Liberal contenders slam Harper for 'anti-Israeli' accusation

[gc1765]

As a Conservative supporter I hope Iggy keeps telling (his version of) the truth.

Unfortunately, he might do himself so much damage with his *truth-telling* to cost himself the nomination.

Partisanship aside, which would you prefer a politician to say: what gets them elected or the truth?

Pretend it was stephen harper, would you want him to tell the truth or would you want him to say what will get him elected?

[Ricki Bobbi]

Partisanship aside, which would you prefer a politician to say: what gets them elected or the truth?

Pretend it was stephen harper, would you want him to tell the truth or would you want him to say what will get him elected?

If I could be guaranteed that all leaders will tell the truth then I would obviously prefer leaders who told the truth (as he sees it).

But I wouldn't want a leader I supported to tell the truth if it was going to lead to his losing because the other guy lied.

Humans being what they are there is such a thing as stupid honesty.

Let's look at Kim Campbell for example.

-There really wasn't much likelihood of an improvement in the job situation from where she was in 1993.

-47 days is too short a time to have a serious discussion of social issues.

Both honest. Both stupidly honest.

[gc1765]

But I wouldn't want a leader I supported to tell the truth if it was going to lead to his losing because the other guy lied.

I suppose that's where we differ. I would put principles above politics.

[Ricki Bobbi]

I suppose that's where we differ. I would put principles above politics.

Look at the sh*t the Liberals have pulled over the last 30 years due to *overly-principled* leaders from the right.

Joe Clark is directly responsible for having Constitution Act 1982 foisted on all Canadians and the NEP foisted on Albertans. Had he been a little less principle and made small concessions to the creditistes his February 1980 budget would have passed and Trudeau would have never taken that famous walk in the snow.

Preston Manning's decision to not go after Chretien for the early election call in 1997 helped Chretien eke out that majority. (Background - many people saw the early election call as very cynical given the Red River Flood earlier in the year.) Had Manning pushed harder at making that an election issue he might have picked up the five needed seats to deprive Chretien of a majority.

Joe Clark again after he became leader again in 1998. What if he hadn't been so adamant about opposing the Reformers. If he had embraced the United Alternative we could very well have been spared the last six years of the Liberals 12 1/2 years in power.

[gerryhatrick]

As a Conservative supporter I hope Iggy keeps telling (his version of) the truth.

Unfortunately, he might do himself so much damage with his *truth-telling* to cost himself the nomination.

Partisanship aside, which would you prefer a politician to say: what gets them elected or the truth?

Pretend it was stephen harper, would you want him to tell the truth or would you want him to say what will get him elected?

Unfortunately that's our current reality....rightwing political correctness rules.

Israel did commit war crimes in Lebanon, that is just a simple truth. Heaven forbid anyone say it though.

[jbg]

Israel did commit war crimes in Lebanon, that is just a simple truth. Heaven forbid anyone say it though.

Again, is it Israel's fault that the Hezzies hide among civilians?

[Borg]

Harper told the truth.

The media and Iggy will try to spin it. It is their job.

Finally and once again - Harper told the truth.

I wonder if that will be reported?

Borg

[Guest Warwick Green]

Israel did commit war crimes in Lebanon, that is just a simple truth. Heaven forbid anyone say it though.

Again, is it Israel's fault that the Hezzies hide among civilians?

The term "war crime" is getting shop-worn. It's being used all the time to describe just about anything going on in a war that someone doesn't like. I just read about a US soldier in Iraq being accused of a "war crime" because he allegedly shot a British reporter.

But it should teach Ignatieff to be more careful in his choice of words.

[Borg]

Israel did commit war crimes in Lebanon, that is just a simple truth. Heaven forbid anyone say it though.

Again, is it Israel's fault that the Hezzies hide among civilians?

The term "war crime" is getting shop-worn. It's being used all the time to describe just about anything going on in a war that someone doesn't like. I just read about a US soldier in Iraq being accused of a "war crime" because he allegedly shot a British reporter.

But it should teach Ignatieff to be more careful in his choice of words.

True.

War crimes are usually only committed by the loser.

In the end as long as the enemy is lying on the ground dead there is no argument about the crime - if there was even one to begin with.

Personally, when ever I hear a politician talking about war crimes I tune it out right away - just more spin. Especially from Canadian media and politicians. Weak and limp wristed as most of them are.

Borg

[watching&waiting]

I disagree with those who say it is a war crime on the Israel's part in the last war. It would only be a crime if they purposefully targeted the civillians, and that is not true plain and simple. Yes the Hezbola did hide in and around civillian targets, and that was what the Israel targeted. They can not help it that some civillians were then harmed. These same civillians should have removed themselves from the area as it would have to be a known fact that hezbola was in their midst.

Just as when we dropped bombs on Germany in the WWII, we were targeting military sites, but the very nature and accuracy of the bombs meant many civillian casualties. The same can be said in this last war with Israel. While accuracy today is much better, it still is not that pinpoint that it can not go wrong. To then call these war crimes is just another abuse of the system, and it does not do the real cause of these rules anything but harm. Harper was right in the stance he took and I support him on that

[betsy]

So, assuming that the liberals have a history of saying what gets them elected...do you think iggy should continue with this tradition or do you think he should tell the truth?

As a Conservative supporter I hope Iggy keeps telling (his version of) the truth.

Unfortunately, he might do himself so much damage with his *truth-telling* to cost himself the nomination.

Getting Iggy out of the race is the best thing that can happen for the Conservatives!

[betsy]

Anyway, what do you do if your enemies hide behind civilians? And there were civilians who harbor them...providing protection by letting them hide amongst them.

So instead, why didn't the Liberal leadership candidates criticize Lebanon for letting that happen?

Are they incapable of discerning that fact?

[jdobbin]

Anyway, what do you do if your enemies hide behind civilians? And there were civilians who harbor them...providing protection by letting them hide amongst them.

I like this way of thinking. Husband holds wife hostage, holds wife in front of him and threatens cops. Cops shoot wife.

Wife is to blame. Afterall, she chose this man in the first place.

[betsy]

Anyway, what do you do if your enemies hide behind civilians? And there were civilians who harbor them...providing protection by letting them hide amongst them.

I like this way of thinking. Husband holds wife hostage, holds wife in front of him and threatens cops. Cops shoot wife.

Wife is to blame. Afterall, she chose this man in the first place.

Or just shoot the wife to incapacitate her...then go for the husband. The movie Speed had two rescue guys talking a version of that kind of scenario..."taking the hostage out of the equation", they say.

You definitely have to go for the husband! You've got to go for the root (no pun intended)!

[jdobbin]

Or just shoot the wife to incapacitate her...then go for the husband. The movie Speed had two rescue guys talking a version of that kind of scenario..."taking the hostage out of the equation", they say.

Cops don't shoot to incapacitate. They shoot to kill.

[Rovik]

I don't think that Iggy will suffer much of political fallout as the Conservatives say he is. Let's face it, if Iggy became the leader of the Liberals, the Conservatives would lose some of their right-wing vote to him, therefore, it's in the Conservative's best interest to make a mountain out of a molehill.

The reason why I think he won't suffer much of fallout is because because he is right and most people know it. The Israeli's did commit war crimes; killing innocent civilians, destroying infrastructure that will set back Lebanon's economy and their use of the incidious cluster bombs that are still killing civilians today. There is also no denying that Hezbellah also committed war crimes, but I bet you that there wouldn't as been as much of an outcry if he focused on Hezbellah.

And just because he criticized what Israeli did in the excursion, doesn't mean he is anti-Israel. For example, I don't like the fact that Americans had secret prisons world-wide that they interrogated prisoners, but that doesn't make me anti-American. For anyone to make such assumptions, including Harper's ridiculious "ant-Israeli" comments, is been unfair and unjust.

[gerryhatrick]

Israel did commit war crimes in Lebanon, that is just a simple truth. Heaven forbid anyone say it though.

Again, is it Israel's fault that the Hezzies hide among civilians?

The answer to that is no.

But the fact remains that war crimes were commited against Lebanon by Israel.

[jbg]

Anyway, what do you do if your enemies hide behind civilians? And there were civilians who harbor them...providing protection by letting them hide amongst them.

I like this way of thinking. Husband holds wife hostage, holds wife in front of him and threatens cops. Cops shoot wife.

Wife is to blame. Afterall, she chose this man in the first place.

If the husband's contnued existence poses a danger to the general public, it may well be necessary to kill the innocent wife. You don't sacrifice the general safety to protect one person.

[gerryhatrick]

The term "war crime" is getting shop-worn. It's being used all the time to describe just about anything going on in a war that someone doesn't like.

Not really. The term "war crime" is quite clear. There are laws of war:

The laws of war, foremost the United Nations Charter, the Geneva conventions and the Hague conventions, bind consenting nations and have achieved widespread consent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war

And breaking them is what is described as a "war crime":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime

Hezbollah committed them as well, and all the same respected human rights organizations that have identified war crimes by Israel have also fingered Hezbollah.

There's a rightwing political correctness that lashes out at the truth when it's applied to Israel, unfortunately.

[Ricki Bobbi]

Not really. The term "war crime" is quite clear. There are laws of war:

The laws of war, foremost the United Nations Charter, the Geneva conventions and the Hague conventions, bind consenting nations and have achieved widespread consent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war

And breaking them is what is described as a "war crime":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime

Hezbollah committed them as well, and all the same respected human rights organizations that have identified war crimes by Israel have also fingered Hezbollah.

There's a rightwing political correctness that lashes out at the truth when it's applied to Israel, unfortunately.

You know grehatrick you were being fair and reasonable until that last sentenced. Do you truly think this douible-standard only applies to conservatives? Wouldn't Jack Layton's support of Hezbollah be an example of leftwing political correctness lashing out at the truth?

tsk tsk grehatrick you appeared to be having a good morning.

[gerryhatrick]

Not really. The term "war crime" is quite clear. There are laws of war:

The laws of war, foremost the United Nations Charter, the Geneva conventions and the Hague conventions, bind consenting nations and have achieved widespread consent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war

And breaking them is what is described as a "war crime":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime

Hezbollah committed them as well, and all the same respected human rights organizations that have identified war crimes by Israel have also fingered Hezbollah.

There's a rightwing political correctness that lashes out at the truth when it's applied to Israel, unfortunately.

You know grehatrick you were being fair and reasonable until that last sentenced. Do you truly think this douible-standard only applies to conservatives? Wouldn't Jack Layton's support of Hezbollah be an example of leftwing political correctness lashing out at the truth?

tsk tsk grehatrick you appeared to be having a good morning.

What's with the name mispelling? It's not my real name, so you're not going to offend me if that's your intent.

How did Jack Layton support Hezbollah? I didn't catch that.

If you don't think there's a rightwing political correctness that's pervasive in Western society today then I guess we're just not on the same page. To me it's quite obvious that critisism of Israel, or almost any military Mid-East involvement by Israel or the West , is treated to a barrage of outrage.

We have two dailies in my Canadian city, and they're both extremely rightwing in their editorials. Liberals are cut-and-runners, Israel is 100% right in everything it does, Stephen Harper is the second coming, Iraq is a great democracy movement, George Bush is a hero and Canadians are all anti-American. This is in Canada I see this constant stream. It's ok, because the truth always wins in the end, but this current rightwing political correctness is undeniable.

Look at Iggy. He said Israel committed war crimes. What happened? Outrage. Shrill protest. Disbelief. Does any media outlet ask the question "What is he talking about? Let's go look at the case for what he's saying and report on it....". Of course not.

[Ricki Bobbi]

What's with the name mispelling? It's not my real name, so you're not going to offend me if that's your intent.

If you don't think there's a rightwing political correctness that's pervasive in Western society today then I guess we're just not on the same page. To me it's quite obvious that critisism of Israel, or almost any military Mid-East involvement by Israel or the West , is treated to a barrage of outrage.

We have two dailies in my Canadian city, and they're both extremely rightwing in their editorials. Liberals are cut-and-runners, Israel is 100% right in everything it does, Stephen Harper is the second coming, Iraq is a great democracy movement, George Bush is a hero and Canadians are all anti-American. This is in Canada I see this constant stream. It's ok, because the truth always wins in the end, but this current rightwing political correctness is undeniable.

Look at Iggy. He said Israel committed war crimes. What happened? Outrage. Shrill protest. Disbelief. Does any media outlet ask the question "What is he talking about? Let's go look at the case for what he's saying and report on it....". Of course not.

Grehatrick is just a way of recognizing the special status you have on the board. In all cases if it wasn't an issue to you it wouldn't have been mentioned.

Rightwing political correctness? wtf? Where was the *barrage* of outrage? Harper said that amost all of the Liberal candidates are anti-Israel. He did take time out to mention that Brison and Volpe are exceptions. A tendency to mention exceptions and be fair that you should learn.

The George Bush analogy is purely weak and false. Trying and bring up the boogeyman to paint all Conservatives as bad?

You really shouldn't be allowed to spread such hate on a message board affiliated with a publicly-funded university. Why should tax payer dollars go to a site that allows you to continually break the rule to spread your lies and hatred about the Prime Minister and his party?

Please do start the swearing again. Yet again another example of your special status. But given your quick edit last time I'll make sure to post them so you can't change your posts.

[Biblio Bibuli]

The term "war crime" is getting shop-worn. It's being used all the time to describe just about anything going on in a war that someone doesn't like.

Not really. The term "war crime" is quite clear. There are laws of war:

The laws of war, foremost the United Nations Charter, the Geneva conventions and the Hague conventions, bind consenting nations and have achieved widespread consent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laws_of_war

And breaking them is what is described as a "war crime":

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime

Hezbollah committed them as well, and all the same respected human rights organizations that have identified war crimes by Israel have also fingered Hezbollah.

There's a rightwing political correctness that lashes out at the truth when it's applied to Israel, unfortunately.

That reminds me of what Michael Ignatieff said yesterday ... "Nobody in their right mind supposes that the only war crimes are those committed by the IDF [israel Defense Forces]. They were also committed by terrorist militia that frankly could care less whether it complies with the laws of war."

Frankly, I think Iggy will come out of this smelling like a rose. And no, he won't wear one, nor a turtleneck, for Sunday's debate.

I can't wait to watch it, it will be yet another feather in his cap.

GO IGGY GO!

[jbg]

Frankly, I think Iggy will come out of this smelling like a rose. And no, he won't wear one, nor a turtleneck, for Sunday's debate.

I can't wait to watch it, it will be yet another feather in his cap.

GO IGGY GO!

Will Sunday's debate be on www.cpac.ca ? Also, was it True Dope that wore the rose?

[Ricki Bobbi]

That reminds me of what Michael Ignatieff said yesterday ... "Nobody in their right mind supposes that the only war crimes are those committed by the IDF [israel Defense Forces]. They were also committed by terrorist militia that frankly could care less whether it complies with the laws of war."

Frankly, I think Iggy will come out of this smelling like a rose. And no, he won't wear one, nor a turtleneck, for Sunday's debate.

I can't wait to watch it, it will be yet another feather in his cap.

GO IGGY GO!

Bibs, I think you are being a little optimisitc if you think that Iggy is going to come out of the Qada fiasco in better shape then he went in.

Do remember that I hope he wins the leadership. All the better for the Conservatives!