Afghan translator tells it all

[Topaz]

Last night, I watched and listened to the translator for the military tell his story and I have no reason to not believe him and he has also said to the Tories, if you don't believe me and help me bring over the people who know and can prove everything he said. He also, said when the Taliban found out he was working for the Canadian military, he asked McKay for help to get his family out of the country before they were killed and was turned down. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/04/15/afghan-translator-allegations-detainees.html

[ToadBrother]

Last night, I watched and listened to the translator for the military tell his story and I have no reason to not believe him and he has also said to the Tories, if you don't believe me and help me bring over the people who know and can prove everything he said. He also, said when the Taliban found out he was working for the Canadian military, he asked McKay for help to get his family out of the country before they were killed and was turned down. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/04/15/afghan-translator-allegations-detainees.html

My problem with all of this is that now that it's become the shitstorm that it has, you'll have people coming out of the woodwork to call out the Minister. This is what happens when governments (or any organization) attempt to cover up. The half-truths and myths that replace the truth are often times so much worse, and the longer you hide the truth (in the vain hope that it will all go away), the worse it becomes. If the Tories had played straight with the Committee last fall, I suspect this would all have blown over by now.

Unfortunately Harper has decided that he needs to put Parliament in its place, no matter many rivets pop out of his own ship.

[Born Free]

My problem with all of this is that now that it's become the shitstorm that it has, you'll have people coming out of the woodwork to call out the Minister. This is what happens when governments (or any organization) attempt to cover up.

Were he alive, Nixon would likely agree with that...

[Topaz]

Well, as it was said in Parliament today, when is Harper going to prorogue Parliament and call an election to stop a government inquiry into this. We all know when things get too hot and too close for Harper he runs to the GG and that would be the biggest cover-up of all. You know, a lot of this happened on O'Connor's watch and he kept saying the Red Cross were monitoring the prisoners. Wrong! How did he ever retire as a Brigade- General??

[Jack Weber]

My problem with all of this is that now that it's become the shitstorm that it has, you'll have people coming out of the woodwork to call out the Minister. This is what happens when governments (or any organization) attempt to cover up. The half-truths and myths that replace the truth are often times so much worse, and the longer you hide the truth (in the vain hope that it will all go away), the worse it becomes. If the Tories had played straight with the Committee last fall, I suspect this would all have blown over by now.

Unfortunately Harper has decided that he needs to put Parliament in its place, no matter many rivets pop out of his own ship.

I agree with that...The problem is that true transparency is not in Harper's DNA.It's obvious that he,and he alone, must control the message at all times by saying nothing.The cover up,to the extent that there is one,is going to be far more damaging long term than had they come clean before Christmas...

Edited April 16, 2010 by Jack Weber

[Bonam]

The cover up,to the extent that there is one,is going to be far more damaging long term than had they come clean before Christmas...

I wonder how many people actually care about this issue. My opinion would be that most Canadians are probably apathetic to this.

The only way this could cause a lot of political damage is if it was the only issue being discussed.

Frankly, Canadians would probably be much more outraged by some tax increase or cut to some social program than they would by this.

[Jack Weber]

I wonder how many people actually care about this issue. My opinion would be that most Canadians are probably apathetic to this.

The only way this could cause a lot of political damage is if it was the only issue being discussed.

Frankly, Canadians would probably be much more outraged by some tax increase or cut to some social program than they would by this.

Normally that might be the case...This is an ongoing thing that begs the simple question...If they could lie about this,what else are they lying about?

There's another thing that I heared Craig Oliver say a few weeks ago on Question period.Each one of these "scandals" by themselves is'nt that big a deal.When you begin to add them up,it tends to become an almost Death by 1000 cuts.1 time does'nt seem to be an issue..10 things that seem to lead to the same theme of secrecy within the PMO???That's going to be a looming problem for the Cons.

[Bonam]

There's another thing that I heared Craig Oliver say a few weeks ago on Question period.Each one of these "scandals" by themselves is'nt that big a deal.When you begin to add them up,it tends to become an almost Death by 1000 cuts.1 time does'nt seem to be an issue..10 things that seem to lead to the same theme of secrecy within the PMO???That's going to be a looming problem for the Cons.

Yeah I could definitely see it being a problem, if the other party (the liberals) could paint themselves as somehow better or different in this regard. But of course any such claim on their part would be laughable. As it is, I think Canadians that care about "transparency" have long since resigned themselves to the reality that they aren't gonna get it from any of our parties. As such, I think the dominant reaction to this issue will be one of apathy. The only thing people in Canada are really gonna get worked up about is if you try to make them pay more tax or try to cut some social spending.

[ToadBrother]

I wonder how many people actually care about this issue. My opinion would be that most Canadians are probably apathetic to this.

The only way this could cause a lot of political damage is if it was the only issue being discussed.

Frankly, Canadians would probably be much more outraged by some tax increase or cut to some social program than they would by this.

Which is a pity, because the fundamental issue, whether we end up with some bizarre hybrid presidential Prime Ministerial semi-democracy or with a Parliament that has its ancient power to dictate to government is what is really at stake. At this point I couldn't give a damn about what happened to some Taliban, I do care that we have a Prime Minister who despises Parliament.

[Bonam]

Which is a pity, because the fundamental issue, whether we end up with some bizarre hybrid presidential Prime Ministerial semi-democracy or with a Parliament that has its ancient power to dictate to government is what is really at stake.

Perhaps, again, it seems like an issue far removed from the lives of ordinary people. How many people even know about the supposed supremacy of parliament? The average Canadian probably has more of an idea of the way the American three branches of government interrelate than how the Canadian system works, mostly from watching movies and tv shows.

[bush_cheney2004]

....The average Canadian probably has more of an idea of the way the American three branches of government interrelate than how the Canadian system works, mostly from watching movies and tv shows.

Ain't that the truth!

[msdogfood]

Last night, I watched and listened to the translator for the military tell his story and I have no reason to not believe him and he has also said to the Tories, if you don't believe me and help me bring over the people who know and can prove everything he said. He also, said when the Taliban found out he was working for the Canadian military, he asked McKay for help to get his family out of the country before they were killed and was turned down. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/04/15/afghan-translator-allegations-detainees.html

Let the fun begin ... the press will go nuts with this!!.

[Wilber]

Which is a pity, because the fundamental issue, whether we end up with some bizarre hybrid presidential Prime Ministerial semi-democracy or with a Parliament that has its ancient power to dictate to government is what is really at stake. At this point I couldn't give a damn about what happened to some Taliban, I do care that we have a Prime Minister who despises Parliament.

It's the Canadian way. Our version of party discipline makes crossing the leader political suicide. Party leaders have that power because our party system has given it to them. Harper and other party leaders are just using the power that has been voluntarily given them by their own members. If Parliament wants that power back, it is up to Parliament to take it.

[Jack Weber]

Which is a pity, because the fundamental issue, whether we end up with some bizarre hybrid presidential Prime Ministerial semi-democracy or with a Parliament that has its ancient power to dictate to government is what is really at stake. At this point I couldn't give a damn about what happened to some Taliban, I do care that we have a Prime Minister who despises Parliament.

That is the scary truth facing all Canadians...I also don't care if some Taliban thug gets cuffed around by his own.What is scary is that we have a Prime Minister who feels he's above the law,as it relates to Parliament.H eclearly has some sort of contempt,not only of Parliament,but maybe democracy itself...I wonder how many have woke up to that fact,or still blindly buy the "We Support the Troops" sloganeering and false patriotism Harper and his aparatchiks bellow forth?

[Bonam]

That is the scary truth facing all Canadians...I also don't care if some Taliban thug gets cuffed around by his own.What is scary is that we have a Prime Minister who feels he's above the law,as it relates to Parliament.H eclearly has some sort of contempt,not only of Parliament...

And why not? Parliament is quite the contemptible institution. Ever watched the "discussion" that goes on in parliament? Bunch of phony old men yelling and screaming and interrupting each other and making no sense. This is not exactly a shining beacon that all must respect.

[Wilber]

That is the scary truth facing all Canadians...I also don't care if some Taliban thug gets cuffed around by his own.What is scary is that we have a Prime Minister who feels he's above the law,as it relates to Parliament.H eclearly has some sort of contempt,not only of Parliament,but maybe democracy itself...I wonder how many have woke up to that fact,or still blindly buy the "We Support the Troops" sloganeering and false patriotism Harper and his aparatchiks bellow forth?

Perhaps Parliament and it's apologists should stop whining and do their job rather than just towing the line. If Parliament won't stick up for itself, why should it get any respect?

[Jack Weber]

Perhaps Parliament and it's apologists should stop whining and do their job rather than just towing the line. If Parliament won't stick up for itself, why should it get any respect?

I agree with that,however the does'nt allow the Prime Minister to act as if he's above the law,does it?

[Jack Weber]

And why not? Parliament is quite the contemptible institution. Ever watched the "discussion" that goes on in parliament? Bunch of phony old men yelling and screaming and interrupting each other and making no sense. This is not exactly a shining beacon that all must respect.

Good to see you prefer creeping authoritarianism...

[ToadBrother]

Perhaps Parliament and it's apologists should stop whining and do their job rather than just towing the line. If Parliament won't stick up for itself, why should it get any respect?

What are you, Charles II's speechwriter?

[ToadBrother]

And why not? Parliament is quite the contemptible institution. Ever watched the "discussion" that goes on in parliament? Bunch of phony old men yelling and screaming and interrupting each other and making no sense. This is not exactly a shining beacon that all must respect.

First of all, that mainly applies to Question Period. I've watched committees and debates enough to know that all in all they're pretty subdued affairs. However, since the minority situation began, a lot of journalists have noted a change in the atmosphere of the House. In the old days, politics was kind of like pro wrestling. Everyone made a big show of hating each other during QP and scrums, but everyone generally got along when the cameras weren't running. Now, it seems it has become considerably more rancorous and personal. Whether that's just the nature of minority governments or because of Harper's extremely antagonistic leadership style I don't know.

But at any rate, democracy has always been a chaotic thing. As Winston Churchill once said, it's the worst governing system ever invented, except for all the others.

[Argus]

Last night, I watched and listened to the translator for the military tell his story and I have no reason to not believe him and he has also said to the Tories,

Yes, I've previously noted with amusement your habit of instant total credulity whenever anyone says anything which fits with your preconcieved prejudices. The words of this man, who you've never heard of and know nothing about, have now assumed the same level of acceptance in your mind as the bible does for a devout Christian.

Most of the rest of us have our doubts.

[Jack Weber]

First of all, that mainly applies to Question Period. I've watched committees and debates enough to know that all in all they're pretty subdued affairs. However, since the minority situation began, a lot of journalists have noted a change in the atmosphere of the House. In the old days, politics was kind of like pro wrestling. Everyone made a big show of hating each other during QP and scrums, but everyone generally got along when the cameras weren't running. Now, it seems it has become considerably more rancorous and personal. Whether that's just the nature of minority governments or because of Harper's extremely antagonistic leadership style I don't know.

But at any rate, democracy has always been a chaotic thing. As Winston Churchill once said, it's the worst governing system ever invented, except for all the others.

I don't believe that it's just because of minority parliament that things are little more rancorous.It believe that the Conservative Party contains some members who are inherently strident and angry.And they not only disagree with many of the opposition members,but have a visceral dislike of the opposition.That's not to say there are'nt radical elements within the opposition,but they are'nt in a position of power able to control the message.I get the feeling that they are frustrated that they cannot seem to get the majority that Harper and his accolytes crave,and they seem almost bitter that they have to try to cooperate with anyone.

I agree that democracy,like free speech,can be messy...It's the politic of the half loaf and requires comprimise.The problem is that we have a Prime Minister,and a party,that has no concept of the term commprimise.In fact,it is beginning to show a strong antidemocratic streak.

[ToadBrother]

I agree that democracy,like free speech,can be messy...It's the politic of the half loaf and requires comprimise.The problem is that we have a Prime Minister,and a party,that has no concept of the term commprimise.In fact,it is beginning to show a strong antidemocratic streak.

Well, Harper is not the first PM to run an autocratic regime. Chretien, up until the last few years, kept a pretty iron grip on the party, and I often wonder whether he lost his taste for the job, and let the Martinites gain much more influence than they would have in the 1990s. Mulroney and Trudeau were much the same; strongmen who only lost their grip when they became too battered or disinterested to maintain it. Mulroney, in particular, had to deal with a very divisive party, and its actually to his credit that he managed to keep a handle on things, but the constitutional wrangling and his own personal unpopularity ground him down.

But there's no doubt that a combination of the circle-the-wagons mentality of the minority situation and Harper's own extremely autocratic style of running both the government and his party have created a very undesirable situation. It has created an unnecessary showdown with the Opposition over the Afghan prisoner abuse issue, one in which neither side can really back down now, and because Harper's position is the most likely legally untenable one, if the Speaker does rule against his ministers, his options become all the worse. Autocratic leaders have this tendency to go down in flames like this. Trudeau and Mulroney were smart enough to see the end game and got out. Chretien, possibly because of the sponsorship scandal, seemed to let go his grip and let Martin wear the whole show. Harper is in no position. If he walks away now, the Tories might well just explode. Most certainly there's no one to step into the breach, MacKay being very damaged goods now. So one gets the feeling that autocracy and extreme partisanship are likes bricks on the accelerator for the Tories, making it speed out of control but at least giving it forward momentum.

It's the great irony of the modern Tory party that as much as it may need a tyrant to keep it together, that tyrant may in fact ultimately smack the party into the wall. The only thing that I can see that is keeping the Tories afloat right now is the weakness of the Opposition, and in particular of Iggy, who seems quite incapable of the kind of tactical thinking necessary to improve Liberal fortunes. And of course the Liberals are in a similar boat. There's no obvious successor if they turf Iggy. No one can tell me that Bob Rae has a hope in hell of improving fortunes in Ontario (any more than Tories should expect Mike Harris to). There's this gridlock, but the whole Afghan issue threatens to force all these issues anyways.

Edited April 16, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Wilber]

I agree with that,however the doesn't allow the Prime Minister to act as if he's above the law,does it?

Your opinion. If Harper is acting contrary to the law, presumably the law will hold him accountable. Not agreeing with someones actions doesn't make them illegal.

[Wilber]

What are you, Charles II's speechwriter?

The PM is no king even though Parliament allows him to act like one.