- Reaction score
- 4,792
- Points
- 1,060
If I was Harper, I'd release it. I'm willing to bet it wouldn't be long before some dufus of an MP leaked the info to the media, thereby proving the CPC's point.
Detainee documents will never see light of parliamentary day
By Don Martin, Calgary HeraldApril 29, 2010
Article Link
When creating Stephen Harper's DNA, the Almighty forgot to insert the compromise chromosome.
That's why the prime minister stood in the House of Commons on Wednesday to insist he was still the final guardian of sensitive files, refusing to cower before the new clout of his parliamentary opposition.
Less than 24 hours after Speaker Peter Milliken ruled that Parliament has more bite without exception than any prime ministerial muzzle, Harper signalled little or no change in the government's position on keeping thousands of Afghan detainee documents under a shroud of secrecy.
The acts and laws guarding national security will prevail, Harper declared, and that means the same statutes the Justice Department used to justify heavy censorship will remain in force as heavy black markers scrawling across sensitive paperwork.
"The government cannot break the law, it cannot order public servants to break the law, nor can it do anything that would unnecessarily jeopardize the safety of Canadian troops," warned Harper in what was essentially an echo of his position before the Speaker's historic ruling on Tuesday.
If that's unsatisfactory to what Conservatives now call the "unholy coalition" of opposition forces, well, too bad. Harper may be open to "reasonable suggestions" because the government "depends" on keeping the confidence of the House, but it won't break laws to avoid losing that confidence.
New Democrat Leader Jack Layton picked up on the subtle inference immediately. "Is the prime minister telling us today that he is going to defy the ruling of the Speaker and the will of the House in order to go to an election?"
Well, not quite, not yet. But it was Harper who raised the spectre of this showdown as a confidence threat and he didn't seem to run away from the possibility it could end up in voter hands.
Ironically, hours earlier there was every indication of speedy resolution to the standoff.
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff sounded conciliatory as he dispatched his top procedural negotiator to a meeting with the government. Oft-cranky Public Safety Minister Vic Toews went all warm and fuzzy about searching for "some kind of compromise," going so far as to admit that opposition MPs "are entitled to see documents but of course they have to maintain secrecy in respect to those documents."
That had some insiders speculating that a meeting today among party representatives could produce an accord by the weekend with some MPs granted special clearance to search for proof Canadian soldiers handed over Taliban prisoners to Afghan authorities knowing they faced certain torture.
Silly people. Have they learned nothing about this prime minister in the last four years?
More on link
By Don Martin, Calgary HeraldApril 29, 2010
Article Link
When creating Stephen Harper's DNA, the Almighty forgot to insert the compromise chromosome.
That's why the prime minister stood in the House of Commons on Wednesday to insist he was still the final guardian of sensitive files, refusing to cower before the new clout of his parliamentary opposition.
Less than 24 hours after Speaker Peter Milliken ruled that Parliament has more bite without exception than any prime ministerial muzzle, Harper signalled little or no change in the government's position on keeping thousands of Afghan detainee documents under a shroud of secrecy.
The acts and laws guarding national security will prevail, Harper declared, and that means the same statutes the Justice Department used to justify heavy censorship will remain in force as heavy black markers scrawling across sensitive paperwork.
"The government cannot break the law, it cannot order public servants to break the law, nor can it do anything that would unnecessarily jeopardize the safety of Canadian troops," warned Harper in what was essentially an echo of his position before the Speaker's historic ruling on Tuesday.
If that's unsatisfactory to what Conservatives now call the "unholy coalition" of opposition forces, well, too bad. Harper may be open to "reasonable suggestions" because the government "depends" on keeping the confidence of the House, but it won't break laws to avoid losing that confidence.
New Democrat Leader Jack Layton picked up on the subtle inference immediately. "Is the prime minister telling us today that he is going to defy the ruling of the Speaker and the will of the House in order to go to an election?"
Well, not quite, not yet. But it was Harper who raised the spectre of this showdown as a confidence threat and he didn't seem to run away from the possibility it could end up in voter hands.
Ironically, hours earlier there was every indication of speedy resolution to the standoff.
Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff sounded conciliatory as he dispatched his top procedural negotiator to a meeting with the government. Oft-cranky Public Safety Minister Vic Toews went all warm and fuzzy about searching for "some kind of compromise," going so far as to admit that opposition MPs "are entitled to see documents but of course they have to maintain secrecy in respect to those documents."
That had some insiders speculating that a meeting today among party representatives could produce an accord by the weekend with some MPs granted special clearance to search for proof Canadian soldiers handed over Taliban prisoners to Afghan authorities knowing they faced certain torture.
Silly people. Have they learned nothing about this prime minister in the last four years?
More on link
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
Afghan detainee docs: CDS sticking it to government?
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2010/04/afghan-detainee-docs-cds-sticking-it-to.html
Mark
Ottawa
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2010/04/afghan-detainee-docs-cds-sticking-it-to.html
Mark
Ottawa
- Reaction score
- 1,409
- Points
- 1,090
The moment that John McCallum used the phrase "war crimes", I knew this was going to be a witch hunt. I don't doubt for a moment that we handed over detainees that were ultimately tortured. Did the commanders on the ground know? Perhaps, perhaps not. The fact remains that the Canadian public:
a. didn't want us to bring them here;
b. didn't want us to maintain our own "Guantanamo" style facility;
c. didn't want us to release them;
d. nor did they, apparently, want us to hand them over.
FFS people... you have to pick one option and live with the outcome.
a. didn't want us to bring them here;
b. didn't want us to maintain our own "Guantanamo" style facility;
c. didn't want us to release them;
d. nor did they, apparently, want us to hand them over.
FFS people... you have to pick one option and live with the outcome.
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
ModlrMike said:
You left out the fact that the people we turned them over to were the Afghans. It is their country. It is their Police.
Another thing no one has bothered to mention is the "Catch and Release" program that is going on. We catch an insurgent, and the Afghan courts release them due to lack of evidence from Afghan sources. To me, this sounds a little like we have "Westernized" their Court System, doesn't it.
The Canadian Government and the Canadian people are ignorant.
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
Afstan: The true nature of up and at 'em Attaran/Speaker Milliken's ruling is right
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2010/05/afstan-true-nature-of-up-and-at-em.html
Afghan detainees: The news not fit to print
Mark
Ottawa
http://toyoufromfailinghands.blogspot.com/2010/05/afstan-true-nature-of-up-and-at-em.html
Afghan detainees: The news not fit to print
Mark
Ottawa
- Reaction score
- 2,527
- Points
- 1,260
- Reaction score
- 2,527
- Points
- 1,260
Board Of Inquiry To Release Findings Related To June 2006 Afghanistan Detainee Incident
MA – 10.016 - May 6, 2010
OTTAWA – Rear-Admiral Paul Maddison, Commander of Joint Task Force Atlantic and Maritime Forces Atlantic and president of the Board of Inquiry (BOI) into the 14 June 2006 Afghanistan detainee incident, will announce the findings of the BOI in a news conference to be held at 1:30 p.m., Friday 7 May, Conference Room D, National Defence Headquarters, located at 101 Colonel By Drive.
The report will be made available prior to the start of the news conference. Media are asked to arrive by 1:00 p.m. Entrance will be through the Nicholas Street security gate.
Media may join the news conference by telephone at the following number: 1-877-974-0447 for all calls from within North America: 416-644-3421 for calls from outside North America.
Media wishing to attend are required to pre-register online at http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/media/contact-eng.asp or by calling the DND Media Liaison Office no later than 0900 Friday at 613-996-2353/1-866-377-0811.
-30-
MA – 10.016 - May 6, 2010
OTTAWA – Rear-Admiral Paul Maddison, Commander of Joint Task Force Atlantic and Maritime Forces Atlantic and president of the Board of Inquiry (BOI) into the 14 June 2006 Afghanistan detainee incident, will announce the findings of the BOI in a news conference to be held at 1:30 p.m., Friday 7 May, Conference Room D, National Defence Headquarters, located at 101 Colonel By Drive.
The report will be made available prior to the start of the news conference. Media are asked to arrive by 1:00 p.m. Entrance will be through the Nicholas Street security gate.
Media may join the news conference by telephone at the following number: 1-877-974-0447 for all calls from within North America: 416-644-3421 for calls from outside North America.
Media wishing to attend are required to pre-register online at http://www.forces.gc.ca/site/news-nouvelles/media/contact-eng.asp or by calling the DND Media Liaison Office no later than 0900 Friday at 613-996-2353/1-866-377-0811.
-30-
- Reaction score
- 2,527
- Points
- 1,260
- Reaction score
- 2,527
- Points
- 1,260
GAP said:
Guesses on my part:
1) "The Liberals were nice enough to let me in on some secrets, so I thought same-back-at-them would be fair."
2) "It's not as if he hasn't had any time to think about it."
3) "Sometimes, process happens."
4) "It took a while for him to take the bait!"
- Reaction score
- 2,527
- Points
- 1,260
From the news release (highlights mine):
More in the statement made at today's news conference and in the BOI report.
I await with interest what MSM picks up on.
More in the statement made at today's news conference and in the BOI report.
I await with interest what MSM picks up on.
The little I have seen is along the line of the troops knew that detainees were being tortured, which is not quite what the board concluded. For example, this Canadian Press, story which appeared on the Globe and Mail web site and is reproduced under the fair dealings provision of the Copyright Act, puts a negative spin on the story, peaking in the last paragraph where it comes close to claiming Canadian troops were war criminals.
Afghan authorities beat detainees ‘on a whim,’ military inquiry finds
Ottawa — The Canadian Press
Published on Friday, May. 07, 2010 2:14PM EDT
A military board of inquiry says Afghan authorities regularly beat enemy prisoners “in the street and elsewhere” and most Canadian soldiers were well aware of the fact.
The probe into an incident involving a suspected Taliban fighter who was beaten in the street in front of Canadian troops says soldiers on the ground had ongoing concerns about the Afghan police.
The report says the “practice of corporal punishment being meted out on an apparent whim in the street and elsewhere was common and was observed and commented upon by most Canadian Forces members.”
The investigators say the suspected Taliban fighter who was beaten in June, 2006, after he was turned over by the Canadians wasn't deemed a detainee so the incident wasn't reported to military brass.
The board found that while a detainee-reporting process was in place during the incident, it fell to soldiers and commanders to determine when someone was actually in Canadian custody. In this case, the troops on the ground didn't consider the suspected insurgent a Canadian detainee.
The probe made no recommendations because it found the military now has a clearly defined process of documenting and reporting detainees.
The investigation stems from an incident in which Canadian soldiers captured a suspected Taliban fighter and handed him over to local police. Afghan police then beat the man to the point where the Canadians had to intervene.
A report on the incident was apparently uncovered only in December, leaving egg on the face of the country's top military commander. General Walter Natynczyk, the Chief of Defence Staff, told the Commons defence committee that troops had questioned the suspected insurgent, but never detained him.
But Gen. Natynczyk corrected himself a day later, saying Canadian troops did indeed capture the man and gave him to Afghan police before taking him back into custody when they saw him being beaten.
The Chief of Defence Staff then ordered an investigation to determine why the information did not get to him or Rick Hillier, the general who served before him. Rear-Admiral Paul Maddison, commander of the navy's East Coast operation, headed the board of inquiry.
Opposition parties say the episode shows the governing Conservatives had credible proof of torture and knew of the dangers of transferring prisoners as far back as 2006.
The Tories maintain they had no solid evidence of Canadian-captured prisoners being abused by the Afghans before November, 2007.
Diplomat Richard Colvin told a Commons committee last fall that Canadian officials were warned about possible torture in 2006, but took little or no action to halt the transfer of prisoners to Afghan authorities. Mr. Colvin said all prisoners turned over by Canadian troops to the Afghans were probably then abused by their captors.
Knowingly transferring a prisoner into a situation where they may face a risk of torture is a violation of the Geneva Conventions and a war crime. A Commons committee and the quasi-judicial Military Police Complaints Commission have been looking into the issue of alleged detainee abuse for months.
Afghan authorities beat detainees ‘on a whim,’ military inquiry finds
Ottawa — The Canadian Press
Published on Friday, May. 07, 2010 2:14PM EDT
A military board of inquiry says Afghan authorities regularly beat enemy prisoners “in the street and elsewhere” and most Canadian soldiers were well aware of the fact.
The probe into an incident involving a suspected Taliban fighter who was beaten in the street in front of Canadian troops says soldiers on the ground had ongoing concerns about the Afghan police.
The report says the “practice of corporal punishment being meted out on an apparent whim in the street and elsewhere was common and was observed and commented upon by most Canadian Forces members.”
The investigators say the suspected Taliban fighter who was beaten in June, 2006, after he was turned over by the Canadians wasn't deemed a detainee so the incident wasn't reported to military brass.
The board found that while a detainee-reporting process was in place during the incident, it fell to soldiers and commanders to determine when someone was actually in Canadian custody. In this case, the troops on the ground didn't consider the suspected insurgent a Canadian detainee.
The probe made no recommendations because it found the military now has a clearly defined process of documenting and reporting detainees.
The investigation stems from an incident in which Canadian soldiers captured a suspected Taliban fighter and handed him over to local police. Afghan police then beat the man to the point where the Canadians had to intervene.
A report on the incident was apparently uncovered only in December, leaving egg on the face of the country's top military commander. General Walter Natynczyk, the Chief of Defence Staff, told the Commons defence committee that troops had questioned the suspected insurgent, but never detained him.
But Gen. Natynczyk corrected himself a day later, saying Canadian troops did indeed capture the man and gave him to Afghan police before taking him back into custody when they saw him being beaten.
The Chief of Defence Staff then ordered an investigation to determine why the information did not get to him or Rick Hillier, the general who served before him. Rear-Admiral Paul Maddison, commander of the navy's East Coast operation, headed the board of inquiry.
Opposition parties say the episode shows the governing Conservatives had credible proof of torture and knew of the dangers of transferring prisoners as far back as 2006.
The Tories maintain they had no solid evidence of Canadian-captured prisoners being abused by the Afghans before November, 2007.
Diplomat Richard Colvin told a Commons committee last fall that Canadian officials were warned about possible torture in 2006, but took little or no action to halt the transfer of prisoners to Afghan authorities. Mr. Colvin said all prisoners turned over by Canadian troops to the Afghans were probably then abused by their captors.
Knowingly transferring a prisoner into a situation where they may face a risk of torture is a violation of the Geneva Conventions and a war crime. A Commons committee and the quasi-judicial Military Police Complaints Commission have been looking into the issue of alleged detainee abuse for months.
- Reaction score
- 2,527
- Points
- 1,260
Sadly, the coverage gets even worse:
Section Commander "heard rumors of the brutality of the ANP and witnessed the ANP using certain forms of corporal punishment. However, the section commander testified that he never observed ANP in the act of abusing detainees"
"Afghan police beatings routine: inquiry"
“In accordance with the strict definition contained in (the policy), the individual was a Canadian Forces detainee” (This from something ADM Maddison reportedly said at the news conference)
"Canadian soldier believed Afghans were abusing detainees, but couldn't prove it"
"Afghan authorities used corporal punishment on 'a whim,' report says"
Sigh...
Section Commander "heard rumors of the brutality of the ANP and witnessed the ANP using certain forms of corporal punishment. However, the section commander testified that he never observed ANP in the act of abusing detainees"
"Afghan police beatings routine: inquiry"
“In accordance with the strict definition contained in (the policy), the individual was a Canadian Forces detainee” (This from something ADM Maddison reportedly said at the news conference)
"Canadian soldier believed Afghans were abusing detainees, but couldn't prove it"
"Afghan authorities used corporal punishment on 'a whim,' report says"
Sigh...
- Reaction score
- 4,292
- Points
- 1,160
Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright ct from the Ottawa Citizen is an excellent opinion piece by Prof. Paul Chapin (Queen’s), himself a former senior official in DFAIT:
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/inquisition/3001773/story.html
I am 100% with Prof. Chapin; this mess has been twisted and bent all out of shape. I have no problems with people like Prof. Attaran and Byers or the BC Civil Liberties Union; they are, I believe honest and well intentioned people who are pursuing commendable goals (peace, proper conduct, etc) even though, I believe, they are (unintentionally) in league with our enemies and even though I believe their ‘standards’ are too rigid for the 21st century.
My problem is with the people, led by a handful of wholly unprincipled Liberal and NDP politicians, like Ujjal Dosanjh, but including “special interests, partisan academics and much of the media,” who have played partisan politics with an important national interest. They, especially Liberal politicians who served in the cabinets of Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin, are a disgrace to parliament and Canada and one hopes that Canadians will wake up to that fact and, at the first opportunity – the next general election, will toss them on the political dung heap where they belong.
We, all of Canada, has been dragged into the gutter by a few overly partisan political hacks and a media that smells (government) blood and does not mind misrepresenting the facts – lying to be crude – when it helps to sell papers or TV time. It is, as Prof. Chapin says, past time to intervene and for Canadians to recapture the moral high ground from parliament.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/opinion/inquisition/3001773/story.html
I am 100% with Prof. Chapin; this mess has been twisted and bent all out of shape. I have no problems with people like Prof. Attaran and Byers or the BC Civil Liberties Union; they are, I believe honest and well intentioned people who are pursuing commendable goals (peace, proper conduct, etc) even though, I believe, they are (unintentionally) in league with our enemies and even though I believe their ‘standards’ are too rigid for the 21st century.
My problem is with the people, led by a handful of wholly unprincipled Liberal and NDP politicians, like Ujjal Dosanjh, but including “special interests, partisan academics and much of the media,” who have played partisan politics with an important national interest. They, especially Liberal politicians who served in the cabinets of Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin, are a disgrace to parliament and Canada and one hopes that Canadians will wake up to that fact and, at the first opportunity – the next general election, will toss them on the political dung heap where they belong.
We, all of Canada, has been dragged into the gutter by a few overly partisan political hacks and a media that smells (government) blood and does not mind misrepresenting the facts – lying to be crude – when it helps to sell papers or TV time. It is, as Prof. Chapin says, past time to intervene and for Canadians to recapture the moral high ground from parliament.
- Reaction score
- 999
- Points
- 1,160
And, too bad only a handfull will read the piece. Some will start to read it, then stop as it does not fit into what they believe.
- Reaction score
- 2,527
- Points
- 1,260
Let's see if MSM applies the principle of "no deal can be perfect" to the ruling government now that we've heard it from the Liberals - this from the Canadian Press:
So, Liberals make a less-than-perfect deal, nobody says anything, and Conservatives make a less-than-perfect deal, try them as war criminals? ? ? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight...
