Beyond The Commons

 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

'Closer to reality'

by Aaron Wherry on Friday, December 3, 2010 1:33pm - 24 Comments

Bob Rae contemplates the lessons of Wikileaks.

Some of what will emerge – in the Middle East, in Pakistan, and elsewhere – will compromise sources, practices, and on it goes, but none of it should “shock”.  Corruption in Russia, Arab leaders saying privately how worried they are about Iran, Americans razzing Canadians for having an “inferiority complex” and “anti-american” programming on the CBC:  there’s nothing new here, and we shouldn’t be so touchy or sensitive that we can’t handle a vigorous discussion.  CSIS directors complaining about the “shackles” that courts concerned about charter rights and due process is hardly news.

The internet is full of gossip, hate, mistrust, misinformation, as well as all that is true and valuable.  We still want our diplomats and public officials to give us their candid and honest assessment of things, and to keep the spin to a minimum.  Maybe if our public comments were closer to reality there wouldn’t be so much amazement at what we are now seeing.

Tags: ,

Bookmark and Share
  • Patchouli

    So far, I haven't read anything amazing or particularly surprising in the Wikileaks file — well except for Flanagan's irresponsible call for assassination of Assange. That's been pretty much the most disconcerting thing to date.

    • Passing by

      Odd then, that just about every newspaper on the planet has had front page stories all week that point out how what's in the cables contradicts what their government's have been saying publicly.

      And this is even before the academics, foreign policy experts, and others who know the files have even analyzed the cables in detail.

      Seems that the "nothing new here" spin that we find on the op-ed pages is belied by the what's showing up on the front pages of the same newspapers.

      Wikileaks rocks!

  • Dubh

    "Maybe if our public comments were closer to reality there wouldn’t be so much amazement at what we are now seeing." Yes.

  • Emily

    Of course people are shocked. Most of them never pay attention to what's going on in the world to begin with, and simply believe the official govt fairy tale whenever questions are raised.

    I notice also that Rae is promoting the idea it's all gossip……which means he hasn't been reading the docs, or just wishes to mislead people about them.

    And yet at the same time he carries the same American line the docs do….Arab leaders 'worried' about Iran etc

    • Amateur Hour

      I think you may have misinterpreted Rae. After pointing out that the leaked cables contain a mixture of factual analysis and personal commentary (some of which runs counter to what the government is telling the public — and much of which is hardly surprising), he starts a NEW paragraph. There, it appears he provides another example of a medium (the internet) in which both facts, misinformation, gossip etc. coexist — and we are able to understand handle that.

      Rae then comments, as you appear to also wish, "Maybe if our public comments were closer to reality there wouldn’t be so much amazement at what we are now seeing."

      • Emily

        I stand by what I said about his overall commentary.

        I can tell paras apart you know.

        • Amateur Hour

          Please note then that Rae's use of the word gossip is in reference to the internet, not the leaked cables.

          • Emily

            Is there some reason you feel you have to explain things to everyone?

            The whole first para on here pooh-poohs the revelations.

          • Amateur Hour

            You stated:

            "I notice also that Rae is promoting the idea it's all gossip……which means he hasn't been reading the docs, or just wishes to mislead people about them."

            This is your interpretation and one not borne out by Rae's words — at all. I was taking the high road by assuming that you hadn't caught the shift in subject re: the word gossip. His gossip reference was specific to the example of the internet, another medium containing things both true and false.

            I then noted that your statement, "Most of them never pay attention to what's going on in the world to begin with, and simply believe the official govt fairy tale whenever questions are raised", is very much in line with Rae's point that we would all be less shocked by the cables' contents, perhaps, if there weren't such a wide chasm between what our leaders say in public and what the say in private.

            Instead, I find that you project some kind of weird hostility on Mr. Rae (whom I rarely agree with, BTW) and on someone responding to your comment (me).

            I do hope your day improves.

          • Emily

            I hope your efforts to patronize, based on tangents improve, because you're striking out here.

            Find something useful to do.

          • Amateur Hour

            Stay classy, Emily.

          • Emily

            Always.

  • bergkamp

    "Maybe if our public comments were closer to reality there wouldn’t be so much amazement at what we are now seeing."

    While we are talking about democratic renewal, I think this idea would go a long way to restoring public's trust in MPs.

    Most common compliant I hear from people is that pols are liars or that you can't believe what they say.

  • Tceh

    Do Flanagan's call to assassinate Julian Assange constitute 'Uttering a threat'? Should Flanagan be charged? Will he be charged?

    There is a precedent for this. A Louisiana Stockbroker threatened Jim Flaherty via email and was successfully prosecuted a couple years ago.
    http://newsdurhamregion.com/article/117102

    • Emily

      Will he be charged? No. Should he be? Probably.

      In an Oz paper I saw the remark attributed to Harper instead, and then horror that a PM would say such a thing.

      But mistakes aside, it certainly damages the idea of free speech they've been promoting.

    • Amateur Hour

      Sections 464 and 465 of the Criminal Code of Canada address counselling another to commit and offense (such as murder or murder for hire) and the penalties for counselling to commit a crime that has NOT occurred are equal to those if it had occurred. Of course, the burden of proof would be on the Crown to show that Flanagan, via his CBC appearance, had seriously counselled Obama to take out a contract on Assange.

    • sourstud

      Sure, great idea. Then we'd have to charge everybody who's ever wished the death penalty for a criminal, every leftie who ever wished GWB dead, and basically everybody who's ever wished someone else dead. Hell, the CBC would surely be equally culpable considering they voluntarily broadcast his rant. Sure, great idea.

      • Emily

        Something Canadians say in coffee shops doesn't have the same impact as a statement by a 'name' on national TV.

        Assange in the UK has heard it. It made the news in Oz even.

        And there is an official complaint in to the CBC about it.

    • Orson Bean

      Am I missing something? I thought that Flanagan retracted his comment?

  • Anon
  • John W.

    If we now decide to get out because it's hopeless, doesn't that make Wikileaks a good thing?

  • hosertohoosier

    There are a few things that should strike us as news. One such item might be China's increased openness to Korean unification. This development is not only big, but it highlights why frankness is not always a good idea.

    China cannot (yet) openly support Korean unification. To do so would:
    1. Seriously alienate North Korea
    2. Cause domestic (probably more among elites than in the larger public) opposition over a major policy reversal

    Given the choice between open support and open opposition to Korean unification, China would choose opposition. Secrecy gives us another option – for China to slowly adjust its policy, while communicating their intentions regarding North Korea to the west.

  • hosertohoosier

    What a ridiculous discussion. Targeted assassinations are a widely practiced tool of statecraft, employed by a number of states (including the United States). There's a reason Castro doesn't open his Christmas cards from the US president any more.

    I view Flanagan's comments in that context – if he wasn't joking, then he was suggesting that the CIA should take out Assange. Since targeted assassination is a policy tool THAT THE US USES, it is legitimate to debate its application, and where the limits may lie.

  • Simon Peter

    What has become of the USA when it advocates extra-judicial killings of journalists?

    The people of North America have been frightened out of their wits by scumbag neo-cons who perpetrate endless war while they degrade their citizenries rights.

    No true hoosier would ever condone such actions.

    You went to war because Mullahs were issuing fatwa's and now you do it yourselves. Hang your heads in shame Canada. Weep for the morals you have lost !!!
    http://www.counterpunch.org/shamir09142010.html

    An open letter to the PM of Australia Julai Gillard: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/41914.html

Previous

Next

From Macleans