Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

The Commons: Shrug and dismiss

by Aaron Wherry on Thursday, December 10, 2009 6:01pm - 126 Comments

The Scene. The Prime Minister stood and shrugged and declared that the military and the government had conducted themselves properly. Michael Ignatieff asked a second question. The Prime Minister rose and shrugged once more, suggesting the Liberal leader was without evidence of wrongdoing by the Canadian Forces.

In the face of futility, Mr. Ignatieff switched to English for a third try. “Mr. Speaker, there are no allegations against Canadian Forces. It is the conduct of the government that is in question,” he attempted to clarify for the umpteenth time. “The government has withheld evidence, it has intimidated witnesses, it has censored documents. This morning it even tried to prevent Parliament from debating the issue. The Prime Minister is responsible for this conduct. He is responsible for a year of wilful blindness. What does he have to hide?”

The Prime Minister stood here to declare the matter closed. “Mr. Speaker, the reason the leader of the opposition now tries to say he does not point the finger at the Canadian Forces and diplomats is, of course, because they have always respected their obligations. These people have been operating in extremely difficult conditions in Afghanistan. Whenever they have been faced with difficulties, they have taken the appropriate action,” he explained. “Systems have been changed two, three, four years ago. This issue has long since been dealt with.”

The government would seem to no longer be interested in trying to explain itself.

Ujjal Dosanjh stood to suggest it was impossible to believe that the abuse of a detainee in the summer of 2006 was confirmed only this week. Peter MacKay rose and confirmed his support for the men and women of our armed forces.

Gilles Duceppe narrowed to the specifics of the field notes apparently only discovered this week that confirmed for General Walter Natynczyk that an individual taken into custody by Canadians had subsequently been abused by Afghan authorities. The Bloc leader referred directly to that report’s most intriguing words—”as has happened in the past.”

The Prime Minister stood and dismissed the concern.

Mr. Duceppe went red in the face, leaned forward, gripped the desk in front of him and castigated Stephen Harper. The Prime Minister rose and asserted his pride in the military.

The Bloc’s Claude Bachand stood and suggested that an internal military investigation was not sufficient, that a full public inquiry was necessary. Mr. MacKay seized on this as a demonstration of disloyalty. “That again really portrays something quite obvious,” he said. “We support the forces, their success and the success of our country. He cannot say the same.”

Jack Layton asserted his indignation. “Mr. Speaker,” he ventured, “Canadians are tired of this nonsense.” The Prime Minister yelled and swiped his hand and asserted his patriotism.

The day went in this way. Moaning and groaning on all sides, unnecessary declarations, reassuring ovations and calls for resignation.

Marlene Jennings raised the previous declarations of the Defence Minister, wondered how many more cases of abuse were as yet unrevealed and demanded a public inquiry. Mr. MacKay invoked “the hard work, the blood, sweat and tears, and sacrifice of the Canadian Forces and our diplomatic corps.”

Mark Holland rose to press further in his particularly insistent way. “Mr. Speaker, the defence minister, on November 23, said, ‘There has never been a single proven allegation of abuse involving a prisoner transferred by the Canadian Forces, not one.’ In one Question Period alone, the minister repeated this line no less than five times. There was no ambiguity, no uncertainty, just an unqualified statement dismissing disturbing allegations of torture, a statement we now know was false,” Mr. Holland reported. “Why did the Defence Minister fail to ensure he was speaking the truth before answering in this House? Why was it left to the Chief of Defence Staff to uncover the minister’s falsehood?”

“Mr. Speaker, at 9:30, when the Chief of Defence Staff called to share this new information with me, that is of course what happened,” Mr. MacKay explained. “We accept his version of the truth.”

Mr. Holland tried again. Mr. MacKay expressed his intent to support the Canadian troops.

The Bloc’s Pierre Paquette attempted to quote from Abraham Lincoln. Mr. MacKay rose to suggest the words actually belonged to P.T. Barnum, then seemed to imply some comparison between himself and Mr. Lincoln. “I will tell him what Honest Abe did do, he tried to unify a nation,” Mr. MacKay declared. “He tried to bring people together during a time of war. That is what great Canadians do. They get behind their forces, they back them, they give them the necessary resources. They give them the necessary support that they need when they are doing difficult work. The honourable member continues to play cheap politics, continues to use wedge politics. We will support our forces. We will see our country succeed with no help from him.”

Mr. Paquette stood and suggested that Mr. MacKay might have more in common with Richard Nixon.

Two more questions from Liberal Judy Foote, two more statements of the government’s faith in the military. Then it was Marcel Proulx who rose to table the afternoon’s 22nd and 23rd questions on this topic. With his supplemental, he referred the Defence Minister to the section commander’s field notes on which this week has turned, wrapping a multitude of questions into one.

“Mr. Speaker, the document made public yesterday by Gen. Natynczyk revealed an essential element, though it was not new,” Mr. Proulx said, the House going noticeably quiet. “In November 2007, this document was included in a 1,200-page bundle presented in Federal Court by the Department of National Defence. At the time, the date of the document was censored, along with the sections dealing with the mistreatment of detainees. It was perhaps new to Gen. Natynczyk, but clearly, it was not new to the government. Why did they hide the truth?”

The Defence Minister stood with what would be his 16th and final answer of the day.

“The member is suggesting by implication that the military somehow did something wrong and that they somehow did not do the right thing,” he opined. “That is what is so despicable. I ask them to slip out of their comfy shoes, pull on some combat boots and walk outside the wire with some of those men and women.”

This was the parting shot, perhaps intended as the afternoon’s climax, the culmination of these past few weeks before the House falls silent on the occasion of Christmas.

And yet, an end to the questions seems about as far away as it has ever been.

The Stats. Afghanistan, 23 questions. The environment, four questions. The economy, finance and banking, two questions each. Human rights, crime, pensions, mining and Aboriginals, one question each.

Peter MacKay, 16 answers. Stephen Harper, eight answers. Jim Flaherty, five answers. Mark Warawa, four answers. Bev Oda, Stockwell Day, Chuck Strahl and John Baird, one answer each.

More by Aaron Wherry

http://intensedebate.com/people/doug_rogers doug_rogers

"Just keep slamming the door in his face. Maybe he'll go away"
MJ Patchouli

"I ask them to slip out of their comfy shoes, pull on some combat boots and walk outside the wire with some of those men and women."

As Petey has done on TV for all of us to see. Nothing despicable about using the men and women of the forces as backdrops, photo opps and other pr stunts.
http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok SeanStok

This Canadian would welcome an election, on the basis of this issue alone. I don't much care which party runs the show, but I do very much care that our parliament be treated with respect. They have little but contempt for representative government, for accountability, and for anything resembling honour.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I welcome an election on the basis of this issue, too. It's time for the Canadian people to have their say. Too bad the Opposition doesn't have the courage of their supposed convictions. Perhaps the Opposition realizes that this will probably fizzle, just as the Opposition's fake outrage over H1N1 fizzled. Too much thin gruel, not enough substance.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

isn't this just doing what the government has been doing to the committee members… not put all the information on the table and force them to make decisions in the dark. I say judicial inquiry first, and if still required an election.

http://intensedebate.com/people/avr avr

That EKOS poll out today – which I note Wherry has conspicuously failed to link, which is odd, since it addresses his hobbyhorse specifically – suggests that a month and a half of torturetorturetorturetorturetortureTORTURETORTURETORTURE has a) convinced a majority of the country that torture occurred with government knowledge, and b) moved the needle on voter preference a little over 1% away from the Tories.

So, keep hammering away at this, by all means. If the next election is solely on this issue, Stephen Harper is guaranteed to remain PM.

kcm

"Despite recent testimony from Rick Hillier, the former chief of defence staff, and other top generals before a parliamentary committee, the majority of Canadians believe that some prisoners who were handed to Afghan authorities by the military were tortured, according to a new EKOS poll'

He might remain PM if no other damaging facts come out…not a likely prospect…but i'd doubt very much if he could do more than hold on to his minority…and maybe not even that.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Even if he does.. it does absolutely nothing to excuse their behavior on this file in particular.

Gayle

How nice.

Of course, this is not about who gets to be PM for the next year. It is about whether our government was complicit in torture and has been lying to us about it.

Harper does not get a pass just because his poll numbers only dropped one point. He still actually has to be accountable.
Andre

Are you sure you want to use the word guaranteed? I'm sure a journalist could find an instance where the polls were not indicative of the election results and I might just hold you up to that word.

This story has received quite a lot of rotation in the main stream media and it just might be the issue to tip the scale.

Brian

Well put.
Anon

When will Harper stop hiding behind the soldiers? When will he stop using them as toilet paper to wipe his own incompetence?

old fogey

You would rather have the liberals-keep your head in the sand.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

So where do we go from here? Mackay had been informed by his military advisors that "There has never been a single proven allegation of abuse involving a prisoner transferred by the Canadian Forces, not one" and an example has finally been produced to show that the military reassurances were incorrect, and therefore Mackay's blanket declaration was incorrect. There was at least one example of a Canadian detainee who was subsequently beaten by his fellow Afghans, before being rescued by our noble and heroic Canadian soldiers.

I'm sure there are a few other examples of suspected or confirmed Taliban who passed through the hands of Canadian forces before being beaten by their fellow Afghans wearing uniforms. There are also millions of examples of Afghans who were beaten by fellow Afghans without ever coming into contact with a Canadian – but we don't care about those people, because they're irrelevant. We only care about the three or four that could possibly prove useful in the eternal quest to embarrass the Canadian government. This is about politics, not morality.

So what now?

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

How cheap are you going to get CR? To say we don't care about those who don't pass through our hands is obviously just a cheap play to try and get people to sweep this under the carpet. Obviously we care about that, which is part of why we are over there trying to install a decent system of law and order. Obviously as well we cannot solve all the worlds problems. But you would hope that our government would, at the very least, take what steps it could to avoid adding to them, not turn away, hide its eyes, and abdicate its responsibility to the troops on the ground.

Thank goodness their training and morality is more solid than that of their civilian leaders who are alleged to have urged reporters and inspectors not to pass this kind of info on officially, and whose allegations now seem to be backed up by the very non-awareness of our Chief of Defense Staff.

I can excuse the CDS for not knowing this was going on.. but only if they were open to receiving the reports if it was. If he was not aware because he preferred not to be made so there is no excuse, not for him, nor for anybody above him.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

If he was not aware because he preferred not to be made so there is no excuse, not for him, nor for anybody above him.

He wasn't even defense minister when it happened. 2006, remember?

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

CR, The Thwim statement you quote does not require McKay to be Minister at the same.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Yeah, but that was the implication. So much relies on implication and innuendo, and so little on actual facts. The whole thing is rather surreal.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Considering that I didn't even mention the Defence Minister, how you get any implication against him is beyond me. I think you've retreated into the Harper Anti-reality bubble, and you're just starting to project the opinion you want on to people who challenge your view point.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Here's the anti-reality. You suggest that Walter Natynczyk may have preferred not to be made aware of reports, and you also suggest that civilian leaders, like Mackay, "urged reporters and inspectors not to pass this kind of info on officially".

Why don't you provide some specific evidence for your explosive allegations, rather than innuendo.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Actually, Richard Colvin made the accusations. I merely pointed out that the redacting we've seen now, and General Natynczyk's lack of awareness of something that was available to the BCCLA seems to be corraborative evidence toward these accusations. Or at least evidence that somebody didn't want any official notice that we were aware of torture being passed along.

As to specific evidence, unfortunately I'm not on the MPCC.. of course.. that wouldn't matter anyway, thanks to our current government. Or do you need specific evidence that they're attempting to hide information.. that is.. evidence beyond the motion this morning or the response from the Justice Minister's office?

Oh wait.. you're the one who chose to believe that the Prime Minister wasn't lying about his office being completely oblivious about statements in the press his own Cabinent Minsters were making after several weeks in the news. After all.. you need specific evidence that he's lying. Given the contortions in that thread, I'm presuming that nothing less than him coming out and flat out admitting it counts.

http://kinnyscomments.blogspot.com/ Paul MacPhail

Who's being cheap here, Thwim? These were issues that were brought forward after the previous LIBERAL (I had to capitalize that because so many of you forget who sent our troops there in the first place) government failed to act to prevent the torture that we are now hearing about. It's a bit late, and quite obviously only politically motivated, as the government as led by the Conservatives had moved to correct this tragedy. Thwin, you're pinning the tail on the wrong donkey; it's as simple as that. I doubt you want to own up to that anymore than Peter MacKay wants to accept responsibility for an Afghani gettting beaten with a shoe. You said you would hope that our government would at the very least take what steps it could to avoid adding to the worlds problems – apparently you've not been paying attention; they've already taken steps years ago so that these problems wouldn't arise again.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

the previous LIBERAL . . . government failed to act to prevent the torture that we are now hearing about

29 November 2005: Parliament dissolves, election campaign beings.
18 December 2005: Hillier signs first detainee transfer agreement
23 January 2006: Stephen Harper wins election, becomes PM.
May 2006: Colvin & others report that torture is ongoing, i.e. previous detainee transfer agreement is a serious problem.
May 2007: after much pressure, including the revelation that the Minister of Defense had misled the House on the issue, a new detainee transfer agreement is signed.

The dates speak for themselves and your willingness to defend and mock torture is a disgrace.

http://kinnyscomments.blogspot.com/ Paul MacPhail

It's nowhere near as disgraceful as your unwillingness to admit that you just want to blame the Conservatives for torture committed by Afghanis against Afghanis. I'm not mocking torture, I'm mocking your opinion. Your real argument doesn't appear to be against torture but rather who the government was at the time. It's an argument with no win or lose: You simply don't like the fact that Stephen Harper is Prime Minister and it's obvious. Our soldiers are dying over in Afghanistan so that Afghanis can have the same rights as you, one of them being to vote for someone of their choosing. Either way, you win. I'm sure you'll exercise your right to vote and anyone reading your comments probably has a good idea where you'll mark your X.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

As ad hominem's go, that was rather dull. I replied below that I thought the Martin government, which incidentally I ridiculed at the time, was to blame for the 2005 agreement (which must surely have been discussed & agreed to before the election campaign of December 2005); I oppose Ignatieff's views on torture; I am not a partisan hack.

As to substance, you ignored my dates completely and have nothing to add. Your ignorance of all this is clear from the fact that you call the citizens of Afghanistan by the name of their currency.
http://kinnyscomments.blogspot.com/ Paul MacPhail

I wasn't ignoring your dates Jack, I just found that they did nothing to advance anybody's reasoning for keeping this debate going. Please accept my apologies for not being exciting. The reason for my disdain about this whole debate is that it's quite obvious that no reasonable Canadian approves of torture, and that any ethical member of either our Government or Canadian Forces would not approve either. That's why steps were taken to fix this problem. To put it in simple terms, my Ford Crown Victoria has several recalls due to manufacturing and design faults; asking Canadians to hold an inquiry won't fix those problems, they were already fixed. This latest line of questioning has only one obvious purpose: to embarrass the current government. It's time for the opposition parties to offer a vision for a better Canada, not a return to past tragedies. Oh, by the way, I referred to Afghans as Afghanis. You were correct about my mispelling; thanks for lesson.
Gayle

Actually, you were suggesting the previous liberal government was responsible for failing to prevent the torture. Jack simply posted a few facts to debunk that statement.

As you agree torture is abhorent, why are you not upset the current government turned a blind eye to it for a year or so?

By the way, just because this is a nasty bit of business, it does not mean the government should not be held accountable. Sure, we all want a "better Canada", but the way to get that is to acknowledge our flaws. How do you improve until you know where you have gone wrong?
burlivespipe

"…quite obvious that no reasonable Canadian approves of torture…"
When Maher Arar was in some dank cell in the middle east Harper and Day were lambasting the government for trying to get answers on his status, accusing the government of the day of "being more interested in terrorists" as opposed to 'real people.'
Harper then had no qualms about torture being used, he may have plugged his ears and warbled 'Lalalalallall' but the info he was being fed no doubt gave him a good idea what was happening to people who were under suspicion of being 'terrorist-friendly'. I'd say Harper's past actions won't pass your statement above. And that was an incident where the recipient of said torture was innocent. Yah, I know your talking note — "the Liberals were the government…"
So why are you so against the current government standing up, providing all information, and being responsible?
Faustian hypocrite.

Lord Kitchener's Own

I care about those other detainees too, I just don't feel the same sense of direct responsibility for ensuring their proper treatment. I'd also say that it's quite clear that our heroic Canadian soldiers were highly concerned about what might happen to detainees once they were handed over, did their best to mitigate the risks to detainees formerly in their custody (bound as they were by orders and pressure from above) and I'd be willing to bet that there are more examples of brave Canadian soldiers discovering the mistreatment of people they had formerly detained, and doing something about it (or attempting to do so given the constraints placed on them by those above). I don't think this is the only example of our soldiers doing the right thing IN SPITE OF orders/pressure from above.

As to what now, I'm not so sure. However, today's flurry of letters makes me think we may actually soon have to pause for a moment in our concern about our involvement in Afghanistan, and back up to make sure everyone understands and respects the supremacy of Parliament and the nature of responsible government in Canada.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

This is a toned-down version of the China argument, Crit, and it still doesn't work.

It isn't that we don't care, because as human beings concerned about human rights abuses, any abuse is too much. However, we are not responsible for the situation that caused those human rights abuses, and frankly there is very little we can do about it. We can, however, correct our own behaviour so that we will never be responsible for the situation causing human rights abuses in the future. And if the situation isn't there, perhaps the abuse won't be there either. Yeah, it's only one person or ten, but every abuse prevented is good. Most certainly, as human beings concerned about human rights abuses, it is hard to sleep at night when you know you hold some responsibility for someone being abused. Our government and our military act in our name, so if Canadian Forces personnel were ordered to hand a detainee over, and that detainee was abused, that is on you, Crit, and me, and Jack and TwoYen and Maggie's Farmboy and wilson and every other Canadian.

Continued . . . dammit!
http://intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

One suggestion for what could happen next: Mackay could contemplate that making blanket assertions (even with input from staff) is a bad strategy.

There was nothing preventing Mackay, when he first heard of the allegations from Colvin several weeks (?) ago, from saying something along the lines of "To the best of my knowledge there has never been a single proven allegation of abuse involving a prisoner transferred by the Canadian Forces. However, these are serious allegations and it is very important for Canada to hold itself to a very high standard when it comes to prisoner above and torture, and to that end I will make sure that my department looks into this matter. Perhaps I could even refer it to a suitable parliamentary committee."

But for reasons that I don't know Mackay chose almost the total opposite approach, and so here we are, at this place and time, where what we can still do is learn from our mistakes.

Bonnie N

There is something unseemly with the strategy of we are the only ones who support the troops and we will not tell you what happened Parliament.

I wonder if Canadians care; I wonder if they know how serious this issue will evolve if we give the government a pass this time.
http://intensedebate.com/people/OntarioTown OntarioTown

You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time.
- Abraham Lincoln

There's a sucker born every minute”
P.T. Barnum quote

….as usual, Mackay is wrong.

Edward

They're both actually apocryphal, in that there's no evidence either ever said those actual words, but you are correct in that they are the standard attributions.

(I believe "sucker" may have actually been said to describe Barnum's practices, rather than by Barnum. My book on the subject is not immediately at hand.)
A true patriot.

Not so much wrong as misleading. When you say he is wrong you imply he does not know the truth. With Mackay it is much likelier that he knows the truth but is lying again. Seems to be a habit of his to lie even when the truth will serve better.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Twiens Twiens

I'm pretty much in agreement with the previous posts. I am sick of the Con's using this whole "traitors for not supporting our forces" approach. This isn't about our Forces, it's about a government that lacks the honour our military have. Mr. Harper should look at some of his quotes and apply them "Whenever they have been faced with difficulties, they have taken the appropriate action". Isn't it about time this government took the appropriate action? To me this is no longer about torture but about a government that doesn't want to admit or take responsibility for their own mistakes. We all make mistakes, own up to it and quit dragging the military into it. (to be continued)

.
http://intensedebate.com/people/Twiens Twiens

Mr. MacKay invoked “the hard work, the blood, sweat and tears, and sacrifice of the Canadian Forces and our diplomatic corps.” As I recall, and correct me if I'm wrong, it was Mr MacKay that shot the first volley at Colvin. What the hell is he talking about now.

He re-enforces his inability to recall (and re-write) history with his quote "I will tell him what Honest Abe did do, he tried to unify a nation, Mr. MacKay declared". Honest Abe tore a nation apart and had countryman fighting countryman in the name of early social justice. Mr. MacKay, please Google "social justice" and then maybe you will have a better understanding why people are screaming for your resignation.

In my simple mind this issue has gone way past "torture" and has become an example of just how arrogant, self serving and out of touch this current government is. For the record I am 100% behind our Armed Forces and it really maddens me that MacKay finds it so convenient to hide such an honourable organization
http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

"I care about those other detainees too…"

Sure, you do.

If you really care as much as you say you'd tell your Liberal master to vote non confidence and let the Canadian people have their say.

http://intensedebate.com/people/TJCook TJCook

"If you really care as much as you say you'd tell your Liberal masters to vote non confidence and let the Canadian people have their say."

This is the stupidest single sentence I've heard all week.

http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

Thank you.
http://intensedebate.com/people/madeyoulook madeyoulook

Well, it might have benefited from a comma between "say" and "you'd" but otherwise it's not so bad. I suggest you expose yourself to more sentences in a week.
http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

It's pretty stupid to say you've "heard" a sentence written on a comment board, unless cannot read without speaking aloud.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jenn_ Jenn_

I'd like to make sure it doesn't happen again, myself. I can't do that if I don't know how or why it happened in the first place. My first choice would be an unfettered Military Police Commission, but it may be too late for that now after all that's gone on there. My second choice would be an unfettered parliamentary committee, but again it may be too little too late. So my third choice (and it is a distant third choice because it is dangerous with everything needing to be public, and it costs a lot) would be a public inquiry. Sadly, I think that is the only option now left to us.
http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

Well, I'm sick of the bleeding hearts smearing our soldiers.

http://intensedebate.com/people/frenchie101 frenchie101

ditto!

kcm

Boffo!

culchee

I don't believe anyone is smearing our soldiers: I think they are smearing our political class ( an rightly ).

Verna Robart

This story is over…whats happening with the HINI? That one is over too. The only ones who care about this is the coalition and their followers…the CBC and CTV.
"A politician is to be judged by the animosities he excites among his opponents"…Sir Winston Churchill.
The govt cleaned up the mess left to them by the Liberals before 2006…Liberals dropping like flies in the poles….thats the story here. Another wafer-gate. This one is shoe-gate.

http://intensedebate.com/people/danby danby

you must be fly fishing

kathryn c

This story is so NOT over it's growing a second head. A reported today:

"A former governor of Kandahar who is accused of personally torturing Afghans might have been removed from office as far back as 2006 if Canadian officials hadn't defended him, according to diplomatic memos that have never been made public by the Canadian government"

As reported by CP and now available on most news outlets including even Conservative TV @ [
http://intensedebate.com/people/danby danby

Easy Kathryn, I'm with you on this one – I was just punning on Verna Robart's Liberals dropping like flies in the poles

http://intensedebate.com/people/frenchie101 frenchie101

Before H1N1 there was Denis Coderre who stood before the house , he was outraged , the shortage of isotypes that had people dying every day.I am sick and tried of the Liberals, sick and tired. Meanwhile in another time zone, the war time president received the Nobel peace prize because this war is just! his Afghanistan war is now a just war. How I love the left leaning media drones, and their followers.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

Hear, hear. It's time for the Opposition to pull the plug on this government and let the Canadian people decide.

Lord Kitchener's Own

Which would be of help to those and future detainees how?

I did like the "Liberal masters" bit though. First off, if they're my "masters" how would my telling them to do something have any effect? Secondly, the Liberals haven't even been successful for the last several elections in getting me to vote Liberal, so I'd hardly consider myself in any way enslaved to them.

Lord Kitchener's Own

The stupid… it burns.

http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

does it ever. zessh!

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I agree with your first choice. The Military Police Commission is the best way to go for further investigations. I support a thorough and transparent investigation of these matters.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

It's really quite sad. They seem incapable of admitting that wrongdoing occured, and steps should be taken to fix it. No.. their attitude is much more, "Well.. if you think it's broken, then you see if YOU can fix it."

Of course, given the paucity of real thought from Harper's cronies, I'm not terribly surprised.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

I really don't care whether Mackay stays or goes. He seems to have botched the government's defense with his recklessly unequivocal blanket declarations, so maybe it's time for him to go.

http://intensedebate.com/people/PhilCP PhilCP

Personally I don't need Mackay to go. Out of all the cabinet ministers or potential ministers that Harper has available, Macky, despite this episode, still seems to have more potential to 'make something of himself' than many other CPC caucus members.

I'd be happy if I saw some evidence that Mackay was learning something valuable out of this whole episode (and not just how to do a better job of dodging an issue). And in Mackay's defense, regarding refraining from using recklessly unequivocal blanket declarations, it doesn't seem that his cabinet colleagues are setting a good example for him to follow.

http://intensedebate.com/people/danby danby

It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it,
that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and
prostituted the chastity of his mind as to subscribe his professional belief to
things he does not believe he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime.

~Thomas Paine

http://intensedebate.com/people/Crit_Reasoning Crit_Reasoning

They already fixed it, back in 2007. The real issue is whether or not they should have acted sooner, in 2006.

http://intensedebate.com/people/TwoYen TwoYen

CR has it rght! The policy was changed in 2007. All this sound and fury is political theatre.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

Well, blame the dissemblers for making it so. Had MacKay been honest from the get-go instead of poorly attempting to play the part of infallible patriot this would have been over quite a while ago.

That sound and fury remains is because it's become so painfully obvious that Harper's party does not feel that Canadians or Parliament deserve any truth about their activities.

tobyornottoby

No that would have been the issue if they had just admitted they should have acted sooner, or explained why they weren't ablet o act sooner, but the issue is now that they lied, and tried to cover-up that inaction.

They fought every attempt to have the facts heard from the Amnesty International court challenge, to the MPCC hearing (and refusal to extend the Commissioner's term) to the parliamentary committee request for documents and questions in the House. The issue CR is that they have refused to be accountable and have thumbed their nose at parliament to do it.

Bingo

The truth can be shrugged off (and has been) in QP, but most Canadians do not think much of a Government that use our Military as their *talking points*
Famous quotes :: every Village has it's idiot.

http://intensedebate.com/people/Jack_Mitchell Jack Mitchell

Lying is an accursed vice. It is only our words which bind us together and make us human. If we realized the horror and weight of lying, we would see that it is more worthy of the stake than other crimes.

~ Montaigne

kcm

Iam different from Washington; i have a higher, grander standard of prnciple. Washington could not lie. I can lie, but i wont.

-Twain

Andre

One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. The bamboozle has captured us. Once you give a charlatan power over you, you almost never get it back.

- Carl Sagan

http://intensedebate.com/people/Thwim Thwim

And rather than simply face up to that and get on with the task of governing, you urge us on to an election.. conveniently before all the facts can be revealed. So tell me, how much worse do you think it's going to get?

Don't get me wrong, I always welcome an election even during this period of "fragility in the economy", I just think it's terribly sad how it seems some would rather do absolutely anything than simply admit fault.. even if it means risking the loss of power. (Incidentally, if an election was held and the Conservative party again won, does that somehow excuse the behavior?)

Previous'Disregarding its powers and authority'

NextWider ramifications