Story continues below ↓   

"He recounts that while imprisoned in Syria, he was beaten and tortured, and in some respects, most offensively, forced to make a false confession. He was returned to Canada in October 2003, and some three years later, a Canadian-government commission of inquiry cleared him of all terrorism allegations, stating, 'There is no evidence to indicate that Mr. Arar has committed any offense.' 
 "Ironically, the same Administration that criticized the Speaker of the House for leading a bipartisan delegation to Syria believed it was acceptable to send the citizen of another country there where he was tortured. 
 "With cases like this, it s no wonder that former Secretary of State Colin Powell has stated: 'The world is beginning to doubt the moral basis of our fight against terrorism.' 
 "Nor have we helped our cause by dispensing with centuries-old legal concepts such as habeas corpus. And, the Administration s penchant for presidential signing statements that assert a right of the President to effectively ignore all or part of the laws he signs must give all of us pause. 
 "It is long past time for effective Congressional oversight and Judicial review of this Administration s actions. 
 "As our fourth President James Madison, wrote in Federalist Paper Number 47 more than 200 years ago: 'The accumulation of all powers legislative, executive, and judiciary in the same hands, whether of one, a few or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.' 
 "The Administration s unchecked violation of Americans civil liberties and accepted international norms of behavior do not serve our nation well. Indeed, they not only do violence to our values and constitutional principles, but also sully our reputation throughout the world and threaten to undermine the rule of law. 
 "All of this makes us less not more safe; these tactics are inspiring more hatred toward the United States; these tactics endanger Americans who fall into enemy hands; and these tactics divert precious resources to innocents rather than those who do seek to harm us. 
 "The result, unfortunately, is deeply disturbing and demands serious soul-searching and evaluation not only in Congress but among the American people. 
 

Two Areas in Which Congress Must Take a Stand FISA and Habeas Corpus 
 "Today, in Congress, Democrats in both the House and Senate are committed to revisiting the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which was amended by the Protect America Act in August. 
 "The Protect America Act provides sweeping new powers to the government to engage in warrantless surveillance of international calls to and from the United States and potentially much more. 
 "Indeed, some FISA experts testified in Congress in September that the PAA authorizes searches of Americans homes, offices, and computer usage, as long as the government is collecting foreign intelligence about communications that 'concern' persons abroad. 
 "The PAA also effectively cuts the FISA Court out of any meaningful role in overseeing surveillance of Americans. 
 "In contrast, the RESTORE Act -- introduced by Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers and Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes is a carefully crafted measure that gives our intelligence community the tools it needs to listen in on those who seek to harm us, while addressing concerns that the bill passed in August could authorize warrantless surveillance of Americans. 
 "This legislation addresses the intelligence gap asserted by the Director of National Intelligence, and restores a checks-and-balances role for the FISA Court. 
 "It does not require a warrant for listening in on suspected and known terrorists. In fact, it clarifies that no court order is required for surveillance of conversations where both parties are foreign citizens. 
 "It does not extend constitutional rights to suspected or known terrorists. Nor does it delay the collection of intelligence information. It grants the Attorney General and DNI authority to apply to the FISA Court for a block order to conduct surveillance on large groups of foreign targets for up to one year. 
 "Finally, this legislation is silent on the issue of retroactive immunity for telecommunications companies that possibly violated privacy laws in turning over consumer information because Congress does not have full access to information about what the companies did. 
 "Simply stated, it would be grossly irresponsible for Congress to grant blanket immunity for companies without even knowing whether their conduct was legal or not. And, importantly, this view is shared by the Chairman and Ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee. 
 "Until we understand what legal authorities were used to justify the terrorist surveillance program, there does not appear to be any practicable way to include retroactive immunity in this bill. 
 "I am proud of the RESTORE Act. The bill provides the tools to protect Americans and reflects an understanding of the most basic concepts in our constitutional form of government: the proposition that we, indeed, are a nation of laws, and that our Founders deliberately designed our three branches to serve as a check and balance on each other. 
 

The Fundamental Right of Habeas Corpus 
 "Let me add that I also believe we made a tremendous mistake in eliminating the right of habeas corpus. Congress must revisit this issue. 
 "The writ of habeas corpus has a hallowed history. Initially mentioned in the Magna Charta of 1215, it is enshrined in our Constitution and is not dependent on any act of Congress. 
 "Nonetheless, the Congress eliminated habeas corpus in the Military Commissions Act in 2005, against the objections of civil libertarians and conservatives alike. 
 "For example, constitutional scholar Bruce Fein, who served as Deputy Attorney General in the Reagan Administration has stated: 'Not a crumb of evidence has been adduced suggesting that the writ would risk freeing terrorists to return to fight against the United States.' 
 "Clearly, the Combatant Status Review Tribunals established by the Military Commissions Act were set up for a different purpose to classify detainees as 'enemy combatants' or not. But such CSRTs are a fundamentally flawed process. 
 "They have come under increasing criticism with all but 38 of 558 detainees being classified as enemy combatants in 2004 and 2005, meaning that those deemed enemy combatants could be held indefinitely without many of the rights afforded conventional prisoners of war. 
 "And recently, Lt. Col. Stephen Abraham, an Army reservist who was a liaison between Guantanamo tribunals and intelligence agencies, and others have told Congress and the Supreme Court that tribunal members felt pressured to find against detainees. 
 "'They were specifically designed,' said Lt. Col. Abraham, 'to reach a result and, in the few instances where a contrary result was reached, pressure was exerted to change the decision, a new tribunal was selected' or the decision was disregarded. 
 

Conclusion 
 "Let me conclude by stressing that there is no doubt that our eyes were opened by the horrific attacks on September 11, 2001. 
 "We will and we must prevail in the war on terror. 
 "However, in the pursuit of those who seek to harm us, we must not sacrifice the very ideals that distinguish us from those who preach death and destruction and the very ideals that will allow us to ultimately prevail over violent jihadism. 
 "This does not mean that we will coddle those who are accused of participating in or planning terrorist acts. 
 "When Saddam Hussein was taken out of a hole and captured, we afforded him his legal right to hear the evidence against him, to contest that evidence, and to be represented by counsel. 
 "When Slobodan Milosevic was brought to justice after murdering tens of thousands and sanctioning the ethnic cleansing of more than two million people, he was afforded his legal rights. 
 "And even the butchers of Berlin who committed genocide, murdering millions of innocents were afforded their legal rights at Nuremburg. 
 "To the law students who are here: I commend you for choosing to pursue a career in this honorable profession indeed, a profession upon which the functioning of our democracy depends. 
 "Do not let the legal overreaching that we see today in this nation discourage you. Let it inspire you to redouble your efforts to fight for the rule of law and the values and legal principles that make this nation the greatest nation on the face of the earth. 
 "And, let us never forget the admonition of Justice Felix Frankfurter, some 64 years ago in McNabb v. United States: 'The history of liberty,' he said, 'has largely been the history of the observance of procedural safeguards.' 
 "We must not let our guard down either against those who seek to harm us or those who would dishonor our values and the rule of law in the name of national security. 
 "The civil liberties we enjoy today are the direct result of the sacrifice and persistence of our forebears. I know you agree: Your generation and the ones that follow deserve no less. 
 "Thank you."