Sir Bandelot Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 Personally, I prefer that this case be referred to the international courts, unlike what Layton has been saying. Quote
capricorn Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 Why is that Sir Bandelot? What more could be gained by having an inquiry outside the country? Quote "We always want the best man to win an election. Unfortunately, he never runs." Will Rogers
Sir Bandelot Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 Why is that Sir Bandelot? What more could be gained by having an inquiry outside the country? Well, so that there won't be a "cover up", and so that the rest of the world can see, whats going on here. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 How smart or classy can any guy be that has fallen into the trap of that supified heiress - Belinda? You can judge a man by what company he has kept in the past. Mackay is not a striaght shooter in my opinion - nor does he have the brains to be honourable. If a woman that will have sex with a hockey thug..and then with any politcal that serves her agenda - then beware of the type of man that will devulge information to a chick that picks his brain and brawn then crosses the floor - Mackay should get it over with and resign - Like I said - If you do the Belinda dance then you must be totally superfical..which I believe he is...a light weight that is not fit to have the power of life and death over our troops. Quote
eyeball Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 (edited) Was he lying, or was he genuinely unaware of what was going on? The problem with bureaucracy is the lack of accountability. You can't be accountable, though, for something you know nothing about. Who's making an excuse? I was asking a question. I was commenting on your statement that a Minister can't be held accountable for something he knew nothing about. That's not the way it used to be in this country. In the not so distant past Ministers in similar circumstances would resign. Our country's slide towards shrugging off and accepting torture is a similar departure from Canadian traditions like Ministerial responsibility. "Ministerial responsibility" is an anachronistic phrase that used to hold cabinet ministers responsible for whatever goes on in their department. It lost any meaning back in 1991, when then-foreign minister Joe Clark refused to resign over the al Mashat affair, blaming his staff for the arrival of Iraq's former U.S. ambassador as an immigrant, with inside help.John Ibbitson The Conservatives have long maintained they are the party of accountability and transparency. Who the hell is accountable for the bureaucratic opacity that's been under Peter MacKay's very nose? If the Conservatives can't even make their government transparent to themselves how can we have any confidence in their ability to make our government accountable to us? It was Peter MacKay's job to ensure Canada's principles and high standards for human rights were being upheld. He failed at that and his excuse of ignorance is worse than lame, it's an indictment of his entire government and his boss should resign for not ensuring his ministers were making transparency and accountability a personal priority. Edited December 11, 2009 by eyeball Quote A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.
Oleg Bach Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 and be made Governor General Morgantaler got the order for being so delluded he thought he was killing possible future Nazis - Mackay should also get the order of Canada for being a person who thinks himself more clever than he really is. The lawyers that drafted the oringinal Order Of Canada should be spanked for not speaking up about the abuse of what was once a real honour now gone dishonourable - just like the high and mighty and honourless Mackay..who I assume has family ties to those that drafted up this bit of shlockish crap - in the form of a medal granted by the delluded elite. Quote
wyly Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 Do you seriously be,ieve the Chief of Defense concerns himslef with such mundane crap unless he has to? `yawn` potentially having Canadian soldiers being charged with War Crimes is mundane is it?... after the Somalia incident ethical treatment of detainees has been high on the militaries list of proper conduct... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Wilber Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 potentially having Canadian soldiers being charged with War Crimes is mundane is it?... after the Somalia incident ethical treatment of detainees has been high on the militaries list of proper conduct... Canadian soldiers did nothing other than hand them over to local authorities. Who's country is it anyway? Poor judgment? Maybe. War crime? Not even close. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
wyly Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 Canadian soldiers did nothing other than hand them over to local authorities. Who's country is it anyway? Poor judgment? Maybe. War crime? Not even close. handing over detainees to a third party who you know will torture or kill them is a war crime...the military knew that, they even took steps to prove and prevent that from happening...the politicians ignored warnings to that effect from both the military and civilian advisors...the politicians put the militaries reputation at risk and exposed them to war crimes charges ...and now the politicians and higher up military brass are going to point fingers at mid ranking military officials as to blame for not informing them... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
M.Dancer Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 potentially having Canadian soldiers being charged with War Crimes is mundane is it?... after the Somalia incident ethical treatment of detainees has been high on the militaries list of proper conduct... Potential...har! So far there is but one confirmed case out of 1000s...I will wager there will be plenty of medals but no war crimes. Mainly because there are no war crimes that even come close to dealing with something like this. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
M.Dancer Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 handing over detainees to a third party who you know will torture or kill them is a war crime... Go ahead. Cite it Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Topaz Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 I think the folowing people should be given lie detector test. All the generals over there at the time, O'Connor, Bernier, McKay Cannon, along with Harper. We know this group of people are good at lying and now with very little or no trust. This government also show little respect for people of the Middle-East, so it makes mwe wonder if their attitiude was torture them who cares. By allowing this to happen and then trying to cover it up it make this COUNTRY lose its respect in the court of public opinion, especially the world. I think most Canadians DO want to know the TRUTH and I think a hearing is to only way and not done by the military either!! Quote
Argus Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 Fire him and turn him over to face charges for the international crimes he has committed. Same applies to Harper and any other member of the Conservatives or military. Congratulations. Still a very new member and already responsible for one of the most mindlessly stupid postings I've read here. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 That's a lame excuse. He should also be fired for not knowing about it. You too. You didn't know about it, so you should be fired. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 I don't think that we should blame the military for doing what the government told them to do. It's the cover-up, and the way Colvin was smeared and threatened by the government that really stinks the most. I agree with you that Clvin should be fired. Unfortunately, they will have to work around the media and simply downgrade his work to the point he resigns himself. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 Clearly the military is complicit in the cover-up. Either that or Hillier and Natynczyk are two of the dumbest fucks going Are they relatives of yours? No? Then they're probably free of that distinction. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Wilber Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 handing over detainees to a third party who you know will torture or kill them is a war crime... the military knew that, they even took steps to prove and prevent that from happening...the politicians ignored warnings to that effect from both the military and civilian advisors...the politicians put the militaries reputation at risk and exposed them to war crimes charges ...and now the politicians and higher up military brass are going to point fingers at mid ranking military officials as to blame for not informing them... We are operating in a sovereign country. Canadian soldiers have no legal jurisdiction over Afghan nationals. Are you suggesting we set up our own legal and prison system in a foreign country? Canadians did not torture anyone. Afghans did. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
wyly Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 Go ahead. Cite it Geneva Convetion Article 12 Prisoners of war are in the hands of the enemy Power, but not of the individuals or military units who have captured them. Irrespective of the individual responsibilities that may exist, the Detaining Power is responsible for the treatment given them.Prisoners of war may only be transferred by the Detaining Power to a Power which is a party to the Convention and after the Detaining Power has satisfied itself of the willingness and ability of such transferee Power to apply the Convention. When prisoners of war are transferred under such circumstances, responsibility for the application of the Convention rests on the Power accepting them while they are in its custody. Nevertheless if that Power fails to carry out the provisions of the Convention in any important respect, the Power by whom the prisoners of war were transferred shall, upon being notified by the Protecting Power, take effective measures to correct the situation or shall request the return of the prisoners of war. Such requests must be complied with. that makes knowingly transferring detainees to be tortured a crime...in the case disclosed the soldiers did the right thing in retrieving the detainee as they are required to do, as they suspected torture...that the government knew this was going on and did nothing to stop it(build our own detention center) makes them guilty of the crime... Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Machjo Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 The defence minister should be given a choice to resign or be fired, he has disgraced Canada with his lies, and his attempt to cover up that he was breaking international law. Conservatives are tough on crime? Not when they are the ones committing it! Where's option 3: 'let the courts decide'? As far as I'm concerned, it's up to the government in power to decide whom to select as defence minister. I just judge the government's performance as a whole. As far as specific ministers are concerned, certainly if any law has been broken, it's not up to us to go on a witch hunt. That's why we have a division of powers. Then if anyone has an issue with it, it's up to him to present the available evidence to the appropriate authorities and let the courts decide. Quote With friends like Zionists, what Jew needs enemies? With friends like Islamists, what Muslim needs enemies?
cybercoma Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 Which if one were to believe to be the case, makes him incredibly incompetent. Seriously, do you honestly believe he only studied the file after giving his testimony to the committee??? When you were in university, did you do all of your readings word-for-word before each class? Quote
cybercoma Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 I was commenting on your statement that a Minister can't be held accountable for something he knew nothing about. That's not the way it used to be in this country. In the not so distant past Ministers in similar circumstances would resign. Our country's slide towards shrugging off and accepting torture is a similar departure from Canadian traditions like Ministerial responsibility. I think you're being a little cynical. I agree that he should resign if he knew that prisoners would be tortured if they were turned over. However, the goal of our presence in Afghanistan is to try and train the Afghanis to take care of their own country. One of the ways we can do that is by allowing them to handle the prisoners of war. It's a small but necessary step. This just goes to show that there is a lot of corruption in the Afghan government that also needs to be fixed. The problem here, however, is not with us or our politicians. The problem is with the Afghans and the way their current government is operating. We can't be over there forever, so they need to start picking up the ball. To say that "our country" is shrugging off and accepting torture is just ridiculous. You would be hard-pressed to find someone that would shrug off torture and the last person that would do so is the Minister of Defense. I believe he was genuine about what he was saying. No one wants to believe that we would knowingly hand over prisoners to be tortured, especially Mackay. He probalby honestly believed it wasn't true. However, if he did know the truth, did nothing about it, and tried to cover it up, the unacceptability of that goes without saying. He should resign and charges ought to be sought. Quote
cybercoma Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 the politicians ignored warnings to that effect from both the military and civilian advisors...Show me some kind of first hand information that supports this claim and not some online weblog or commentary. I would be interested to see it. Quote
M.Dancer Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 Geneva Convetion Article 12 that makes knowingly transferring detainees to be tortured a crime I thought you might cite that. Sorry, it does not apply. Why it does not apply is in the first line Prisoners of war are in the hands of the enemy Power They are not prisoners of war by any legal definition. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Wilber Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 Prisoners of war may only be transferred by the Detaining Power to a Power which is a party to the Convention and after the Detaining Power has satisfied itself of the willingness and ability of such transferee Power to apply the Convention. Afghanistan is a signatory to at least some of the Geneva Conventions and satisfying ones self is a very subjective term. Clearly, if there were war crimes committed, they were committed by Afghanis. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
M.Dancer Posted December 11, 2009 Report Posted December 11, 2009 that makes knowingly transferring detainees to be tortured a crime... No proof he was tortured. Only beaten. There's a difference. in the case disclosed the soldiers did the right thing in retrieving the detainee as they are required to do, I agree as they suspected torture... No, as they suspected he was abused...again, a difference. that the government knew this was going on and did nothing to stop it(build our own detention center) makes them guilty of the crime... No proof the governement knew this one cat was beaten...one cat. When the Liberals decides to stop transfering prisoners to the US, it was bound to happen. It's their culture, we should respect it. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
.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.