Catchme Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 Hopefully this is not true, The Canadian military has launched an investigation into allegations of detainee abuse by soldiers in Afghanistan, The Globe and Mail has learned. Spokesperson Major Luc Gaudet confirmed yesterday that the military began its probe last week after being informed that the Military Police Complaints Commission -- a civilian body formed to investigate complaints against the military -- had received a request for an investigation into the treatment of several detainees. The commission is expected to decide within days whether to launch its own probe -- a "public interest investigation" -- into the allegations. At least one, and perhaps three, Afghan detainees "taken captive by the Canadian Forces appears to have been beaten while detained and interrogated by them," alleges Amir Attaran, a University of Ottawa law professor, in a letter sent to the commission. Abuse Investigation Military officials are investigating allegations that three Afghan prisoners were abused while in the custody of Canadian soldiers.The allegations come from a law professor at the University of Ottawa, Amir Attaran, based on government documents he obtained under the Access to Information Act. The documents show three men were brought to military police by a single interrogator in one day with injuries to their faces, heads and upper bodies, he told the CBC on Tuesday. The issue of detainees is a sensitive one for the Canadian military, which spent a decade answering questions about the 1993 torture and slaying of a Somali man during a peacekeeping mission to the African country. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/02/06/...tary-probe.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 Bringing this up to the proper authorities so they are prosecuted (if indeed guilty) was the right thing to do. Bringing this to the press to get his face on TV put the troops at danger and makes people question the mission, rather needlessly. This prof is an idiot, self-serving at a huge cost to others. There is no doubt that some soliders are going to lose it. People do it everyday in society, that without being under the emmense pressure that troops are under overseas. It's absolutely no reflection on the mission, our policies, or our Armed Forces. In fact, it's a simple matter of criminal law that I'm confident would be dealt with appropriately. But this guy had to make his point that big bad Canada was hurting everyone. The prisioner had cuts and bruises?! Oh no! When his arms were tied behind his back?!?! Goodness!!! The report says the prisioner was combative. Knock the crap out of him then. I would venture the guess that if anyone assaulted a police officer, Mr. Attaran would not be racing to their aid when the officer handcuffed them. So why the difference? Grow up people, when troops have to question tying up a bomb maker so they don't get charged with torture, it's just ridiculous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 God I wish I could care if a terrorist lives to complain..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 Bringing this up to the proper authorities so they are prosecuted (if indeed guilty) was the right thing to do. Bringing this to the press to get his face on TV put the troops at danger and makes people question the mission, rather needlessly. This prof is an idiot, self-serving at a huge cost to others. There is no doubt that some soliders are going to lose it. People do it everyday in society, that without being under the emmense pressure that troops are under overseas. It's absolutely no reflection on the mission, our policies, or our Armed Forces. In fact, it's a simple matter of criminal law that I'm confident would be dealt with appropriately. But this guy had to make his point that big bad Canada was hurting everyone. The prisioner had cuts and bruises?! Oh no! When his arms were tied behind his back?!?! Goodness!!! The report says the prisioner was combative. Knock the crap out of him then. I would venture the guess that if anyone assaulted a police officer, Mr. Attaran would not be racing to their aid when the officer handcuffed them. So why the difference? Grow up people, when troops have to question tying up a bomb maker so they don't get charged with torture, it's just ridiculous. Well said Geoffrey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 Now this is a story worthy of our national attention, worthy of those high wages that are paided to those we call journalists. I just wondering how long it will consume the left. But before we arrest a few soldiers on abuse or disband another regt to keep our nations good image intact we should be asking these questions. The allegations come from a law professor at the University of Ottawa, Amir Attaran, based on government documents he obtained under the Access to Information Act. One Has to ask has Mr. Attaran been investagating "all" detainies captured by Canada's military? and for what purpose, yes he works for a human rights org, and if he is using his spare time to ensure that the military stays on track then i commend him for his efforts..But if his purpose is to undermind the mission, or use this info for personal gain or worse yet be employed by the bad guys then he himself should be investagated and brought to justice.. If he has'nt been investagating all the detainees captured by Canada's military how did he single out these 3, from hundards of detainees captured....inside sources "highly unlikely" or outside sources, are the taliban using this guy to make a big deal out this. We need to ask why he is doing all this....What was his motives for doing so, to have 5 mins of fame under the lights, or is he working to discredit the Afgan mission, or worse is he working for the bad guys. What does NON Complaint mean, it means that the detainee will not cooperate at all, not talking, not drinking, not eating , not walking or sitting he just refuses to do anything he is asked... What is "Extremely belligerant" mean...the detainee is using extreme physical violence to disrupt everything he is subjected to, IE capture, transport, interagation....which ranges from anything from bitting, head butting, kicking, using his entire body to inflict injury... I want you to remember that these guys were taken in combat by soldiers, not policemen ,downtown toronto. taking down a prisoner is a violent process, much like getting sacked by a 300 lb linebacker and if you resist then lets say measures will be taken against you to put you down, and to subdue you. They are extremily painful but are proven to be the quickest and most effective... they will leave marks and bruises, broken bones etc for more than a few days... That being said if these detaineees were beaten for someone pleasure by all means throw the book at who ever beat them, but if this is all about handling rowdy prisoners with kid gloves give me a break this is not the school yard this is the big leagues....mess with the bull and you will get both horns... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 I realize you have to operate under strict rules of engagement, but still, unless they surrender, why take prisoners? Not like the Taliban will return the favour..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 Actually the rules of egagement are very liberal compared to others we have been forced to use. Lethal force can be used if it is percieved that your life is endangered. That covers alot of ground... Prisoners serve alot of functions, remember these guys want to die killing us, it's a big moral boaster for us to haul one of these fanitics off the battle field screaming like a bady, it also is a big moral deflater for the taliban to see the same thing. They know they are not going to end up in Canadian pow center but a Afgan one, and that scares them.. Once they figure out we are going to treat them half decent they tend to offer alot of good intel... Following the genva convention is what separates us from them.. Remember the only difference between a dead enemy and a pow is the split second decission a Canadian soldier made to shoot or to check fire. Thats it...remember the ROE's it is if you percieve your life to be endangered that would cover just about everything... As for them taking prisoners has not happen to date, because we never operate in small groups, we always ensure we have the upper hand..be it numbers or superior fire power. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noahbody Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 Bringing this up to the proper authorities so they are prosecuted (if indeed guilty) was the right thing to do. Bringing this to the press to get his face on TV put the troops at danger and makes people question the mission, rather needlessly. This prof is an idiot, self-serving at a huge cost to others. There is no doubt that some soliders are going to lose it. People do it everyday in society, that without being under the emmense pressure that troops are under overseas. It's absolutely no reflection on the mission, our policies, or our Armed Forces. In fact, it's a simple matter of criminal law that I'm confident would be dealt with appropriately. But this guy had to make his point that big bad Canada was hurting everyone. The prisioner had cuts and bruises?! Oh no! When his arms were tied behind his back?!?! Goodness!!! The report says the prisioner was combative. Knock the crap out of him then. I would venture the guess that if anyone assaulted a police officer, Mr. Attaran would not be racing to their aid when the officer handcuffed them. So why the difference? Grow up people, when troops have to question tying up a bomb maker so they don't get charged with torture, it's just ridiculous. Totally agree. Beyond the media reporting these grasping at straws allegations from the self-serving prof, Canoe has taken the story to the Afgan people. That'll help build Canada's reputation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 Bringing this up to the proper authorities so they are prosecuted (if indeed guilty) was the right thing to do. Bringing this to the press to get his face on TV put the troops at danger and makes people question the mission, rather needlessly. This prof is an idiot, self-serving at a huge cost to others. There is no doubt that some soliders are going to lose it. People do it everyday in society, that without being under the emmense pressure that troops are under overseas. It's absolutely no reflection on the mission, our policies, or our Armed Forces. In fact, it's a simple matter of criminal law that I'm confident would be dealt with appropriately. But this guy had to make his point that big bad Canada was hurting everyone. The prisioner had cuts and bruises?! Oh no! When his arms were tied behind his back?!?! Goodness!!! The report says the prisioner was combative. Knock the crap out of him then. I would venture the guess that if anyone assaulted a police officer, Mr. Attaran would not be racing to their aid when the officer handcuffed them. So why the difference? Grow up people, when troops have to question tying up a bomb maker so they don't get charged with torture, it's just ridiculous. It would seem that you are ready to blame the media in this case. Why would that be, perchance you did not read the article? He (Attaran) did bring it up to the authorities as the article explains. It goes on to say that DND , well wait let me post what it says ..""Only yesterday, because this was about to break in the press, did the DND agree to conduct an internal investigation. An inquiry of this kind should be open to the public," he said." So go ahead and misplace your anger on the media , afterall it was the media who "might" have beat on them...right? And this "puts the troops in danger" BS is tiring. The troops are in danger 24-7. I dont buy it for one minute. The prof is an idiot? Maybe the idiots really reside at DND for not following up on this until they knew the media had some info? Maybe ?? Injuries occurring while the arms are tied behind the back? It is called torture and should not be allowed. Their are other ways to glean info from someone, hell make them as uncomfortable as you can , but to beat and injure someone who is tied up is not correct. And before anyone tells me I hate the CDN Armed Forces, you could not be more wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 It would seem that you are ready to blame the media in this case. Why would that be, perchance you did not read the article? The media is not to blame for pouring fuel on the fire , how so, they've published a story with only half the facts, they leave it up to the reader to fill in the blanks. He (Attaran) did bring it up to the authorities as the article explains. It goes on to say that DND , well wait let me post what it says ..""Only yesterday, because this was about to break in the press, did the DND agree to conduct an internal investigation. Attaran sent the information to the Military Police Complaints Commission, a civilian-run body that investigates complaints. Stanley Blythe, a spokesperson for the chief of staff for the commission, said the commission received the complaint a week ago. It alleges Afghans in custody were mistreated and that the military police failed to deal with it. It only recieved the compliant last week, again he done what he thought was right, and reported it, what would Attaran have to gain by going to the press other than personal gain, i mean i could see if the commision had sat on it for months but the just got the complaint last week... The prof is an idiot? Maybe the idiots really reside at DND for not following up on this until they knew the media had some info? Maybe ?? What info, DND had already sited most of the info was to be censored to MR. Attaran, it would also be cnesored to the press as well. so what new info did the press have , nothing other than what Mr Attaran has provided them...which at this piont is one sided as the investagation has not been completed, it's only a week old... Injuries occurring while the arms are tied behind the back? It is called torture and should not be allowed. Their are other ways to glean info from someone, hell make them as uncomfortable as you can , but to beat and injure someone who is tied up is not correct. No it is not, your making a big leap there by suggesting that those injuries were made during an interrogation. that would be torture....the same leap mr Attaran has suggesting...but all 3 of these men where noted that they did have marks and bruises on them after capture....and before interrogation... it is also noted that they were uncomplaint and extremily belligerant, if it takes 4 men in battle gear to subdue one man then there is a problem, and is going to result in some marks and bruises if not broken bones....it should also be noted that they were still extremily belligergent after they were zapped strapped... i'm sorry but if you head butt me or bite me, kick me while i'm loading you on to transport, your going down, and going down hard...hand cuffed or not, and at the end of the day you'll find yourself loaded on the transport. We do not use city cop rules here, there is no watch your head while you get into the car...the prisoner sets the tone, cooperate and your trip will go fine, mess with the bull and you will get both horns...until you play nice... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 It would seem that you are ready to blame the media in this case. Why would that be, perchance you No it is not, your making a big leap there by suggesting that those injuries were made during an interrogation. that would be torture....the same leap mr Attaran has suggesting...but all 3 of these men where noted that they did have marks and bruises on them after capture....and before interrogation... it is also noted that they were uncomplaint and extremily belligerant, if it takes 4 men in battle gear to subdue one man then there is a problem, and is going to result in some marks and bruises if not broken bones....it should also be noted that they were still extremily belligergent after they were zapped strapped... i'm sorry but if you head butt me or bite me, kick me while i'm loading you on to transport, your going down, and going down hard...hand cuffed or not, and at the end of the day you'll find yourself loaded on the transport. We do not use city cop rules here, there is no watch your head while you get into the car...the prisoner sets the tone, cooperate and your trip will go fine, mess with the bull and you will get both horns...until you play nice... Fair enough , I see that it indeed would be a leap to suggest there could be no other alternative reason for bruising. As for the treatment of any prisoner once subdued, it should always be done with respect, even though that may seem impossible. We must always take the high road. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catchme Posted February 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 Apparently, they were not prisoners, but "detainees", which are apparently Afghans civilians being picked up and detained and released again. Now "prisoners" are turned over to the Afghans, and not released. This begs 2 questions: 1. why are the Canadian military picking up Afghan civilians and detaining them, and then releasing in the first place? 2. Should the Canadian military turn over prisoners to the Afghan government? BTW, I notice this am on Anna Maria Tremonte, Hillier said we are NOT, in a war in Afghanistan. seems to be a different song than what is being sung around here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayLee Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 OK. Harper does whatever bush says he has to do. This is simply a matter of Canadian soldiers showing that they can be just like American soldiers. We have seen that by how many civillians Canadian soldiers have murdered then use the made in America excuse... "we told them to stop but they would not obey" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 This is simply a matter of Canadian soldiers showing that they can be just like American soldiers.We have seen that by how many civillians Canadian soldiers have murdered then use the made in America excuse... What the hell are you talking about? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fortunata Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 BTW, I notice this am on Anna Maria Tremonte, Hillier said we are NOT, in a war in Afghanistan. seems to be a different song than what is being sung around here. We're not in a war .. aren't we there for retribution for 9-11? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Blue Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 OK.Harper does whatever bush says he has to do. This is simply a matter of Canadian soldiers showing that they can be just like American soldiers. We have seen that by how many civillians Canadian soldiers have murdered then use the made in America excuse... "we told them to stop but they would not obey" Wow such great insight, one can only wonder in amazement where you must have gotten that gem of knowledge... About as innane as saying all Police Officer's are "things". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Poser: Apparently, they were not prisoners, but "detainees", which are apparently Afghans civilians being picked up and detained and released again.Now "prisoners" are turned over to the Afghans, and not released. Actually everyone that is picked up on the battlefield is a prisoner of war, and all are handed over to the Afgan authorities. where they will face a trial or investagation to determine thier status...Detainees are those that are picked up in sweeps or raids not on the battle field, IE like the bomb builder, these personal are also handed over to the afgan authorities unless Canadians determine they are just civilians, in which they are released. 1. why are the Canadian military picking up Afghan civilians and detaining them, and then releasing in the first place? One of our mandates is to assist Afgan authorities in thier operations, so we do pick-up suspected taliban members, bomb builders, raids on drug lords etc etc. unfortunitly sometimes Civilians are picked-up and then released due to bad intel, or what ever. 2. Should the Canadian military turn over prisoners to the Afghan government? We've already had this debate, Canadians did not want us to hand them over to the US, it was decided to hand them over to the Afgan government. We do not have the personal to run a detention facility nor do we want the hasle of what that brings... BTW, I notice this am on Anna Maria Tremonte, Hillier said we are NOT, in a war in Afghanistan. seems to be a different song than what is being sung around here. I don't know why he would say that, but you can call it what ever you want...when they issue me unlimited ammo, and a ROE that allows me to use it, then i call it a war.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted February 8, 2007 Report Share Posted February 8, 2007 Baylee: Harper does whatever bush says he has to do.This is simply a matter of Canadian soldiers showing that they can be just like American soldiers. We have seen that by how many civillians Canadian soldiers have murdered then use the made in America excuse... "we told them to stop but they would not obey" Your not looking for a debate but trolling, you've made a retarded comment looking for a retarded response. so you could sit there, in your chair behind your computer and feel superior, with king like qualities to pass judgement on those you feel are beneath you. Or perhaps it is envy or jealousy that clouds your judgement. Jealous that these men and women, are actually doing something noble with thier lifes, bringing peace to nation, assisting in rebuilding it from the ground-up, and you can't stand the fact that you have to look-up from your postion in life just to catch a glance at them. Either way, you were not there, you do not have any of the facts, nor do you have the qualifactions to pass judgement on those rare cases where Canadian soldiers have killed innocent civlians, Nor do you have the right to slander any soldier for thier decisions made in combat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayLee Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Yea whatever Army Guy. I now hear the story of Canadian soldiers mistreating prisoners got a little heavier today. With Canadian soldiers sordid past of torturing and killing innocent people it is no wonder this stroy is being taken so seriously Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 I now hear the story of Canadian soldiers mistreating prisoners got a little heavier today.With Canadian soldiers sordid past of torturing and killing innocent people it is no wonder this stroy is being taken so seriously Hmm ...."sordid past of torturing and killing innocent people"....are you referring to the Princess Patricia killing in Somalia that ocurred sometime in the early 90s as I recall? Whoa boy thats a stretch. But hey, go read a post about your credibility in the Houston BC cop thread. Same applies here I guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayLee Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Jealous that these men and women, are actually doing something noble with thier lifes, Thier lifes? Is that how the educated soldiers in our army speak ? That sounds like someting bush would say.. "I hope you leave here and walk out and say, 'What did he say?'" --George W. Bush, Beaverton, Oregon, Aug. 13, 2004 "This has been tough weeks in that country." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 13, 2004 "Who could have possibly envisioned an erection -- an election in Iraq at this point in history?" --George W. Bush, at the white House, Washington, D.C., Jan. 10, 2005 "I hear there's rumors on the Internets that we're going to have a draft." --George W. Bush, second presidential debate, St. Louis, Mo., Oct. 8, 2004 And one of the best..... "Iraqis are sick of foreign people coming in their country and trying to destabilize their country." --George W. Bush, interview with Al Arabiya Television, May 5, 2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Jealous that these men and women, are actually doing something noble with thier lifes, Thier lifes? Is that how the educated soldiers in our army speak ? That sounds like someting bush would say.. " LOL....careful, you are tripping over your own feet........unless of course this is acceptable where you are from. "thier someting" is that english or tagalog? Shall I research more? No, I wont, my point is go ahead and debate, but if you rely on spelling mistakes, then you lose...or is it loose. me so dumb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canadian Blue Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Yea whatever Army Guy.I now hear the story of Canadian soldiers mistreating prisoners got a little heavier today. With Canadian soldiers sordid past of torturing and killing innocent people it is no wonder this stroy is being taken so seriously So let me get this straight, you hate police officer's, you hate soldier's, do you also hate firefighters as well? Since from what I hear a few did commit crimes and get convicted of drunk driving so they all must be like that correct. Baylee what exactly do you do, that makes you so much higher then everyone else. By the way, remember that these soldiers only go where the Canadian people tell them to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catchme Posted February 10, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 Canadians do not tell the Canadian military where to go the military and government do. Occassionally, when a strong enough voice is heard, like that of our none participation in Iraq, there is compliance. If the Canadian voice was heard we would NOT have a military presence in Afghanistan either, right from the get go. The USA are behaving badly in Afghanistan, and it seems some of the Canadian military want to emmulate the USA's military. This is unfortunate and these Canadian military personal, like those Americans who are speaking out now, will have to live with their actions. But all Canadians are diminished when this type of thing occurs. Also, our military are turning prisoners over to the Afghan government, knowing they will be tortured. As such, Canadians are complicit in the torture of prisoners. Our military is abusing civilian Adfghan detainees, who are not even prisoners, can you imagine what the Afghans are doing to prisoners? Tis a terrible blight upon the face of Canada and Canadians. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted February 10, 2007 Report Share Posted February 10, 2007 If the Canadian voice was heard we would NOT have a military presence in Afghanistan either, right from the get go. The mission to assist the Afghani people was highly popular initially, until the Liberals turned on the mission. I'm sure France and Germany has room for people like you Catchme, but the reality of the situation is that we have a mutual defense agreement with the United States under NATO. Whether or not you like it, we have an obligation under that treaty to uproot any regime that harbours the al-Qaeda that attacked US interests abroad and in New York and Washington. So ya, you can turn your back on NATO, be a fairweather friend like France or Germany, but don't for a second then complain when Canada breaks meaningless obligations in Kyoto. And then don't bitch when Canada gets attacked and no one gives a shit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.