fact is, he wasn't properly checked.

SMITH: Arar, a Syrian-Canadian with dual citizenship was arrested in September at a New York airport and deported to Syria after US allegations he belonged to al-Qaeda. His brother denied it.

UNIDENTIFIED MAN: He has no links to terrorists, nothing, he have no links at all.

SMITH: For weeks, Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham complained about Arar's treatment and demanded more evidence. But last week, US Secretary of State Colin Powell defended the US action and Ottawa suddenly changed its tune. Foreign Affairs now says Canada is closely collaborating with other international agencies. Still, there was no comment on reports that the RCMP tried to question Arar last January, or on the new evidence against him.

JOHN MANLEY (Deputy Prime Minister): We would not, in any circumstances, of course, disclose information of that sort.

SMITH: For the opposition, it's proof of holes in Canadian security.

ABLONCZY: How is it the US could uncover this man's background so quickly when this government's screening system failed to find his al-Qaeda links?

STEPHEN HARPER (Opposition Leader): We may have a cover-up, but what we've likely got is just pure bungling.

SMITH: But the NDP leader accuses the Alliance of being too quick to condemn Arar.

ALEXA MCDONOUGH (NDP Leader): They're sounding like the judge, jury and the executioner based on rumours that are unsubstantiated about someone's guilt or innocence.

SMITH: With Arar being held in a Syrian jail, it's still not clear what the evidence is against him. But the careful new line out of Ottawa does raise questions about why he was never interrogated in Canada. Roger Smith, CTV News, Ottawa.

CJCurrie 21:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

RESPONSE by TapuyoGN: That’s great! I think this article is an excellent example of what was being debated on that particular day: new information having just come to light that caused a government “about-face”, and the Opposition questioning the government’s security measures. It even quotes from Ablonczy’s questions – in the proper context! And it supports your point that the NDP was taking a different approach (credit to Mrs. McDonough), although it hardly shows an appeal to “secure his freedom”. An extract from a CTV article the next day makes the confusing situation of that time even more clear:

"U.S. says deported Canadian belongs to al Qaeda - CTV News Staff, Updated: Tue. Nov. 19 2002 4:23 PM ET The shadowy case against a Canadian is becoming shrouded in even more confusion. The Americans now say that Maher Arar is a member of al Qaeda.

Arar, who was born in Syria and holds dual citizenship, was detained in the United States and deported to Syria a month ago. The 32-year-old was travelling to Montreal from Tunisia when he was taken into custody.

The foreign affairs department, which had been pushing Arar's case with the Americans, has suddenly backed-off. The opposition is accusing the government of trying to defend a suspected terrorist.

New information reveals Arar had been under RCMP watch for more than a year. While the federal government is not commenting directly on Arar's case, it is no longer challenging the American position.” End of quote.

TapuyoGN 04:35, 11 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Revise text

edit

My previous attempts to address the above issue by providing reasoned arguments for removal were immediately countered by CJCurrie, who keeps reverting within minutes. I don’t want to get into an edit war, but I also am not willing to give up on making this a balanced and factual biography. I therefore am now making the following changes:

  • add information on a far more substantial part of Ms. Ablonczy’s career than this one question, to provide a little balance
  • provide context for the Arar question (see discussion above and CTV news article quoted by CJCurrie) and replace editorializing with factual quotes
  • restructure and create a new section to provide a cleaner flow of information .

I understand that proper procedure is for other editors to now work on the wording until there is agreement, so I expect CJCurrie to leave this new version up for discussion or suggest changes, not just do another point blank revert.

TapuyoGN 20:13, 14 October 2007 (UTC)Reply


As I stated previously, without additional context the impression the newly inserted Arar section creates may lead the reader to draw biased conclusions about the intent of the question. I have inserted another direct quote and re-inserted some context, supported by references, in hopes of providing some additional balance. The second reference was originally provided by CJCurrie on October 8 on this talk page and agreed to by TapyuoGN as acceptable.

Firstpastthepost 21:00, 28 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Diane Ablonczy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:50, 10 September 2017 (UTC)Reply

edit
Latest comment: 6 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Diane Ablonczy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:21, 10 December 2017 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Diane_Ablonczy&oldid=1197860893"