Afghan translator tells it all

[Born Free]

Yawn.

The only people who care about the Afghan "issue" are people who would never vote for the Tories no matter what they do, they're mostly people who are reflexively anti-military to begin with, supercilious snots with poor educations and attention spans and an overweaning opinion of their own intelligence.

Kinda like almost everyone on this topic!

At least you are finally agreeing its an "issue". Thanks for playing.

[ToadBrother]

Remember Toadie,Mr.Harper has always wanted rebuild the political infrastructure in Canada to resemble a Reform view of Canada.This probably why he has such a disdainful attitude towards anyone who might have a differing point of view...Like for example...Opposition parties that might question his position on paying no attention to a request from Parliament on documents regarding Afghan detianee's???

But the system he's apparently attempting to build is the polar opposite of Manning's vision. Manning was no authoritarian, no advocate of an absolutist PMO. Quite the opposite, he wanted to remake Confederation into a somewhat looser creature, with Ottawa wielding less direct power. I suspect, when you peel off the layers of the long-standing disputes between Manning and Harper, this may in fact be it, that for all Harper's Reform pedigree, he isn't too many houses down the block from the kind of Prime Minister that Trudeau, Mulroney and Chretien formulated. The only they had that Harper doesn't is a majority so that his whims and decrees can go unopposed. I truly fear the thought of a Harper majority now.

[Jack Weber]

But the system he's apparently attempting to build is the polar opposite of Manning's vision. Manning was no authoritarian, no advocate of an absolutist PMO. Quite the opposite, he wanted to remake Confederation into a somewhat looser creature, with Ottawa wielding less direct power. I suspect, when you peel off the layers of the long-standing disputes between Manning and Harper, this may in fact be it, that for all Harper's Reform pedigree, he isn't too many houses down the block from the kind of Prime Minister that Trudeau, Mulroney and Chretien formulated. The only they had that Harper doesn't is a majority so that his whims and decrees can go unopposed. I truly fear the thought of a Harper majority now.

I think you're right...I was never a fan of Mannings vision for the country,but at least I knew where he stood.Frankly it seems that Manning was/is a right of centre libertarian and Mr. Harper is really more of a right wing authoritarian ideologue.The only thing stopping him from going all the way with this type of agenda is his party's minority status.On the face of it,I don't know howanyone could deny this when one looks at his secretive,autocratic,controling nature???

[Handsome Rob]

It should be about the Liberals as well. No one can reasonably say that any wrongdoing on our part (if there was any wrongdoing) magically started only when the Tories formed the government. The chief thing driving the Liberals is that any nasty stuff is going to do more damage to the current government than the previous one.

If roles were reversed, would you expect any less?

[ToadBrother]

If roles were reversed, would you expect any less?

Nope, not in the least. The one good thing that I hope comes out of this is that Parliament's supremacy over the Government is fully re-established.

[Jack Weber]

Nope, not in the least. The one good thing that I hope comes out of this is that Parliament's supremacy over the Government is fully re-established.

Agreed!

It's about time that the powers acquired by the PMO,since the Trudeau era,are greatly decreased because of this.

[bloodyminded]

As many have observed, Canada's military will come out of Afghanistan one of the most skilled anti-insurgency-type forces in the world. We have an entire generation of commanders blooded in the field, as opposed to a few generations of useless paper tigers. We have a rare opportunity, probably the first since the Korean War, to have battle-trained soldiers, some of which who will be career officers, and the Opposition would throw that away to get at the autocratic egomaniac Harper.

While I agree with you on most of your points in this post, I'm not sure about this one. If you're right about the improved counter-insurgency skills, and considering the 2011 pullout, why are the next several months so much more crucial to skill-enhancement than the last eight years?

[ToadBrother]

While I agree with you on most of your points in this post, I'm not sure about this one. If you're right about the improved counter-insurgency skills, and considering the 2011 pullout, why are the next several months so much more crucial to skill-enhancement than the last eight years?

If you start pulling the army apart over allegations like this, how many soldiers pondering a career in the armed forces will you drive away? The accusations, on the face of it, largely seem so low level, but the Opposition's desire to smack anything they can find over Harper's head so extreme, that the battle for Parliament could see the army the casualty in the struggle.

Look, I have no problem with the Foreign Affairs Committee going through the documents. I can't believe that there is anyone on that Committee that poses a security risk, and the Government certainly hasn't named any names, just simply declared that it's immune somehow from constitutional imperatives that have existed for over three hundred years. I am, as I said, a strong constitutionalist, and will, though my heart is with our troops, side with Parliament. But I still think Parliament should be very careful not to turn this into a witch hunt against the troops themselves. I could care less whether MacKay's reputation is wiped out. I don't even care if the Government ultimately falls over it. I have little emotional attachment to any political party, believing them all to be dens of autocracy and inequity. But I do care if we do one better than the Somali affair and see the Committee turned into an inquiry-by-any-other-name. As I said in another post, everyone in Parliament is to blame for this reaching this point.

[bloodyminded]

If you start pulling the army apart over allegations like this, how many soldiers pondering a career in the armed forces will you drive away? The accusations, on the face of it, largely seem so low level, but the Opposition's desire to smack anything they can find over Harper's head so extreme, that the battle for Parliament could see the army the casualty in the struggle.

I'm not sure it would have any effect at all...but who knows? A good answer.

[Keepitsimple]

It's quite interesting that Malgarai's lawyer is Amir Attaran, the smug University of Ottawa academic who has often appeared on CBC bashing the Military and the Government. I wonder how Malgarai found him - or did Attaran actually find him. In light of Malgarai's suspect "testimony", I wonder what advice and coaching Attaran gave him. How is it that this guy so conveniently popped out of the woodwork at this time? Here's a link to a BLOG that gives a backgrounder on Mr. Attaran.

Link: http://unambig.com/amir-attarans-quest-to-down-the-conservatives/

Edited April 20, 2010 by Keepitsimple

[capricorn]

It's quite interesting that Malgarai's lawyer is Amir Attaran, the smug University of Ottawa academic who has often appeared on CBC bashing the Military and the Government.

Attaran and Lew Mackenzie were on Power Play last night. Mackenzie got the better of Attaran who was red faced when the retired General got through with him. See the clip, link to the exchange is on the right hand side.

http://watch.ctv.ca/news/power-play/april-19/#clip291220

[M.Dancer]

Attaran and Lew Mackenzie were on Power Play last night. Mackenzie got the better of Attaran who was red faced when the retired General got through with him. See the clip, link to the exchange is on the right hand side.

http://watch.ctv.ca/news/power-play/april-19/#clip291220

Indeed. When I first heard the shooting of the unarmed man/ cover up allegation I thought it was nonsense. The Canadian forces have shot at least a couple of handfuls of unarmed civilians without any cover up, so why start now?

[wyly]

If you start pulling the army apart over allegations like this, how many soldiers pondering a career in the armed forces will you drive away? The accusations, on the face of it, largely seem so low level, but the Opposition's desire to smack anything they can find over Harper's head so extreme, that the battle for Parliament could see the army the casualty in the struggle.

maybe the rambo type may be disillusioned but those looking for a job or an education it won't bother them in the least...

[wyly]

Attaran and Lew Mackenzie were on Power Play last night. Mackenzie got the better of Attaran who was red faced when the retired General got through with him. See the clip, link to the exchange is on the right hand side.

you're a homer...our wonderful general is supporting the military defying canadian law, he was over his head taking on a lawyer over law...if the military is innocent produce the investigation, why hide it?...

[Argus]

Attaran and Lew Mackenzie were on Power Play last night. Mackenzie got the better of Attaran who was red faced when the retired General got through with him. See the clip, link to the exchange is on the right hand side.

http://watch.ctv.ca/news/power-play/april-19/#clip291220

I'm wondering how one gets to be a law professor without knowing the difference between first-hand testimony and second-hand hearsay. Then I remembered, he's from the University of Ottawa.

For those of you unfortunate enough to be stuck with a smarmy, politically active, knowledge free "professor" like this - first hand testimony is the soldiers who were actually there. Second hand hearsay is from the translator who spoke with the Tablian captured there.

[Argus]

you're a homer...our wonderful general is supporting the military defying canadian law, he was over his head taking on a lawyer over law...if the military is innocent produce the investigation, why hide it?...

I think Mackenzie was fairly obvious on that point. The documents of the raid included full sets of planning, intelligence workups, command and control set-ups, methodolgy, sources, etc. I can certainly see why the miitary would be reluctant to hand that over to people whose sympathies seem to be more with the Taliban than with them.

[M.Dancer]

I'm wondering how one gets to be a law professor without knowing the difference between first-hand testimony and second-hand hearsay.

Oh I am sure he knows the difference and the % of people who don't...

[bloodyminded]

I think Mackenzie was fairly obvious on that point. The documents of the raid included full sets of planning, intelligence workups, command and control set-ups, methodolgy, sources, etc. I can certainly see why the miitary would be reluctant to hand that over to people whose sympathies seem to be more with the Taliban than with them.

That's the cheapest cop-out I've heard all day...and I was just listening to some remarks by Charest.

[Born Free]

I'm not impressed by yet another Canadian general shoutung out "ludicrous".

[M.Dancer]

I can certainly see why the miitary would be reluctant to hand that over to people whose sympathies seem to be more with the Taliban than with them.

You don't think the Taliban have the right to know our capabilities and how we gather intelligence about their operations?

[Born Free]

You don't think the Taliban have the right to know our capabilities and how we gather intelligence about their operations?

Ludicrous!!

[bloodyminded]

So two posters now (Argus and M. Dancer) are performing the art of special pleading...that our military, and by extension our government, should be more secretive and less accountable.

While I applaud this faux-patriotic sense of deeply ingrained servility, I must say I'm less than convinced that the opposition parties are loyal to the Taliban.

But whatever insane conspiracy theory floats your flimsy little boat....

[Muddy]

Glad I was a soldier and not a lawyer! Way to go General! I know who I trust between those two guys. I might just be a little prejudice. I served with MacKenzie when he was just platoon commander. He was destined for greatness. He will be at our old regiments birthday this Friday at Moss Park Armoury and Saturday at the Harbour Castle where he will be the key note speaker.Also in attendance will be Princess Alexandra, Col. Dave Deval of CTV weatherman fame from the juniour service ( Air Force) will be the MC. Along with Queens Own Rifles Veterans from WW2 right through Korea, Cold War,Cyprus ,assorted peace keeping and Afganistan today.

That was just a plug for anyone interested.Go to qor2010 for more information.

It`s a good thing that MacKenzie King did not have to deal with lawyers and politicians who I suspect have other agendas today, other than beating up bad guys.They almost have no opinion on head choppers, acid in the face of little girls, buggering of little boys and torturers.

[bloodyminded]

Glad I was a soldier and not a lawyer! Way to go General! I know who I trust between those two guys. I might just be a little prejudice. I served with MacKenzie when he was just platoon commander. He was destined for greatness. He will be at our old regiments birthday this Friday at Moss Park Armoury and Saturday at the Harbour Castle where he will be the key note speaker.Also in attendance will be Princess Alexandra, Col. Dave Deval of CTV weatherman fame from the juniour service ( Air Force) will be the MC. Along with Queens Own Rifles Veterans from WW2 right through Korea, Cold War,Cyprus ,assorted peace keeping and Afganistan today.

That was just a plug for anyone interested.Go to qor2010 for more information.

It`s a good thing that MacKenzie King did not have to deal with lawyers and politicians who I suspect have other agendas today, other than beating up bad guys.They almost have no opinion on head choppers, acid in the face of little girls, buggering of little boys and torturers.

If your one and only agenda is "beating up bad guys," you are on the road to authoritarianism.

This isn't about the "bad guys," it is about us.

Elementary morality tells us to take care of the problems in the mirror first--that our own failings are a far more serious matter than the failings of others.

This is so basic we teach it to three year olds, and rightly so.

Some of us forget. In this case, it's thanks to a kind of military fetishism.

Edited April 21, 2010 by bloodyminded

[Muddy]

You were obviously never a soldier! The last guys who want war are soldiers.But when guys without uniforms are trying to kill you ,you want to make sure they die and not you and your mates. Your country sends you out to do a job,in this case it started with the UN ,asking us through NATO to take on this task. I do not condone cold blooded murder. Not for one minute but those Lads are facing an unconventional enemy and they sometimes have to make split second decisions or they end up dead or worse they contribute to the death or maiming of their mates. War is messy. It`s a horrible last resort. It is failure. But if your going to take part you better go with the attitude you want to win. I would prefer Gen. MacKenzie to lead and not that lawyer who thinks second hand testimony should be gospel.