Opposition MPs Using the Troops AGAIN

[scribblet]

According to the news this morning, opposition MPs are pushing to send the Governer General to Kandahar - why and what is the rush? What is there to gain from this other than cheap political points.

We know that if she got hurt over there it would play well for the opposition, and we know its highly likely that the terrorists would target her as she is a woman and that hurting or killing her would turn more people against the mission - she would be a prime target, more so than the PM.

We also know that Harper would wear it even though it is not his war.

[Leafless]

According to the news this morning, opposition MPs are pushing to send the Governer General to Kandahar - why and what is the rush? What is there to gain from this other than cheap political points.

We know that if she got hurt over there it would play well for the opposition, and we know its highly likely that the terrorists would target her as she is a woman and that hurting or killing her would turn more people against the mission - she would be a prime target, more so than the PM.

We also know that Harper would wear it even though it is not his war.

According to the article GG Michaelle Jean voluntarily wants to visit the troops in Kandahar: "Ms. Jean told Gen. Rick Hillier, chief of defence staff, in early 2006 that she wanted to visit the troops in Kandahar"

But I also see this as a possible cheap Liberal ploy to promote Michaelle Jean, seen as a Liberal appointed star icon, rather than owe any political credit credit to Stephen Harper in an effort to belittle the importance of his trip to Kandahar.

Although the GG is technically 'commander-in-chief' of Canada's military, her role in operational terms is simply as a figurehead.

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/s...09-450bd12cd4a9

[scribblet]

The CPC have said they are looking into it, the opposition seem to be in a rush to get her there - why I wonder?

[normanchateau]

According to the news this morning, opposition MPs are pushing to send the Governer General to Kandahar - why and what is the rush?

Michaelle Jean has been repeatedly asking Rick Hillier to go since early 2006 but she's been told that there are security concerns. This same excuse has been used to block visits by the House of Commons multi-party defence committee and the Senate multi-party national security committee.

But for some reason, Stephen Harper, Peter MacKay and Gordon O'Connor have all met the troops in Kandahar. Wouldn't it be nice if Jean, who is nonpartisan and represents ALL Canadians could visit and show her support for the troops instead of just three Conservatives?

[Ricki Bobbi]

But for some reason, Stephen Harper, Peter MacKay and Gordon O'Connor have all met the troops in Kandahar. Wouldn't it be nice if Jean, who is nonpartisan and represents ALL Canadians could visit and show her support for the troops instead of just three Conservatives?

Non-partisan? Right normie.

Talk about having the blinders on. You somehow have a problem with the Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Defence meeint the troops. Please explain that.

As a 'non-partisan' why isn't Jean speaking out about the clearly partisan efforts of the opposition?

[normanchateau]

Talk about having the blinders on. You somehow have a problem with the Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Defence meeint the troops. Please explain that.

If there are security concerns preventing Jean from visiting despite her pleas to visit, why were Harper, MacKay and O'Connor able to visit?

[Ricki Bobbi]

If there are security concerns preventing Jean from visiting despite her pleas to visit, why were Harper, MacKay and O'Connor able to visit?

What is your problem with the Prime Minister, Minister of Defence and Minister of Foreign Affairs meeting our troops?

Are you that against our forces you can't see straight to support these clear morale building trips?

I take it your silence on the non-partisan issue clearly recognizes how tied to the Liberal Party of Canada Jean is.

[Argus]

Talk about having the blinders on. You somehow have a problem with the Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Defence meeint the troops. Please explain that.

If there are security concerns preventing Jean from visiting despite her pleas to visit, why were Harper, MacKay and O'Connor able to visit?

They were there on business, not sight-seeing.

[Wilber]

How many opposition MP's have visited Kandahar?

[betsy]

Well the whole Liberal Party should all visit Kandahar together!

Give them all the credit for that visit...why, we should even do a big promotion on that visit..announce it maybe 3 weeks before the date....complete with date count down!

At least it will be in keeping with that spoof ad of the Liberals on youtube, that showed all original leadership candidates under the space voyager starship Enterprise.

Except that they'll be more like "Police Academy" On "Airplane: The Movie"

[gerryhatrick]

Talk about having the blinders on. You somehow have a problem with the Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Defence meeint the troops. Please explain that.

If there are security concerns preventing Jean from visiting despite her pleas to visit, why were Harper, MacKay and O'Connor able to visit?

They were there on business, not sight-seeing.

Then what about the "House of Commons multi-party defence committee and the Senate multi-party national security committee" referred to above? Why are they blocked?

The only people playing partisan games in this situation is the CPC.

Don't tell me the GG is partisan or that the opposition has an ulterior motive for having her go there. That's BS.

[watching&waiting]

GH nobody is stopped from going to Afghanistan, you can book a flight and go and as long as your passport is in order you can leave on your own schedule. It is when you are asking the government to pay and also be prepared to make you trip there safe that issues arise. I am sure that if any member of the opposition really wants to go there to see what it is like, The government will be happy to send them as long as they know in advance that there is a high probability that they could come under enemy fire. Hell I am sure Harper would love to send all the opposition there for an extended stay. But Things like this have to have certain expectancy of safety involved with them. O'Conner and Harper both made last minute trips that were no advertised because of the security concern. If the opposition wanted to do the same I am sure it would be approved. But no the opposition want this to be a photo op and with full press. That is where security just can not be given. The insurgentents get many more points if they can take out enemy MP's. So they would be very high on the suicide bombings and also for sniper attacks etc. So be careful what you wish for, as you may just get it.

[normanchateau]

Talk about having the blinders on. You somehow have a problem with the Prime Minister, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of Defence meeint the troops. Please explain that.

If there are security concerns preventing Jean from visiting despite her pleas to visit, why were Harper, MacKay and O'Connor able to visit?

They were there on business, not sight-seeing.

In this morning's Vancouver Sun on page A4, Peter O'Neil points out that in addition to Harper, MacKay and O'Connor, numerous entertainers, business people and ex-soldiers have all recently met the troops in Kandahar. I guess they were all there on business.

Typical Harper bs. Blocking opposition MPs and now even the nonpartisan Governor General from visiting shows that the Harper government is once again lying about security concerns.

Fortunately Jean has been supporting the troops in other ways, including visiting bases in Esquimalt, Edmonton and Halifax, and meeting with families of Canada's fallen in Afghanistan.

[gerryhatrick]

Fortunately Jean has been supporting the troops in other ways, including visiting bases in Esquimalt, Edmonton and Halifax, and meeting with families of Canada's fallen in Afghanistan.

Yes, the GG has shown a lot of support for the troops. They would love to see her.

[normanchateau]

Fortunately Jean has been supporting the troops in other ways, including visiting bases in Esquimalt, Edmonton and Halifax, and meeting with families of Canada's fallen in Afghanistan.

Yes, the GG has shown a lot of support for the troops. They would love to see her.

Maybe that's the security concern...Harper's own insecurity. I suspect there'd be far more of our troops

interested in seeing her than Harper, MacKay and O'Connor combined.

[killjoy]

Michaelle Jean has been repeatedly asking Rick Hillier to go since early 2006 but she's been told that there are security concerns. This same excuse has been used to block visits by the House of Commons multi-party defence committee and the Senate multi-party national security committee.

Maybe that's the security concern...Harper's own insecurity. I suspect there'd be far more of our troops

interested in seeing her than Harper, MacKay and O'Connor combined.

LOL! Oh - now all of a sudden there are no security concerns in Afghanistan!

Another fine example of blatant dishonesty and clumsy spinning.

For how long now have you guys relished the opportunity to come here and display the headline of the day about Afghanistan in an effort to point out "how bad it is" over there - how the Taliban are on the rise - how the attacks are increasing etc. etc.. Now that it doesn't fit with your story suddenly 'security concerns’ are just an "excuse". Suddenly there should be no security concerns and it’s all just a big lie and plot. Do you even know what you believe anymore? Of course you don’t. You’re told what to believe and you’re too lazy to do otherwise.

I'm willing to bet most of you guys lie so much you have lost all track of what you're lying about compared to what you actually believe.

Hilarious and pathetic.

.

[normanchateau]

You’re told what to believe...

Who exactly tells us "what to believe"? Satan? Other demonic forces opposed to socon Harper?

[gerryhatrick]

Michaelle Jean has been repeatedly asking Rick Hillier to go since early 2006 but she's been told that there are security concerns. This same excuse has been used to block visits by the House of Commons multi-party defence committee and the Senate multi-party national security committee.

Maybe that's the security concern...Harper's own insecurity. I suspect there'd be far more of our troops

interested in seeing her than Harper, MacKay and O'Connor combined.

LOL! Oh - now all of a sudden there are no security concerns in Afghanistan!

Another fine example of blatant dishonesty and clumsy spinning.

Hilarious and pathetic.

.

Settle down. That is not what the poster said, not in the least.

[Argus]

They were there on business, not sight-seeing.

Then what about the "House of Commons multi-party defence committee and the Senate multi-party national security committee" referred to above? Why are they blocked?

Because they had no business there.

Harper, Mckay and O'Conner were there to support the troops, and to meet with government officials. I don't think a bunch of MPs or Senators are going to bump up the troops' morale, and I doubt the government has any need to have these people discussing issues with the Afghanistan government when they're in no position to make deals or impliment anything.

Don't tell me the GG is partisan or that the opposition has an ulterior motive for having her go there. That's BS.

I don't know the circumstances of her visit, but things are somewhat more dangerous now than they were when Harper went over. O'Connor is a soldier anyway, and we wouldn't really miss McKay much. It would be a huge propaganda blow for The Taliban, though, if they so much as scratched the GG.

[gerryhatrick]

They were there on business, not sight-seeing.

Then what about the "House of Commons multi-party defence committee and the Senate multi-party national security committee" referred to above? Why are they blocked?

Because they had no business there.

I'm sorry Argus, that is just a silly statement.

[southerncomfort]

The GG non partisan LOL she's left wing CBC hack.

Wouldn't it be nice for the opposition if she was hurt they'd really score some points there, more photo ops and coverage if she was hurt or god forbid killed More troops would have to be provided for security we don't have, send her somewhere else but not Kandahar. Boy, this is strictly political and opposition using the troops and that CBC partisan Jean GG for political gain.

.

[killjoy]

Settle down. That is not what the poster said, not in the least.

Yes it is what he said. Now all of a sudden the idea that there could be security concerns is declared a fake when complaining about security is all you guys ever do.

Who exactly tells us "what to believe"? Satan? Other demonic forces opposed to socon Harper?

I dunno. You tell me. "Rage Against The Machine"? The Liberal party? Your picculi-smokin girlfriend? A 100 or more .org sites that don't know anything but won't let that stop them from yakking about it? Your conspiricy sites? Any of the barrage of books out there making their money on anotehr political consciousness that has simply become another target market?

The list is endless but my money is you get most of your poitical beliefs from some 22-year-old musicians.

The fact of the matter is you chant "Harper = Bush" like a mantra with nothing but wishful thinking, an unhealthy preoccupation with the US, and closed-mindedness to back it up.

.

[normanchateau]

They were there on business, not sight-seeing.

Then what about the "House of Commons multi-party defence committee and the Senate multi-party national security committee" referred to above? Why are they blocked?

Because they had no business there.

Harper, Mckay and O'Conner were there to support the troops, and to meet with government officials. I don't think a bunch of MPs or Senators are going to bump up the troops' morale, and I doubt the government has any need to have these people discussing issues with the Afghanistan government when they're in no position to make deals or impliment anything.

The House of Commons defence committee has no business there? They think otherwise. That's why they've asked to go but perhaps you think they just want a free Kandahar vacation.

[southerncomfort]

Maybe they do, free Tim Hortons and all that, maybe Iran next I hear they have some great beaches LOL

But you know how it is Normie, those partisan Taliban loving Liberals always loved a free junket, and donuts to boot.

[normanchateau]

my money is you get most of your poitical beliefs from some 22-year-old musicians.

The fact of the matter is you chant "Harper = Bush" like a mantra with nothing but wishful thinking, an unhealthy preoccupation with the US, and closed-mindedness to back it up.

Actually I just started a thread on "Harper=Clinton." Got the idea from some 22-year old musicians.