Transfer-Injunction Filed

[betsy]

This was filed in court.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...3/BNStory/Front

If the court approves it, this will really put our soldiers in a much more difficult situation.

So at MDUffy Live, Ret.Gen McKenzie was asked what the soldiers must do to cope with this.

His answer?

TAKE NO PRISONERS!

I agree.

And they can thank all these folks who readily take the words of suspects at face value....to the point that they would rather place our soldiers in even greater danger. Why should our soldiers take more unnecessary risks? You push our own troops in a corner...well then, if that's the case, I support anyway they do their fighting...to win...and to survive!

All other NATO allies hand their prisoners over to Afghan officials....and yet it is only in Canada that this thing is so exploited....and shamelessly used as a political tool!

[jdobbin]

All other NATO allies hand their prisoners over to Afghan officials....and yet it is only in Canada that this thing is so exploited....and shamelessly used as a political tool!

It is only Canada that didn't sign a deal similar to the Brits, the U.S. and the Dutch.

[betsy]

All other NATO allies hand their prisoners over to Afghan officials....and yet it is only in Canada that this thing is so exploited....and shamelessly used as a political tool!

It is only Canada that didn't sign a deal similar to the Brits, the U.S. and the Dutch.

What is the difference with the others' deal?

[jdobbin]

What is the difference with the others' deal?

Monitoring.

[betsy]

What is the difference with the others' deal?

Monitoring.

Well, by the sounds of it, they can monitor now too.

So why are the Oppostions still being shrill about it?

[jdobbin]

Well, by the sounds of it, they can monitor now too.

So why are the Oppostions still being shrill about it?

Because the Conservatives told the House they were monitoring all along and then when they faced a Federal Court, they hastily signed a deal.

[sharkman]

This is yet another issue that the left is filled with hypocrisy. Another poster mentioned this before, but the left wants other cultures (afghanistan) left alone to sort out their issues, but can't handle it when afghanistan is left alone to handle its own issues with prisioners. Make up your damn minds!

I'm waiting for Layton to go to Afghanistan and demand the Taliban refrain from torturing our allies.

[jdobbin]

This is yet another issue that the left is filled with hypocrisy. Another poster mentioned this before, but the left wants other cultures (afghanistan) left alone to sort out their issues, but can't handle it when afghanistan is left alone to handle its own issues with prisioners. Make up your damn minds!

I'm waiting for Layton to go to Afghanistan and demand the Taliban refrain from torturing our allies.

This is where some in the right justify torture.

[betsy]

Well, by the sounds of it, they can monitor now too.

So why are the Oppostions still being shrill about it?

Because the Conservatives told the House they were monitoring all along and then when they faced a Federal Court, they hastily signed a deal.

But now the deal's signed.

So why don't the Oppositions move on....and stand by our soldiers....and leave them be to do their job!

Stop messing up our soldiers! Enough is enough!

[betsy]

This is yet another issue that the left is filled with hypocrisy. Another poster mentioned this before, but the left wants other cultures (afghanistan) left alone to sort out their issues, but can't handle it when afghanistan is left alone to handle its own issues with prisioners. Make up your damn minds!

I'm waiting for Layton to go to Afghanistan and demand the Taliban refrain from torturing our allies.

This is where some in the right justify torture.

I call what the Oppositions are doing as a form of torture!

Torturing our soldiers! Torturing their families!

Do you have any idea how all these play up in their minds?

And for what? To score political points!

How would you feel if you knew this is how much your life is worth? Political points!

[betsy]

The Oppositions are so riddled with ironies and contradictions.

Just read what Sharkman had just said.

And funny how their sense of "sensitivities" and moral indignations only applies selectively!

They are sensitive to the plight of the detainees, to the point of putting the welfare of these suspects AHEAD of our own troops!

Oh, they're not done yet. They've found another way to drag this on.

Now they want TO MAKE SURE....TO GUARANTEE....that there are no tortures in Afghan prisons!

Blasted hell! They can't even guarantee there are no tortures happening in Canada right at this minute as we speak!

[Argus]

All other NATO allies hand their prisoners over to Afghan officials....and yet it is only in Canada that this thing is so exploited....and shamelessly used as a political tool!

It is only Canada that didn't sign a deal similar to the Brits, the U.S. and the Dutch.

You listen to Jdobbin, because he's carefully researched the policies of all NATO allies and knows exactly what they've signed and didn't sign and the procedures they follow. He wouldn't just say things without even bothering to look into them and be able to show you cites and references. Not him. Yes, I know he wasn't able to back up even a more limited version of this statement the last time I questioned him on it but hey, I'm sure he's since done plenty of research.

[Argus]

What is the difference with the others' deal?

Monitoring.

Yes, and even though jdobbin can't actually demonstrate there is any monitoring by the rest of NATO, well hey, he had to say something here right?

[Argus]

This is not something anyone actually thinks is going to result in any kind of court intervention. The HR lefties only want to be seen on camera nobly standing up for the plight of the downtrodden and condemning the evil capitalist militarists of the west. It's all about the gesture, you see, and getting TV coverage. And even when the case is thrown out they'll still hold their heads up high for fighting the good fight - not that they would ever actually fight where they were in danger, of course. If they were in danger they'd run screaming in tears to the guys with the guns they disdain.

[jdobbin]

Yes, and even though jdobbin can't actually demonstrate there is any monitoring by the rest of NATO, well hey, he had to say something here right?

Actually, what was shown is that you didn't you didn't read anything that was linked here.

[jdobbin]

You listen to Jdobbin, because he's carefully researched the policies of all NATO allies and knows exactly what they've signed and didn't sign and the procedures they follow. He wouldn't just say things without even bothering to look into them and be able to show you cites and references. Not him. Yes, I know he wasn't able to back up even a more limited version of this statement the last time I questioned him on it but hey, I'm sure he's since done plenty of research.

It's funny that Canada is the only country who signed a deal that has run into these sort of problems on monitoring. Canada has now signed the exact same deal as the British did and yet you seem to think they have no monitoring even though there are several links in here from the media saying so and British parliamentary reports describing how they monitor.

[jdobbin]

I call what the Oppositions are doing as a form of torture!

Torturing our soldiers! Torturing their families!

It is the Conservatives who have bungled the file on this. Blame them for not doing their job.

[jdobbin]

But now the deal's signed.

So why don't the Oppositions move on....and stand by our soldiers....and leave them be to do their job!

Stop messing up our soldiers! Enough is enough!

Standing by our troops and sending them on missions that are open ended is not the same thing.

[Argus]

Yes, and even though jdobbin can't actually demonstrate there is any monitoring by the rest of NATO, well hey, he had to say something here right?

Actually, what was shown is that you didn't you didn't read anything that was linked here.

Nothing has been linked here but the globe story. You provided several links the last time I questioned you on other NATO nations and how they treat prisoners, and none of it was specific. At most it suggested that a couple of states reserved the right to check up on prisoners after handing them over to the Afghans - not that they ever actually did that. But Canada had the same agreement. So what? Put up or shut up. Let's have a listing of all the NATO nations in Afghanistan, and the procedures they follow for prisoner transfer.

[Argus]

You listen to Jdobbin, because he's carefully researched the policies of all NATO allies and knows exactly what they've signed and didn't sign and the procedures they follow. He wouldn't just say things without even bothering to look into them and be able to show you cites and references. Not him. Yes, I know he wasn't able to back up even a more limited version of this statement the last time I questioned him on it but hey, I'm sure he's since done plenty of research.

It's funny that Canada is the only country who signed a deal that has run into these sort of problems on monitoring.

Because if someone bothered to raise such an issue in most other countries they'd be ignored or laughed out of the office, perhaps? Why don't you admit you really don't know a damned thing about what the other nations in Afghanistan do about prisoners.

[jdobbin]

Nothing has been linked here but the globe story. You provided several links the last time I questioned you on other NATO nations and how they treat prisoners, and none of it was specific. At most it suggested that a couple of states reserved the right to check up on prisoners after handing them over to the Afghans - not that they ever actually did that. But Canada had the same agreement. So what? Put up or shut up. Let's have a listing of all the NATO nations in Afghanistan, and the procedures they follow for prisoner transfer.

What I said at the time was that the British, Dutch and Americans had agreements to monitor their prisoners. You didn't believe they did. Canada was alone in having no checks at all.

Canada has now signed an agreement modeled on the British one.

All I have seen over the last weeks here and in Parliament is spin and it finally exploded in the faces of those who either said there was monitoring or that it wasn't needed.

[jdobbin]

Because if someone bothered to raise such an issue in most other countries they'd be ignored or laughed out of the office, perhaps? Why don't you admit you really don't know a damned thing about what the other nations in Afghanistan do about prisoners.

It certainly is obvious that Canada doesn't know what is happening to its own detainees. Your response is "Why care?"

The ham handed treatment of the issue is what made it an issue.

[Argus]

Nothing has been linked here but the globe story. You provided several links the last time I questioned you on other NATO nations and how they treat prisoners, and none of it was specific. At most it suggested that a couple of states reserved the right to check up on prisoners after handing them over to the Afghans - not that they ever actually did that. But Canada had the same agreement. So what? Put up or shut up. Let's have a listing of all the NATO nations in Afghanistan, and the procedures they follow for prisoner transfer.

What I said at the time was that the British, Dutch and Americans had agreements to monitor their prisoners. You didn't believe they did. Canada was alone in having no checks at all.

Canada has now signed an agreement modeled on the British one.

All I have seen over the last weeks here and in Parliament is spin and it finally exploded in the faces of those who either said there was monitoring or that it wasn't needed.

But we know that Canada DID monitor the prisoners, thus we have reports from Corrections Canada officers complaining that Afghani prison officials followed them too closely, and presumably intimidated prisoners. Do we even know the Americans and Dutch actually wound up checking on prisoners, or how often? And what about all the other NATO nations you spoke about. You said Canada was the only one that didn't monitor prisoners. Let's have the agreements all the other nations have to monitor prisoners. Let's see the cites.

[jdobbin]

But we know that Canada DID monitor the prisoners, thus we have reports from Corrections Canada officers complaining that Afghani prison officials followed them too closely, and presumably intimidated prisoners. Do we even know the Americans and Dutch actually wound up checking on prisoners, or how often? And what about all the other NATO nations you spoke about. You said Canada was the only one that didn't monitor prisoners. Let's have the agreements all the other nations have to monitor prisoners. Let's see the cites.

Oh my, this old chestnut that Corrections Canada was doing the monitoring?

Stop deflecting and you might actually recognize that you could care less if other NATO countries do actually monitor detainees.