Jack may become the first ID user in the world to achieve a reputation score of 100 based on substantive, thoughtful commentary rather than an endless stream of noise.

Just here to let you know, Orson, that your attempt at irony is hitting a bit of a pothole–as what you're archly "doubting" is actually an indisputable historical fact. Care to try again?

I could have sworn Wilson was posting the libs as handing over detaintees to the Afghans starting 2002 as recent as yesterday….guess she parsed the "facts" a little more closely since.

I'm also on record as saying on here I don't care if a public inquiry were to find Liberal Cabinet Ministers of the past guilty of negligence or not on this detainees transfer/torture file. If they did so, then it's just as wrong and they should be prosecuted just as they should be if Conservative Ministers or current military/bureaucratic officials have done so.

"That is, until reporters toured the camp, and found that conditions of life for the prisoners compared rather favourably with that of the Marines standing watch over them.'"
We didn't exactly cover ourselves in glory here AC did we?

Pundit dung of the first order sir.
Truth be told I have come to expect more than shoddy, lazy, and such obviously pro-PC partisan analysis from you. Sadly, you seem to be intent on obfuscating the issue at hand.

Really sir, it is not the historical paternity tale of our Afghan Detainee Policy (ADP) that is germane at this point, it is the current Government of Canada's inability to straightforwardly address the known issues of abuse. Our current government's shameful effort to censure and attack those who would speak truth to power can not go unchallenged. Our current government's absolute failure to be transparent on this issue must be challenged.

I care not what stripe our government of the day wears (PC Blue or Lib Red) it's irrelevant. Fact is, the government of the day, the government TODAY, owes us all an explanation. Do they, in OUR name, as OUR government participate in and/or condone and abet illegal war practices that any reasonable Canadian would deem inhumane treatment? Did they, do they, support policies that knowingly lead to the torture other human beings? It's a simple questions that deserves an honest answer. What Paul Martin did in 2005 is, of course, important. More importantly, however, now that more facts are known, is WHAT IS STEPHEN HARPER HAS (OR HAS NOT) DONE to live up to our international legal obligations to not torture other human beings?

To wit:

http://scottdiatribe.canflag.com/

You are going to be waiting a long time, I reckon. Canadian reporters are the most incurious bunch of people as possible to imagine.

I will be very surprised indeed if any Canadian reporter looks at emails other than Lorrie Goldstein and declares that maybe we should have second look at AGW after it has been revealed that scientists are keen to manipulate their work for political ends. But who knows, American and Brit publications are having a look at the issue so maybe I will be pleasantly surprised.

My accusations of you working for the CPC are slightly facetious, but from what you post, I'm surprised you haven't been offered a position with them yet.

Google "wilson" and "Liberals" and you'll see.

Early 2002 is at least one year before second Iraq War started and the left's obsession with BUSH/Cheney = Hitler = war crimes = book ban in libraries = halliburton meme. I was living abroad at time, so I don remember brouhaha, but why the outrage in early 2002 if not knee jerk anti-Åmericanism?

Really.. I don't know why I should be amazed at the demagoguery you Conservative supporters practice on here.

Cavalluzzo said O’Connor found that “in situations like that you’ve got to be more analytical in the sense that you have to look at the human rights record of the country, the human rights records of the detention centre where the person is, and you make an educated decision. “It seems in this instance that’s what Mr. Colvin was doing. He didn’t see it, obviously, but he recognized it and when he made these reports alarm bells should have rung in Ottawa and a thorough investigation should have occurred at that time. In my view, Colvin was acting quite appropriately … because he has an obligation to bring it forward to his superiors.”

Cavalluzzo said O’Connor found that “in situations like that you’ve got to be more analytical in the sense that you have to look at the human rights record of the country, the human rights records of the detention centre where the person is, and you make an educated decision. “It seems in this instance that’s what Mr. Colvin was doing. He didn’t see it, obviously, but he recognized it and when he made these reports alarm bells should have rung in Ottawa and a thorough investigation should have occurred at that time. In my view, Colvin was acting quite appropriately … because he has an obligation to bring it forward to his superiors.”

AC, how did you fall for that pile of dung so easily? Shame on you!
Funny how every other ally of note over there came to the same decision as we did…eventually…it'a called politics – you may have heard of it…i believe it's sometimes generated by public opinion – perish the thought.

How could you fall so easily for that old chestnut…it just had to be latent liberal anti-Americanism? Get in line Canada, behind the Brits, the Dutch, the Franch, the Germans [ ok i'm guessing about those last two] We had a hell of a lot more reason to be wary of the Yankees than one incident that so delighted Steyn. I believe there was still a tag team called Bush/Cheney still around at the time too!
But by all means use your x ray hindsight to pin it on Anti-Americanism

Is it now safe to assume that 99 is the ceiling to IntenseDebate's reputation score?

Not that I much care, but the enforcement of a limit seems odd and arbitrary. I suppose it's a paternalistically beneficent feature of the platform–meant to keep any of us from getting swelled heads (not that it'll have much of a restraining effect on Jarrid, scf, jolyon, etc.). ;)

Rosie, dear, Canada "picked Afghans over Americans as front-line allies" because our mission required it: we're there, remember, to train an indigenous, effective, independent Afghan army. This can happen only if those we are mentoring stand shoulder-to-shoulder with us, consistently, on the field during active operations. Yes, we could have played it safe and hung around the cool American kids, but we were rather more interested in actually achieving our primary mission objectives.

Yeah, I know–typical Canadian, left-lib, can't-do attitude. How on earth do you put up with us, Rosie?

Nice way to show a lack of patriotism.

I consider the point about not trusting American treatment of prisoners to be quite justified, given Cheney's stances at the time and the further revelations about his attitude toward treatment of prisoners since he left office. It wasn't just Abu Ghraib.