CP Learns that CSIS interrogated tortured Afghan Detainees

[nicky10013]

Ok so in other words you have no proof.

So the Chief of the Defence Staff doesn't qualify as a reputable source of information. I see. When all else fails, throw the person under the bus. Classic tactic.

If the allegations were as baseless as you are saying they were, parliament wouldn't have been prorogued and the government wouldn't be refusing to hand over documents.

[Mr.Canada]

So the Chief of the Defence Staff doesn't qualify as a reputable source of information. I see. When all else fails, throw the person under the bus. Classic tactic.

If the allegations were as baseless as you are saying they were, parliament wouldn't have been prorogued and the government wouldn't be refusing to hand over documents.

One guy saying something to another doesn't make it so.

Hearing someone say something without any evidence to back it up simply isn't good enough.

So because you read it in a newspaper in December makes it true?

I'm still trying to understand your thought process.

[nicky10013]

One guy saying something to another doesn't make it so.

Hearing someone say something without any evidence to back it up simply isn't good enough.

So because you read it in a newspaper in December makes it true?

I'm still trying to understand your thought process.

He admitted it in a parliamentary committee.

[Mr.Canada]

He admitted it in a parliamentary committee.

And what proof did he have?

I'm still waiting for some proof other then he heard it from some guy.

[nicky10013]

And what proof did he have?

I'm still waiting for some proof other then he heard it from some guy.

So the chief of the defence staff's information is wrong because he heard it from "some guy." Like a diplomat, the officers under his command, foot soldiers on the ground who knew it happened. So, the Liberals hate the military for calling an investigation into this, but now the entire military is an incompetent bunch of "some guys" who have no idea what they're doing because they admitted information that proved the CPC was lying? Yikes. Flip. Flop. Flip. Flop.

Also, to what M.Dancer said. If someone in a Canadian jail under police custody was beaten with a shoe, I have no doubt that you'd sue the police station for 10 million and have the charges thrown out due to unconstitutional process.

Edited March 8, 2010 by nicky10013

[Mr.Canada]

So the chief of the defence staff's information is wrong because he heard it from "some guy." Like a diplomat, the officers under his command, foot soldiers on the ground who knew it happened. So, the Liberals hate the military for calling an investigation into this, but now the entire military is an incompetent bunch of "some guys" who have no idea what they're doing because they admitted information that proved the CPC was lying? Yikes. Flip. Flop. Flip. Flop.

Also, to what M.Dancer said. If someone in a Canadian jail under police custody was beaten with a shoe, I have no doubt that you'd sue the police station for 10 million and have the charges thrown out due to unconstitutional process.

There's no proof that anyone was hit with a shoe. Produce some evidence, but you can't because their isn't any. People don't get convicted in this country without being able to prove your accusations. So until you can prove it nothing happened and it's nothing more than broken telephone.

Attacking me personally doesn't help you prove anything ecept that you have trouble losing an argument and resort to acting childish.

So once again prove that Canada knowingly pareticipated in the torture of POW's or just clam up.

[nicky10013]

There's no proof that anyone was hit with a shoe. Produce some evidence, but you can't because their isn't any. People don't get convicted in this country without being able to prove your accusations. So until you can prove it nothing happened and it's nothing more than broken telephone.

Attacking me personally doesn't help you prove anything ecept that you have trouble losing an argument and resort to acting childish.

So once again prove that Canada knowingly pareticipated in the torture of POW's or just clam up.

Even M.Dancer has fessed up to a guy being beaten by a shoe. How can I produce evidence anyway. You'll just say it doesn't matter because it's all hearsay anyways. The only evidence that matters to you is evidence that exonerates your pal Harper so whatever I do produce you'll throw out as garbage.

Even then, here it is anyawys

In an explosive reversal, Canada's top soldier admits a prisoner taken into Canadian custody was abused by Afghan authorities after a report comes to light that contradicts his own testimony and MacKay's repeated denials

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/natynczyk-in-the-dark-on-afghan-prisoners-history/article1395145/

Edited March 8, 2010 by nicky10013

[M.Dancer]

Even M.Dancer has fessed up to a guy being beaten by a shoe.

Yes..this is the sum total of the evidence....the sum total.

[nicky10013]

Yes..this is the sum total of the evidence....the sum total.

Like I said, if you were beaten with a shoe in a Canadian jail, you'd sue for millions and have the charges thrown out. Why should you be afforded those rights and not an Afghan? After all, those rights we claim are universal. So, if we're not fighting for that then what are we fighting for?

[Mr.Canada]

Even M.Dancer has fessed up to a guy being beaten by a shoe. How can I produce evidence anyway. You'll just say it doesn't matter because it's all hearsay anyways. The only evidence that matters to you is evidence that exonerates your pal Harper so whatever I do produce you'll throw out as garbage.

Even then, here it is anyawys

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/natynczyk-in-the-dark-on-afghan-prisoners-history/article1395145/

Well it was an interesting blend of fiction and non fiction. On par with something I'd read from a paperback novel but it really doesn't prove anything at all does it?

It's just one guy saying something to another guy and nothing more. If there was more to it then people would be in Hague charged with all sorts of crimes against humanity. I just don't see that happening here at this point.

When people bring allegations of abuse forward their is usually some proof such as photos proving that people were mistreated. I don't see that here.

Edited March 8, 2010 by Mr.Canada

[nicky10013]

Well it was an interesting blend of fiction and non fiction. On par with something I'd read from a paperback novel but it really doesn't prove anything at all does it?

It's just one guy saying something to another guy and nothing more. If there was more to it then people would be in Hague charged with all sorts of crimes against humanity. I just don't see that happening here at this point.

When people bring allegations of abuse forward their is usually some proof such as photos proving that people were mistreated. I don't see that here.

Ahahahah bingo! I called it! So what you're exactly saying the Chief of the Defence Staff has absolutely no credibility. Including the entire military and diplomatic corps. They're all just "guys who talk to each other." And it's the Liberals that hate the military? At least Liberals aren't using the soldiers as pawns in their own political games. nice.

[Keepitsimple]

So the Chief of the Defence Staff doesn't qualify as a reputable source of information. I see. When all else fails, throw the person under the bus. Classic tactic.

If the allegations were as baseless as you are saying they were, parliament wouldn't have been prorogued and the government wouldn't be refusing to hand over documents.

You might have thought Dancer was kidding - but he wasn't. After investigating the incident, the Chief of Defence found that Canadian soldiers had witnessed a detainee being beaten with a shoe by an Afghan jailer - so they took the detainee back into custody. Sounds like we were doing a pretty good job - yet the opposition (and you) would like to take 10 years of brutal war and focus on a single instance of one Afghan being beaten with a shoe by their Afghan jailer. Pathetic.

[Mr.Canada]

Ahahahah bingo! I called it! So what you're exactly saying the Chief of the Defence Staff has absolutely no credibility. Including the entire military and diplomatic corps. They're all just "guys who talk to each other." And it's the Liberals that hate the military? At least Liberals aren't using the soldiers as pawns in their own political games. nice.

No one can bring charges against anyone else without proof. It doesn't matter who does it. Anyone bringing allegations against another needs evidence. Otherwise people would be sent to jail routinely without a burden of proof. This isn't a world I wish to live in, qa world where people are found guilty without proof.

Sounds like some communist country. That may be your ideal nick but it isn't shared by many here I wouldn't think.

[nicky10013]

No one can bring charges against anyone else without proof. It doesn't matter who does it. Anyone bringing allegations against another needs evidence. Otherwise people would be sent to jail routinely without a burden of proof. This isn't a world I wish to live in, qa world where people are found guilty without proof.

Sounds like some communist country. That may be your ideal nick but it isn't shared by many here I wouldn't think.

No one said anything about charges, just that the Chief of the Defence Staff admitted that torture has gone on. Then you call me a communist and you called me a supporter of segregation even though I said NOTHING about segregation at all. How surprised I am. You've run out of arguments. You threw the entire military under the bus to try and keep upright and now you're lashing out by throwing all these different labels out there hoping something sticks to the wall because you've clearly got nothing else.

What's your definition of communism? Or are you just using that word, without knowing what it means, to try and discredit my argument with random hearsay? That's more of a communist tactic than what I've been doing.

[Mr.Canada]

No one said anything about charges, just that the Chief of the Defence Staff admitted that torture has gone on. Then you call me a communist and you called me a supporter of segregation even though I said NOTHING about segregation at all. How surprised I am. You've run out of arguments. You threw the entire military under the bus to try and keep upright and now you're lashing out by throwing all these different labels out there hoping something sticks to the wall because you've clearly got nothing else.

What's your definition of communism? Or are you just using that word, without knowing what it means, to try and discredit my argument with random hearsay? That's more of a communist tactic than what I've been doing.

You have no proof of any wrong doing by the Canadian armed forces. Just what some random people happened to mention that found it's way up the chain of command. Their's a word for this Nick. It's called gossip.

[nicky10013]

You have no proof of any wrong doing by the Canadian armed forces. Just what some random people happened to mention that found it's way up the chain of command. Their's a word for this Nick. It's called gossip.

If it was just gossip, Natynczyk wouldn't have admitted it.

[Mr.Canada]

If it was just gossip, Natynczyk wouldn't have admitted it.

The point is he could've said anything up there. Without proof it's just gossip, nothing more.

[nicky10013]

The point is he could've said anything up there. Without proof it's just gossip, nothing more.

If the man in charge of it all admitting it isn't proof enough for you, nothing will be proof enough for you. It will ALL be gossip. You're calling him, and the rest of the military, incompetent by accusing them of allowing nothing but gossip and rumours making it up the chain.

Do you support the military? I wouldn't think a guy that does wouldthrow it's commander under the bus.

Edited March 8, 2010 by nicky10013

[M.Dancer]

Like I said, if you were beaten with a shoe in a Canadian jail, you'd sue for millions and have the charges thrown out. Why should you be afforded those rights and not an Afghan?

Because Canadians are not being beaten with shoes and Afghans are notb being beaten with shoes in Canada....

You do know the relevance of the shoe?

[PIK]

So many people have stood up and said this was a joke, from hillier on down, how many times is this dog going to be beaten.This again will blow up in the liberals faces. How many of these people turned over ended up being let go out the back door,by the brother in law and maybe killed a canadian soldier. And a question I want answered is what and when the liberal goverment at the time knew about this ,since they set this up. And IMO I think that harper might know something about that as is making sure he can legally released that info and it might not to to good for the libs.But how can the libs ,whos own rules allowed this to happen ,start blaming harper for it, the one that changed the rules to what they are now..

[waldo]

Because Canadians are not being beaten with shoes and Afghans are notb being beaten with shoes in Canada....

You do know the relevance of the shoe?

Conservative partisans are very quick to diminish any suggestion of torture, or degrees of torture, by simply labeling it as nothing more than a 'shoe throwing'. Certainly, the 'shoe throw' is an off-the-cuff dismissal - one very easily made when the government in question, the Harper Conservative government, refuses to release related information to Parliament.

[M.Dancer]

Conservative partisans are very quick to diminish any suggestion of torture, or degrees of torture, by simply labeling it as nothing more than a 'shoe throwing'. Certainly, the 'shoe throw' is an off-the-cuff dismissal - one very easily made when the government in question, the Harper Conservative government, refuses to release related information to Parliament.

It was a size 8 topsider

[nicky10013]

Because Canadians are not being beaten with shoes and Afghans are notb being beaten with shoes in Canada....

You do know the relevance of the shoe?

So we don't have to respect human rights as long as we're not in Canada. For universal values, they aren't very universal.

[Born Free]

The nation needs a visionary leader.

.... you mean like changing the lyrics of Oh Canada?

[nicky10013]

So many people have stood up and said this was a joke, from hillier on down, how many times is this dog going to be beaten.This again will blow up in the liberals faces. How many of these people turned over ended up being let go out the back door,by the brother in law and maybe killed a canadian soldier. And a question I want answered is what and when the liberal goverment at the time knew about this ,since they set this up. And IMO I think that harper might know something about that as is making sure he can legally released that info and it might not to to good for the libs.But how can the libs ,whos own rules allowed this to happen ,start blaming harper for it, the one that changed the rules to what they are now..

Maybe Hillier said this was a joke because he commanded troops in Afghanistan during the time in question, so, just like the Liberals, shouldn't we also try and figure out what his motives are and what he knew?

Your second argument is that Harper, the most partisan PM in Canadian history, is sitting on info that could destroy the Liberals and haven't released it yet? Now THAT'S a joke.

Yes, the Liberals need to be held to account as it was their rules that allowed this to happen. However, what does it say about the current government who never did anything over the 4 years since that agreement came into effect? They may not have drafted the rules but they played by them knowing what was happening. That makes them just as responsible for what's going on now as the Liberals if not more so. Why? The Conservatives actually had a chance to stop what was happening. They didn't.