an unanticipated consequence of
Jack M. Balkin
Jack Balkin: jackbalkin at yahoo.com
Bruce Ackerman bruce.ackerman at yale.edu
Ian Ayres ian.ayres at yale.edu
Mary Dudziak mary.l.dudziak at emory.edu
Joey Fishkin joey.fishkin at gmail.com
Heather Gerken heather.gerken at yale.edu
Abbe Gluck abbe.gluck at yale.edu
Mark Graber mgraber at law.umaryland.edu
Stephen Griffin sgriffin at tulane.edu
Bernard Harcourt harcourt at uchicago.edu
Scott Horton shorto at law.columbia.edu
Andrew Koppelman akoppelman at law.northwestern.edu
Marty Lederman marty.lederman at comcast.net
Sanford Levinson slevinson at law.utexas.edu
David Luban david.luban at gmail.com
Gerard Magliocca gmaglioc at iupui.edu
Jason Mazzone mazzonej at illinois.edu
Linda McClain lmcclain at bu.edu
John Mikhail mikhail at law.georgetown.edu
Frank Pasquale pasquale.frank at gmail.com
Nate Persily npersily at gmail.com
Michael Stokes Paulsen michaelstokespaulsen at gmail.com
Deborah Pearlstein dpearlst at princeton.edu
Rick Pildes rick.pildes at nyu.edu
Alice Ristroph alice.ristroph at shu.edu
Neil Siegel siegel at law.duke.edu
Brian Tamanaha btamanaha at wulaw.wustl.edu
Mark Tushnet mtushnet at law.harvard.edu
Adam Winkler winkler at ucla.edu
Maher Arar, what are you going to do with all that money? Well, I'm not going to Disney World
The Canadian government has given Maher Arar a settlement worth 8.9 million U.S. dollars. Arar, a Canadian software engineer, was detained by American officials on the basis of false statements made by Canadian police. He was deported to Syria where he was repeatedly tortured. A Canadian judicial commission exculpated Arar and recommended compensation. The settlement includes payment of his legal expenses.
One thing Arar won't be able to do with that 8.9 million is travel by plane to the United States. Arar is still on the American government's terrorist watch and no fly list.
And that makes perfect sense: We can't have people who have been wrongfully accused of being terrorists and sent off by American officials to be tortured running around the United States telling their stories. It might undermine people's confidence in the War on Terror. And besides, if he really wants to commit terrorist acts in the United States, he can always rent a car and drive across the border like everybody else. Posted
by JB [link]
I was in Canada when the head of the RCMP (Zacardelli) tried to explain to Parliment why they told the US that it was ok to send Arar to Syria.
He finally had to resign, but it took a MAJOR political push to oust the head of the mounties. Ordinary Canadians were horrified and mortified, but both the Tory and Liberal leaders were uncomfortably blase about the case.
And yeah, having Arar speaking at Mosques, Churches and Temples (Hindu, Jewish & Sihk)across the US would cause the US government to squirm, just a tad.
When I went to Toronto, I took the bus one way, the train the other.
As an aside, I notice Sandy Levinson has a rejoinder to Elizabeth Holtzman's push for impeachment.
I understand the political and time related concerns. But, I really don't see this problem with trying to obtain some strong charge against Bush. The treatment of Arar alone was a "high crime or misdemeanor" in my book. Others are supplied by EH.
If one of our hosts would like to post about the "grounds" to impeach Mr. Bush, I am sure we could have a lively discussion.
Personally, as a former prosecutor, I find Elizabeth Holtzman's idea of prosecutorial discretion as disturbing as that of Ronnie Earle, Mike Nifong and Patrick Fitzgerald. Actual evidence applied to actual crimes appear to fall behind politics in their estimation.
We've all known for quite some time that our "friend" Bart is delusional, but when he assigns Ronnie Earle and Patrick Fitzgerald to the same category as Mike Nifong -- that's not merely delusional. That's downright stupid. In the fullness of time, juries in Washington and Austin, and the disciplinary authorities in North Carolina, will make the distinction clear even to the stupid and delusional among us.
We've all known for quite some time that our "friend" Bart is delusional, but when he assigns Ronnie Earle and Patrick Fitzgerald to the same category as Mike Nifong -- that's not merely delusional. That's downright stupid.
Agreed. And Earle and Fatzgerald are far more prfessional than ... ummmm, Kenneth Starr, ferinstance.
Pathological lying, pseudologia fantastica, mythomania and morbid lying are generally used interchangeably, although it remains debatable whether they all describe the same phenomenon. Indeed, Bursten's7 description of Manipulative Personality shows characteristics similar to those of pathological lying. Nevertheless, for the purpose of this article, we make no distinction among the terms just described. In addition, we confine our discussion to the narrow phenomenon of pathological lying and do not consider the broader concept of lying. The latter subject has been the object of considerable discussion.
Many articles have variously defined pseudologia fantastica, but a commonly quoted definition is that put forth by Healy and Healy8 who described it as "falsification entirely disproportionate to any discernible end in view, may be extensive and very complicated, manifesting over a period of years or even a lifetime, in the absence of definite insanity, feeblemindedness or epilepsy" (Ref. 8, p 1). While this is a very comprehensive definition, it raises the question of whether definite insanity, feeblemindedness, or epilepsy must be absent for lying to be considered pathological.
Selling disagreed. He believed that "obvious mental disease, particularly a diagnosable psychopathic personality of some type" (Ref. 9, p 336) was responsible for pseudologia fantastica.
While no consensus definition for pathological lying currently exists in the literature, the identified functional elements of the phenomenon are: the repeated utterance of untruths; the lies are often repeated over a period of years, with the lies eventually becoming a lifestyle; material reward or social advantage does not appear to be the primary motivating force but the lying is an end in itself; an inner dynamic rather than an external reason drives the lies, but when an external reason is suspected, the lies are far in excess of the suspected external reason; the lies are often woven into complex narratives...