wyly Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 I think you're really pressing it. Who got charged with a war crime for this murder in Iran? How is the case proceeding? Perhaps it would be OK, in your eyes, if Peter Mackay got the same treatment as whoever was bureaucratically responsible for Zahra Kazemi's torture? I think that would be appropriate, why not? unless you've kept up with the thread you'll miss the point of the post... Dancer claimed beating is akin to and "roughing up" prisoners and not a war crime...but the Geneva Convention which both Canada and Afghanistan are party to says otherwise...knowingly delivering someone to a third party for special treatment is also a crime... the afghan detainee that was beaten with a shoe and rescued by Canadian troops Dancer dismissed as not a crime...I merely extended that "roughing up" to a canadian Journalist accused of espionage who also "roughed up" with a shoe in Iran and died as a result of her injuries...being dead in Dancers limitless imagination is not torture so apparently ok... we are not Iraian secret police nor are we Afghan security we are CANADIANS! roughing up people with a shoe is torture, something we do not do...because Iran ignores international law does not make it ok for us to do the same... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radsickle Posted December 22, 2009 Report Share Posted December 22, 2009 (edited) MacKay is so representative of the new generation of bully in the caucasian Canadian; ever so innocent, yet a blue meanie beneath the surface. He ignored Colvin on purpose. He and Harper are what's wrong with student government in Canada these days; globally stupid and relying on baboons to form their talking points. MacKay should be tried for treason, lying to his country like that. Edited December 22, 2009 by Radsickle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 not a cover up unless there are bodies... where are the bodies? success? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 I found this and I guess this articles says it all.... http://www2.canada.com/chilliwacktimes/news/opinion/story.html?id=39135722-a7ef-40d9-bc6f-a1f1335c2551 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted December 23, 2009 Report Share Posted December 23, 2009 Dancer claimed beating is akin to and "roughing up" prisoners and not a war crime...but the Geneva Convention which both Canada and Afghanistan are party to says otherwise...knowingly delivering someone to a third party for special treatment is also a crime... No. I claim you don't know if anyone was beaten or tortured... The most dangerous thing an "Innocent" as you suggest would be to be placed with the Taliban. TALIBAN: Who are you? Achmed. I am Achmed, a simple farmer. TALIBAN: You are a spy (WHACK) the afghan detainee that was beaten with a shoe and rescued by Canadian troops Dancer dismissed as not a crime... Certainly not a crime by Canadians, who in fact took the fellow after they heard he has been hit with a shoe, one of the gravest insults in the muslim world. And in fact, this is the sole incident that, under the klieg lights of scrutiny has been uncovered. BIG WHOOP. Again, how many instances of abuse have been shown? ONE. I merely extended that "roughing up" to a canadian Journalist accused of espionage who also "roughed up" with a shoe in Iran and died as a result of her injuries...being dead in Dancers limitless imagination is not torture so apparently ok... You merely extended it to an irrelevancy. we are not Iraian secret police nor are we Afghan security we are CANADIANS! roughing up people with a shoe is torture, something we do not do...because Iran ignores international law does not make it ok for us to do the same... I agree, we are not any of those, which is probably why accusation of abuse by Canadians has been proven to be false. ....although if ng insulted by being hit with a shoe is totrure, should the fellow who threw his shoe at Bush be brought before a House of Commons inquiry? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted December 24, 2009 Report Share Posted December 24, 2009 I didn't mean that public outrage would alter the events. Our government rarely listens to us. I was merely suggesting that with all the media efforts and government spin that the war that is taking the lives of our soldiers is just not being taken seriously enough by the majority of citizens. I hear you, I was suggesting we would literally have to take up arms to make our government listen to us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted December 24, 2009 Report Share Posted December 24, 2009 I hear you, I was suggesting we would literally have to take up arms to make our government listen to us. Because that worked so well for Louis Riel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted December 25, 2009 Report Share Posted December 25, 2009 Because that worked so well for Louis Riel. I don't think violence is the answer at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted December 25, 2009 Report Share Posted December 25, 2009 I said, we WOULD have to take up arms to get the government to listen, not SHOULD. I don't EXPECT the government to listen to anything, I just HOPE they would, in vain I suspect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted December 25, 2009 Report Share Posted December 25, 2009 I said, we WOULD have to take up arms to get the government to listen, not SHOULD. I don't EXPECT the government to listen to anything, I just HOPE they would, in vain I suspect. Nah I think you have a point there. Fact is that if you arn't the government the only way you can be heard is by actually raising arms and sending the message. This can be done by lobbying, letter writing or otherwise. I've had communications responded to by aides or even using the name of the person themself. Fact is they will LISTEN sometimes, but that doesn't mean their interests are to act the way you would like them to, or that your concept is the right one. There is information you may not have that they do, or priorities that you do not have that they do. Ask yourself What exactly is the message and how will it be responded to, not this is what I want you to do for me. Sometimes this can coincide but other times manipulating the situation may bring better results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironstone Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Has anyone come up with a solution as to what Canada should do with Taliban prisoners yet?If they are turned over to the Afghans and subject to beatings,then do you want them to come to Canada.They would certainly be treated well if conditions in Canadian prisons are any indication.Did you know there is torture in Canadian prisons too?There must be since prisoners can sue for such flagrant human rights violations as melted ice cream,or ill fitting prison garb.If Taliban members end up in Canada,at least they will be fiercely protected by our Human Rights Commissions. Seriously,why so much concern for these Taliban monsters and none for their numerous victims,past and present? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyminded Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Seriously,why so much concern for these Taliban monsters and none for their numerous victims,past and present? First of all, lots of people are concerned with the victims of the Taliban. Where do you get the idea that they aren't? Canada, the US, and NATO, on the other hand, don't officially much care for the victims of theocratic thugs and misogynists and torturers and killers. We know these agents don't care, because we are closely allied with the Warlords, with the Northern Alliance--who are fundamentally identical to the Taliban. Their only distinction is that they're our allies--but (heresy!) being allied with us doesn't automatically make you good. Oh, I know, knuckledragging nationalist pantywaisted cowards, in Canada and the US, think that allies are automatically decent folks. But--as anyone who isn't a drooling moron knows--that just isn't the case. Meanwhile, there ARE secular, democratic forces in Afghanistan--say, Malalai Joya and her huge number of loyal followers. But, we ignore her. Because she isn't obedient, like the killer, gangster, woman-hating, Islamist Warlords are obedient. She has guts--and we don't like that. She hates the Taliban..but she also hates the Northern Alliance. Oh dear...she must not understand that Canada, the U.S. et al are always benign and right. Even when they're allied with repressive, murderous woman-haters. Which we are. We are allied with repressive, murderous woman haters. So, we can't hate the Taliban for their behavior. That's illogical. Since we look the other way at identical behavior by our sweet, courageous, gangster allies. So, if you're complaining about "not caring about the Taliban's victims" you should start with the coalition governments, including our own--because they definitely don't care. They are proving it; insisting upon it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Has anyone come up with a solution as to what Canada should do with Taliban prisoners yet? G.C. III http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/7c4d08d9b287a42141256739003e63bb/6fef854a3517b75ac125641e004a9e68 If they are turned over to the Afghans and subject to beatings,then do you want them to come to Canada. Ultimately that is a question of what is an acceptable ally, topling one brutal regime to install a second and wasting billions of taxpayer dollars doesn't seem to brite to begin with. Canada has two choices 1. uphold its image as an international law abiding nation 2. descend into hell with the rest of NATO. I think it is clear what option Canada will choose. They would certainly be treated well if conditions in Canadian prisons are any indication.Did you know there is torture in Canadian prisons too? Yes. There are many common violations of law in Corrections Facilities in Canada. There must be since prisoners can sue for such flagrant human rights violations as melted ice cream,or ill fitting prison garb. Or having cuffs not locked and wrists cut as a result, in not providing diet such as serving meat to a vegetarian, or ice cream to someone who is lactose intolerant so as to give them diarhea. Or how about not giving them access to appeal treatment, or sticking them in a cell that smells like feces, how about strong arming them to move into general population by wracking their wrists during transport. Peoples religious and conscience diet should be provided. If people follow jain or hindu beleifs they should not be forced to eat beef to survive. Also being in seclusion and not having access to any reprive is also flagrant violation of their rights. If Taliban members end up in Canada No. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 If they are going anywhere it should be Turkey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironstone Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 First of all, lots of people are concerned with the victims of the Taliban. Where do you get the idea that they aren't? Canada, the US, and NATO, on the other hand, don't officially much care for the victims of theocratic thugs and misogynists and torturers and killers. We know these agents don't care, because we are closely allied with the Warlords, with the Northern Alliance--who are fundamentally identical to the Taliban. Their only distinction is that they're our allies--but (heresy!) being allied with us doesn't automatically make you good. Oh, I know, knuckledragging nationalist pantywaisted cowards, in Canada and the US, think that allies are automatically decent folks. But--as anyone who isn't a drooling moron knows--that just isn't the case. Meanwhile, there ARE secular, democratic forces in Afghanistan--say, Malalai Joya and her huge number of loyal followers. But, we ignore her. Because she isn't obedient, like the killer, gangster, woman-hating, Islamist Warlords are obedient. She has guts--and we don't like that. She hates the Taliban..but she also hates the Northern Alliance. Oh dear...she must not understand that Canada, the U.S. et al are always benign and right. Even when they're allied with repressive, murderous woman-haters. Which we are. We are allied with repressive, murderous woman haters. So, we can't hate the Taliban for their behavior. That's illogical. Since we look the other way at identical behavior by our sweet, courageous, gangster allies. So, if you're complaining about "not caring about the Taliban's victims" you should start with the coalition governments, including our own--because they definitely don't care. They are proving it; insisting upon it. No government is perfect,and this Kharzai fellow is most certainly a sleazy,corrupt SOB.It seems to be inherent to the Afghan way.Sometimes it's like we must choose the lesser of two evils.As for the "women hating" stuff,it will be right here in Canada eventually when we get Sharia law.What is very disturbing is that they can bring that hateful way of life over to our country,think of the Khadr family or the Toronto 18.It's growing fast because there are many in the West who don't want to take a stand against it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 No government is perfect But should we accept criminal governments such as the Harper Tories? "women hating" stuff This is totally painting. Lots of Islamic men treat their wives very well. Just like their are drunken alchoholic western wife beaters, and tons of domestic assault in Canada, it happens around the world. Lots of guys treat their wives like *s*h*i*t* Both Muslim men and women can choose their faith. Just like Canadians can choose to follow the law or not, lots of people break Canadian laws. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyminded Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 No government is perfect,and this Kharzai fellow is most certainly a sleazy,corrupt SOB.It seems to be inherent to the Afghan way.Sometimes it's like we must choose the lesser of two evils.As for the "women hating" stuff,it will be right here in Canada eventually when we get Sharia law.What is very disturbing is that they can bring that hateful way of life over to our country,think of the Khadr family or the Toronto 18.It's growing fast because there are many in the West who don't want to take a stand against it. Well, I wasn't even talking about Karzai; he's morte along the lines of OUR bad politicians. I was talking about the Northrn Alliance, the Warlords. You say "the lesser of two evils" because you didn't read my post. They are ideologically IDENTICAL to the Taliban. Not a lesser evil. The SAME evil. These are our friends and allies, whom our PM and US president claim (knowing the truth themselves, making them degnerate liars) are going to "liberate Afghan women" and all that nonsense. It's black comedy, except I think it's improper here to laugh. If we wanted a free and democratic Afghanistan, we would be siding with the Afghans who are fighting for freedom and democracy. But we are not. That's a choice we made, and there surely is some reason for this choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 But should we accept criminal governments such as the Harper Tories? Criminal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 Criminal? War crimes... yeah thats where they come from. You know you break international law, you become a war criminal.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
William Ashley Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 War crimes... yeah thats where they come from. You know you break international law, you become a war criminal.... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ToadBrother Posted December 30, 2009 Report Share Posted December 30, 2009 War crimes... yeah thats where they come from. You know you break international law, you become a war criminal.... You mean if I fish inside of France's territorial waters without consulting the French government, I'm a war criminal? Either you have no idea what international law and being a war criminal is, or your thinking is so sloppy that crossing the border into another country with insufficient documentation would end you up in the Hague next to Radovan Karadzic. I don't recall anyone accusing Canadian soldiers of war crimes. If they did anything wrong, it's not in getting sufficient assurances that prisoners being turned over to Afghan authorities wouldn't be tortured. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 Meanwhile, there ARE secular, democratic forces in Afghanistan--say, Malalai Joya and her huge number of loyal followers. Define huge.... Is huge, "power broker" huge? Or is huge, "thank god Nato is keeping the Taliban at bay or we seculur apostates would all be beheaded" huge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 Define huge.... Is huge, "power broker" huge? Or is huge, "thank god Nato is keeping the Taliban at bay or we seculur apostates would all be beheaded" huge? Either way, he lied and he should resign. Failing that Harper should fire him. Should Harper decide not to fire him if he does not resign then Harper is guilty of supporting a liar and places himself in the same boat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 Either way, he lied and he should resign. No, you think he lied. You think, one person, getting whacked in the head with a shoe (flip flop? Sandal? Loafer?) is of such importance that the ministry issued a breaking news bulletin... You're best guess is not reason enough. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted December 31, 2009 Report Share Posted December 31, 2009 No, you think he lied. You think, one person, getting whacked in the head with a shoe (flip flop? Sandal? Loafer?) is of such importance that the ministry issued a breaking news bulletin... You're best guess is not reason enough. Are we talking about prisoner abuse, what the government was told and what they say they were told or about something else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.