Born Free Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Which is not Iraq. Do you know where a pre deployment takes place? Obviously not or you wouldn't have posted the brain fart about harper sending troops to iraq... You must be dyslexic er sumpthin' Its about Harper words and NOT about troop deployment. The two things I like about you and Harper are your face... Quote
wyly Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Look at Mckay - what do you expect as far as supervision of the military - This guy can not even supervise his own personal life and has horrible judgement as far as character - getting into the sack with Belinda Stronach should have been a sign that the man is an utter fool and materialist with no real intellect of spirit. Why would a man in his right mind bed a woman that is a spoiled elitist with a grade 9 education and a father who fires workers who find defects in the metal of prime auto parts? who he humps in the sack is his business it's what he does while in office hr's is the issue... and how does someone with Gr9 education gain admittance to York University? Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
Gabriel Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 I'd still like some serious alternatives from the critics of these stories on how to deal with Afghan detainees. When enemy combatants (fancy words to describe terrorists) are captured on the battlefield, what are the Canadian forces supposed to do? We can't be expecting to operate infrastructure to house these persons. In the real world, you need to work with what you have, and in Afghanistan there is existing infrastructure and a system in place to deal with these detainees. I'll look for more details regarding exactly what steps Canada took towards ensuring that the detainees apprehended by Canadian forces and then transferred over to Afghan custody weren't abused. Reasonable people will concede that a guarantee can never be made and shouldn't be expected. What should be expected are reasonable efforts were made by Canada to ensure our compliance with international agreements. Quote
Born Free Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 I'll look for more details regarding exactly what steps Canada took towards ensuring that the detainees apprehended by Canadian forces and then transferred over to Afghan custody weren't abused. There werent any steps taken. Had there been any, you would be aware of them by now. The brass were likely waiting for the Afghan's to advertize on You Tube. Quote
Gabriel Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) There werent any steps taken. Had there been any, you would be aware of them by now. The brass were likely waiting for the Afghan's to advertize on You Tube. That's not true. I'm guessing you didn't watch the hearings with Colvin or Hillier and company. During several question period I remember McKay describing some of the lengths to which Canada went towards ensuring appropriate treatment of prisoners transferred to Afghan custody. You need to lose the habit of stating misinformation. Anyways, I'll get back to this thread later with details as I'm sure some people are genuinely interested in learning about these things rather than preaching from an e-soapbox. Edited February 1, 2010 by Gabriel Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 ....Chretien soon found out the proof Bush offered was pure bullshit but eventually was able to forgive him when he said..."Don worry aboud it...its water under de fridge now." Chretien couldn't have done dick in Iraq even if he wanted to. He sat on the fence pitching that Afghanistan was where the real righteous action was and now they even bitch about that. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Born Free Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 That's not true. I'm guessing you didn't watch the hearings with Colvin or Hillier and company. During several question period I remember McKay describing some of the lengths to which Canada went towards ensuring appropriate treatment of prisoners transferred to Afghan custody. You need to lose the habit of stating misinformation. Anyways, I'll get back to this thread later with details as I'm sure some people are genuinely interested in learning about these things rather than preaching from an e-soapbox. "There has never been a single, solitary, proven allegation of abuse of a detainee, a Taliban prisoner, transferred by Canadian Forces." MacKay said Dec. 2 in the House of Commons. Its hard to determine who to believe...MacKay or General Natynczyk. Quote
Born Free Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Chretien couldn't have done dick in Iraq even if he wanted to. He sat on the fence pitching that Afghanistan was where the real righteous action was and now they even bitch about that. Chretien was right about Iraq. You guys had no proof. It was all bullshit and its now on the record. Get over it... Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Chretien was right about Iraq. You guys had no proof. It was all bullshit and its now on the record. Get over it... It was supposed to be....ding dong...Saddam is dead. Get over it. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Gabriel Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Its difficult to find the information regarding the efforts that Canada undertook to ensure that detainees transferred to the custody of Afghan security forces weren't mistreated - because it's a Canadian story and Canadian news is left-leaning. I wish I had a better memory, because then I could recollect what I heard MacKay had said regarding these matters. I do remember him stating that Canad has spent some millions of dollars towards maintaining the prison infrastructure, and that there was some sort of system in place for Canada to monitor prison conditions. I'll try to find some tangible information, though. Quote
Born Free Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 It was supposed to be....ding dong...Saddam is dead. Get over it. Some of your fellow countrymen still cling to the belief that it was an intelligence failure.. The only intelligence failure was Bush. Quote
Gabriel Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) "There has never been a single, solitary, proven allegation of abuse of a detainee, a Taliban prisoner, transferred by Canadian Forces." MacKay said Dec. 2 in the House of Commons. Its hard to determine who to believe...MacKay or General Natynczyk. That's not relevant to what I said, unless your intention is to do character assassination on MacKay (who I like) in order to discredit any statements he's ever made that contradict your assertions that Canada didn't do a thing to ensure that transferred detainees weren't mistreated. Is that how you intend to argue your position - attack MacKay or any other government official with information contrary to your assertion? Do you think it'd difficult to discredit Colvin on his testimony? Just watch the Hillier testimony (which I'm guessing you haven't seen), he really took Colvin's allegations to task. Anyways, I'd like to stay more focused as I feel this thread derailing into the broader subject of the entire Afghan detainee story - is Canada complicit/negligent in its responsibilities or not? I guess that's an unavoidable evolution of the subject matter, though... Edited February 1, 2010 by Gabriel Quote
Born Free Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) Its difficult to find the information regarding the efforts that Canada undertook to ensure that detainees transferred to the custody of Afghan security forces weren't mistreated - because it's a Canadian story and Canadian news is left-leaning. I wish I had a better memory, because then I could recollect what I heard MacKay had said regarding these matters. I do remember him stating that Canad has spent some millions of dollars towards maintaining the prison infrastructure, and that there was some sort of system in place for Canada to monitor prison conditions. I'll try to find some tangible information, though. 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. Edited February 1, 2010 by Born Free Quote
M.Dancer Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 You must be dyslexic er sumpthin' Its about Harper words and NOT about troop deployment. The two things I like about you and Harper are your face... You are haing a hard time followinmg you're owm statements. You said... Harper is the guy, when opposition, declared that the Canadian Army needs to be sent to Iraq. - As PM he claimed that he only said that to scare Saddam. And clearly, by your own admission and backed by your link, he didn't. Nor did he say that he wanted to send to iraq to "scare Saddam:" You have an average mind, you can figure this out... Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Born Free Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 That's not relevant to what I said, unless your intention is to do character assassination on MacKay 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. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Some of your fellow countrymen still cling to the belief that it was an intelligence failure.. The only intelligence failure was Bush. Yet Mr. Ignatieff, "smart" American from Harvard, had the same "intelligence failure". LOL! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Gabriel Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 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. Natynczyk's testimony doesn't really corroborate Colvin's testimony. It's misleading to suggest they are both on the same page of this matter with respect to their claims. Colvin suggested widespread prisoner abuse, going to far as to say that all detainees apprehended by Canadian forces transferred to Afghan security forces were "likely tortured". Natynczyk's claims are of evidence that one detainee was tortured. Here's the video, actually. I think it actually reflects well on Canada, from top to bottom, that Canada is able to correct its errors and works towards improving its operations continually. Now, I'm not naive, I don't think this is the only situation where abuse is likely to have happened. Given the circumstances, I think Canada is conducting itself as well as it reasonably can. Let's not be stupid, Afghanistan is not a country with rich traditions of human rights and civil liberties. We have to work with the existing infrastructure and make reasonable efforts to improve it. It would be naive to think we can expect Canadian or international standards to be consistently applied in Afghanistan. What we can do is take reasonable steps towards bringing up the standards of prisoner treatment in Afghanistan over time. We have cases of abuse of prisoners in Canada, how can we expect the Afghan system to operate flawlessly. We need to balance this problem with our military and security concerns. We cannot do nothing and release detainees because we aren't guaranteed that they won't be mistreated. Let's be clear that Natynczyk and Colvin are not on the same side of this issue, which your statement seems to suggest. Quote
Born Free Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Nor did he say that he wanted to send to iraq to "scare Saddam:" You have an average mind, you can figure this out... ..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. Quote
Gabriel Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 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. I'm not going to continue exchanging posts with you. You're clearly not here to have a serious exchange or you're incapable of it for whatever reason(s). Colvin's character was never attacked by the government. I watched the testimony and subsequent question periods. All the claims from the Liberal party, NDP, etc about the government attacking Colvin are absolutely false. There is a big difference between attacking someone's statements and attacking someone's character. MacKay and others from the cabinet were always extremely careful in their statements regarding Colvin, and nothing they said ever crossed the line towards character assassination. They simply attacked the credibility of his statements, which deserved to be attacked. Anyways, I'm done wasting my time with you. Quote
Gabriel Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 (edited) Anyone know where I can find transcripts or even video records of question period? Is there an online database somewhere? CPAC's archives don't seem to go back too far. I'm looking for the question period records from around the time of the beginning of the Colvin affair. It's sad how much difficulty I'm having finding specific information about efforts Canada has made towards ensuring proper treatment of detainees transferred to Afghan custody. Edited February 1, 2010 by Gabriel Quote
Born Free Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Natynczyk's testimony doesn't really corroborate Colvin's testimony. It's misleading to suggest they are both on the same page of this matter with respect to their claims. 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... Quote
M.Dancer Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 ..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. My mistake and I humbly apologize. I think perhaps your account has been hacked cause I read..\ Remember, Harper is the guy, when opposition, declared that the Canadian Army needs to be sent to Iraq. - As PM he claimed that he only said that to scare Saddam. Once again I apologize for confusing the hacked half truth post with someone who is clearly not a biased partisan sloganeer Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
Born Free Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 Yet Mr. Ignatieff, "smart" American from Harvard, had the same "intelligence failure". LOL! 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. Quote
Born Free Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 My mistake and I humbly apologize. I think perhaps your account has been hacked cause I read..\ Once again I apologize for confusing the hacked half truth post with someone who is clearly not a biased partisan sloganeer 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.. Quote
M.Dancer Posted February 1, 2010 Report Posted February 1, 2010 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.. \ The essence is he never said he wanted to send Canadians to Iraq. Even in a pre deployment. To quote another, End of Story Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
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.