Born Free

You must have missed all the news about that. They did engage in it....with a little help from their friends..

So says he....

Been to Vietnam lately?

Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 548 U.S. 557 (2006), is a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that military commissions set up by the Bush administration to try detainees at Guantanamo Bay lack "the power to proceed because its structures and procedures violate both the Uniform Code of Military Justice and the four Geneva Conventions signed in 1949."[1] Specifically, the ruling says that Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions was violated. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamdan_v._Rumsfeld

What I'm doing is that I'm supporting my argument that Harper and the boys are thugs. Giving examples of their past behaviour is a rather good way to demonstrate that fact. Calling one of their diplomats names or applying lables to him is simply a more current example of their thuggery. I'm sorry that you arent able to see it for what it is...unless of course you honestly believe that the words were never said by Mackay .....or Harper for that matter. Well do you? I characterize it as a collective body of work that they share and it isnt pretty.

It relates to your own previous assertion Morris.... "It means dead terrorists and a friendly government." The conditions have been met. Time to leave.

I'm not dodging anything. Even the mere suggestion that a man in his position was "duped" by the enemy and that he was a "suspect source" is typical of their thugery. You have conveniently forgotton how Harper and the boys accused Paul Martin of being soft on child porn. More thuggery.

I'm not dodging anything. Even the mere suggestion that a man in his position was "duped" by the enemy and that he was a "suspect source" is typical of their thugery. You have conveniently forgotton how Harper and the boys accused Paul Martin of being soft on child porn. More thuggery.

There are no semantics about it. If you are absolutely denying that the term "dupe" and "suspect source" were not used on Colvin... that is another matter. I contend that MacKay is a thug as only a thug would stoop to that kind of discourse. I recall the indicent with his nasty canine comment about Belinda Stronach...oh no...he's a thug alright...

No. Mackay is calling him a "suspect source" and a "dupe"...thats definitely character assasination. Had he simply said that Colvin was too quick to believe what he had been told ... different story. Ergo Mackay is a thug in shining armour who is simply trying to emulate Harpers style..

Lots of dead terrorists over there and Karzai is as friendly as Hell. His Swiss bank accounts will tell you that. Time to leave Afghanistan...

Silly little man.........

I agree.

Of course it was. I didnt make that stuff up. Defence Minister Peter MacKay has described Colvin as a "suspect source" who has been duped by Taliban-planted stories in Afghanistan. CTV

I'll wait to see what is brought to light at the trial. If convicted of committing terrorism, then put him away forever. If convicted of the alleged murder by tossing a handgrenade, then put him away for as long as the law allows. I'm just pleased that the law was upheld to grant him a tial.

I guess we both had dumb shits as leaders.... except for the fact that ours had a better bullshit detector than yours did.

Dats hokay...hits water under de fridge...

Of course he did. If you honestly believe that Harper was against sending troops to Iraq... carry on soldier. "I noted that there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein operates programs to produce weapons of mass destruction. Experience confirms this. British, Canadian and American intelligence leaves no doubt on the matter. Failure to do so (ie. topple Saddam) is not fitting with the greatness of our history or with our standing as a nation. -- Harper House of Commons - January 2003 "Nay." -- Harper voting against a motion urging the Canadian government not to participate in the US military intervention in Iraq, March 20, 2003.

Dont apologize. I have alread acknowledged that my timing was off as to when he said it...but not the context nor the essence of what the two faced Harper has said. If you cant get past it...thats your problem..

Anyone who says the dumb shit stuff that he had said in the past ..aint very smart. You might want to check the Harvard alumni donation list to see how much that degree cost his old man. It wasnt the first one that was purchased and it wont be the last.

What I am suggesting is that two guys say that there was information passed to military authorities that torture was going on. The Minister guy says that there was no evidenc of torture going on. Then you have Hillier saying that he never heard suggestions that Canada may have been indirectly complicit in the torture of detainees in Afghanistan. Any CO who waits for bad things to happen instead of taking action to see that bad things do not happen is a sure recipe for having lots of bad things to happen. Who to believe....who to believe...

..this is just for your below average mind....what I wrote was.... in June 2004, in the run-up to the election that year. Harper told reporters that he was only advocating morally supporting Bush and Tony Blair. Later in June, as the campaign began, he said he hadn't wanted to send Canadian troops to Iraq for the invasion, he was thinking of a pre-deployment before the war to scare Saddam.

Of course its relavent. Any conflicting testimony is relevant. Character assasination you say? The character assination you speak of was all done by Mackay when he smeard Colvin as a Taliban dupe.

Fine. If you must...do continue to believe what MacKay has said....and I'll take under advisement what Richard Colvin and General Natynczyk have had to say.

Some of your fellow countrymen still cling to the belief that it was an intelligence failure.. The only intelligence failure was Bush.