Fortunata

ArmyGuy, nobody is accusing Canadian soldiers themselves of being abusive. Lets get that straight right off the bat. If anything I believe that most of us believe you (as in Cdn soldiers in Afghanistan) are acting with great restraint and propriety in very dangerous and trying situations. The system of handing over detainees to Afghan authorities who may (I'll give you that one) abuse is the problem. It's our system that should be held to our standards. The people who don't care if detainees are mistreated, even though they have not had charges, trials or sentencing are by their very statements, saying that we should lower our standards to those of a basically lawless and cruel society.

I agree with you on the part about elections on polls and/or whims. I don't agree with you about Steve doing the attack ads before we are in an actual election. Electioneering does go on always but not full-blown like this government has been doing. I hate attack ads by anybody, I just wish they would so backfire no party would use them. I'd like to hear what they would do not what the other guys won't or whatever. Promises, you know, like income trust and the GST. Do you (or does anyone) know the answer to my question about how the dates would work in a non-confidence situation?

Then how would that work? A government brought down half way through a "fixed" period, would we then have a new fixed period or the new government rules until the end of the old fixed period? My biggest objection to fixed dates was that we would get electioneering seemingly forever like happens in the USA but Steve has not stopped electioneering since his ad campaign started who knows how long before an election is even called.

It's only wrong and bad politics if the Liberals do it. The Harpercrites can see nothing wrong in anything Steve does.

You know ArmyGuy, you jump on the jump to conclusion bandwagon a bit too often. Because Harper puts out this political spin that you can't both support our troops and not want to see prisoner mistreatment you buy into it? I am a big "L" Liberal if I think we can do both? The Steve propaganda lives on in many forms. Let me make myself perfectly clear. I am not a big "L" Liberal; I don't vote for them and the only reason I would want to see them back in power is to get Steve the hell out of it. I don't buy any party line and think political rhetoric is meant for the brainless masses who either can't or don't want to bother thinking for themselves. You can parrot Steve all you want but that doesn't make you right. And just because you are a Steve parrot doesn't make me not believe in our people in Afghanistan; that we have ideals different from Afghan ideals and that we don't lower ourselves to other's standards. Too idealistic for you? Tough. My email to my MP before the big vote was: So ArmyGuy, I have suggested leaving it in your hands. Do I have to be a Conservative to believe in what you do? Or is a non-Con believing just too much for you to take in?

Yes Steve.

Sickening, scurrilous comment. Where is the conflict between following our international obligations and protecting the troops? There is no conflict. But this is what the Steve government does, misrepresents and lies to serve their political purposes. And some people are just too happy to parrot this nonsense just because they can. We signed on to the Geneva conventions. We should operate anywhere in the world with those rules. We are not a society that cannot care about our troops AND human rights. We are multifaceted and can walk and chew gum at the same time. Most Canadians are smart enough to realize that we are being lied to. We are constantly told about the "good" we are doing (and I don't believe we are not doing good), girls are going to school without fear (human right is it not?), we are there helping set up an accountable government, justice system, etc. then on the other hand we have these same people saying that tortures and/or mistreatments by these same institutions are OK because they are "Taliban" (not really human?) and that if a few good innocent people fall through the cracks, oh well (betsy), them's the breaks? Afghans don't see this confusing and hypocritical stance we take? Either we are there to help or we aren't. It's as simple as that. And for those who say there was the same problem under the Liberals need to get your head around this: The Conservatives form the government right now. It is theirs to do. No amount of blame and finger pointing on a former government negates the need for action under their governance.

So betsy, are you denying that man has had anything at all to do with climate change? Think about this: No matter where man has been we have caused pollution. We have air pollution, water pollution, soil pollution. It has taken (and will take more) years to clean up some of these things. Wouldn't it make sense, given these examples, that man has had something to do with what is happening in our atmosphere?

My parents were raised with the understanding that the police are your friends. The police are there to help you. They did not teach their children the same thing - they taught that if you were respectful and law-abiding you would be likely not be in need of the police nor in conflict with them. I will be teaching something different again - obey and respect the law and stay away from law enforcement whenever you can.

If they are paying for the meals themselves - great, good for them. If the taxpayers are paying and it's not being declared - very, very bad. If lobbyists are paying that just smacks of conflict of interest and all should be asked to resign. They know the rules.

From my view, it isn't that things haven't been happening within the RCMP for years. I guess I don't think that the RCMP should have political interference UNLESS something like the pension thing comes up and can't be handled satisfactorily internally. What I don't understand is that when former and current officers started contacting government officials because of inaction or inappropriate actions by RCMP higher-ups, nothing was brought forward until the papers and the opposition parties were brought into it. Even then the Conservatives refused to bring these RCMP in to testify. Why? Now they act outraged.

Maybe you could give us all a list of topics you think are serious enough to be concerned about so we know what we should all discuss.

According to the Cons today: 1. Allegations of abuse are false, there have been no abuses 2. We have always had access to detainees 3. If you think detainees are abused by Afghan authorities you do not support our troops and you are unpatriotic 4. The agreement touted by O'Connor as signed yesterday is only being drawn up now BUT we always did have access anyways

Ooops, wrong thread

Well I dunno about you but it seems some of us can be interested and/or concerned about more than one thing at a time. Government coverup and corruption is an ongoing concern; this particular issue may be small in itself but generally points to more serious issues, which are how our glorious PM does the same things he has screamed about others doing; how our taxpayers money gets spent in secret - how many more examples of secrets (spending and otherwise) don't we know about? So all in all, when you look at the wider picture, it is but one indicator of many of what our government is about.

Pointing out the honest, ethical Steve Harper is a hypocrite is not a point? Just Liberal (and other non Conservative) spin to wrestle power from a harpercritical government? So when does saying one thing and doing another count as a point? If it is not a Conservative?

Read Betsy read. I know you can if you want to. I specifically said: And as for the Germans? Yes, they were a wonderful bunch those Nazis. Only exterminated 6 million or so people? And did unspeakably horrific medical and other experiments on them. The Taliban on the other hand are maniacs compared to the Nazi's? Good thinking. Now Betsy, what about people rounded up that haven't committed acts of violence toward NATO forces nor their own citizens? Do you think everyone taken in for questioning is a murderer, not one innocent person happening to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, hasn't been detained? What about them betsy? Most of us in this country do not want to be placed at the same level as the Taliban.

The Afghani man that has been shown on tv was not a Taliban fighter, he was an ordinary person going home to get his tools. He was detained by Canadians and abused by Afghan authorities. Without proper investigations, charges and trials who knows how many innocent people get caught up in the mistreatment. THAT'S why we should all care about this. It's not a matter of protecting Taliban fighters - it's a matter of making sure you have a Taliban fighter that has committed acts against NATO forces and/or Afghan civilians before you declare they are guilty. You know, the civilized way.

ArmyGuy, part of what makes us a great country and a great people is that we don't do the grotesque and inhumane just because others do it. What a great example that would be and we don't need more fuel for the fire for our soldiers over there. Is this how we think we will win hearts and minds? These detainees have friends, family and communities that will watch and remember what happens to these guys after they are taken by Canadians. Part of why we are there is to set the country in a direction of democracy and freedom. Isn't it? If not, why the hell are we there then? As for putting the prisoners into Canadian camps, I think it is a bad idea, but to drivel on about how they would be made refugees and let out on our streets comments by some, is just too stupid for words. If this is supposed to be a real discussion then we should have some realism here.

There are some on here that would let anything pass as long as it was the Cons that do it. Never mind openness and honesty for ALL and ANY government. Their mantra is "the Liberals were worse". So it's ok if the Cons are crooked, just let them be not as crooked as what the Liberals were. That's some ethics.

During WWII we had German POW detention camps in Canada so the idea of Taliban POW detention camps is not out of our line of experience. But there has to be a better way; handing them over to Afghan authorities is obviously something we cannot continue to do without on-going supervision as to their treatment. We cannot be complicit in the torturing of people no matter if they be Taliban or whomever. It's scandalous that we knew about the goings-on and basically did nothing to this point.

"There's no evidence"......."equally plausible" ....... EXACTLY why we need an investigation into this whole thing. Thinking people want to know what, no matter what that what is. And Day cannot lead an investigation into himself; even the Cons would know that that would stink.

I'll go with the $60k for dressing and $10k for psychic services. The publicity and book/movie deals to follow will more than make up for lack of salary whilst on the public payroll. I think that all clothing and makeup advice expenses should be deductible for the 2007 tax year.

It will take as long as Steve wants it to take. He's a smart boy though; he'll figure out that the longer he stonewalls the longer it will stay in the limelight. What I want to know is why her name doesn't show in employee records; why she is not shown in any of the PMO lists as traveling (or even existing). If Steve has nothing to hide then she should appear, her classification, wages and PSC approved job description should all be a matter of public record. I mean it's OUR money. Something that the Steve government, like the Libs before them, seemed to forget.

Emerson Softwood lumber Emerson Environment Emerson Harper Emerson Environment Emerson Need I go on?