Even the bourgeois press is taking notice. The Conservatives have moved heaven and earth to silence this witness ... without success.
Canada complicit in torture of innocent Afghans, diplomat says (Globe and Mail)
Jump to navigation
Even the bourgeois press is taking notice. The Conservatives have moved heaven and earth to silence this witness ... without success.
Canada complicit in torture of innocent Afghans, diplomat says (Globe and Mail)
What is fascinating is the Canadian Ambassador in Kabul at the time is now in China and he was outted as a "turn a blind eye" participant. I can just imagine how China will receive any holier than though "rights" talk from Harpo when he arrives on his latest political junket.
This report implies that our PMO is complaisant in war crimes and if true it is a very very serious accusation that the NDP and Bloc need to not allow to disappear.
A high level civil servant [Colvin] raises an alert about prisoners of Canadian troops in Afghanistan being tortured after they are turned over to Afghan officials, and nothing is done.
Peter MacKay says it wasn't a credible alert, and that is why they didn't look into it. However, any alert from a respected civil servant should be taken seriously, especially where there might be torture occuring.
MacKay's stated defence for inaction has very little credibility.
That is, they were un-Canadian, counterproductive and probably illegal.
There should be calls to action going out about this to MP's......as a bolster to this:
"The only way to get to the bottom of this is a full public inquiry. The women and the men of the Canadian Forces deserve nothing less."
List of MP's with email addresses
I am charmed by the way the MSM, pretends they haven't heard the detainee torture story before and that this is "news".
That's good! Keep this story fresh in the minds of Canadians. Hopefully this will turn enough Canadian voters in the next federal election so that the Cons[ervatives] will be voted out of office!
CBC last night did not do this, Susan O, stated straight out that when rumblings of this were happening the Cons started to change actions, which indicates full well they knew what was happening, and indeed her and Peter stressed that the proof went well beyond the plausible denial meme. hey showed dlips of Sue's coverage about it back in the day....
The At Issue panel discussed this last night too, and Coyne was trying to share the blame with the Liberals, which really does not fully wash in my view as detainees and detainee transfers went way up under Harper's regime.
Also covered was Ignatieff's inability to carry this into the public light given his approval of toruture in his book.
Gulbuddin Heymatyar was infamous for throwing acid in the faces of women at the University of Kabul! He was the recipient of billions in aid from the CIA and Saudis in the 1980's during their anticommunist jihad!
And now Pete Mackay's bosses in Warshington and London are offering Hekmatyar a power sharing role in Karzai's government!
Someone should tell Pete Mackay that his imperialist masters aided and abetted the throwing of acid in women's faces not so long ago.
This morning The Current interviewed Peter Desbarats, former commissioner of the Somalia Inquiry. His opinion was that Canadians didn't seem particularly interested, much less out-raged about that incident. And he wasn't confident we would be about this one. And if we aren't, no loss for the Conservatives.
"We have seen the enemy - and it is us"? Pogo, I think.
Not only that, but Peter MacKay makes the assumption that these prisoners were "Taliban". An assumption that has yet to be proven.
Gulbuddin Hekmatyar does not belong to a member organization of the Taliban. He is the commander of an insurgent group known as the Hezb-i-Islami Gulbuddin or the HIG Hekmatyar network. Hekmatyar and and his network usually operates on its own. Hekmatyar and his HIG network usually operates in northeast Afghanistan, not Kandahar province, south Afghanistan.
[url=http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=49354]Chris Arsenault interviewed Malalai Joya recently:[/url]
The CIA is still funding warlords. Karzai's brother is a drug baron on the CIA's payroll, just as the CIA were funding drug barons and the most vicious of warlords and mercenaries in the 1980's. Gulbby, their coalition partner in crime in waiting, is still dealing drugs after all these years. What a mess. After 30 years of US meddling in Afghanistan, nothing has changed for ordinary Afghans living in grinding poverty and despair.
[url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/many-detainees-were-just-farme... detainees were just local farmers[/color][/url]
Overall, though, I'm guessing that the locals are overwhelmingly grateful to their Canadian saviours for building schools etc.
Sure it is. US-managed election results in Afghanada reveal as much. Democracy is the right's most hated institution and always will be.
The U.S. offers bounties to those who bring in "Al-Qaeda" and "Taliban" "terrorists". Anyone wanting to make a quick buck can either make a "citizen's arrest" or "finger" (along with two, or more, others who bear false witness) a totally innocent person to U.S. or Canadian or other NATO/ISAF troops (think Afghans can tell them apart, or care? They're all hated feringhees or foreigners or "Americans" to them.) Off to Bagram prison for them.
Anyone seen "Taxi to the Dark Side"?
The following Globe and Mail article paints a picture that the political storm that is about to break with extreme violence in Ottawa is only just brewing:
Where's the petition to see charges laid against Hillier, Harper and MacKay? I want to sign.
Anyone remember the Euro classic movies "Battle of Algiers" and "Z"?
But it does have a lot of upchuckability.
In Afghan tribal culture, revenge doesn't always involve direct violence. Many of the innocent victims of false terrorism charges are simply fingered due to domestic or financial disputes.
Another example of culturally insensitive American expediency being utilised by Afghans to settle scores. As in Iraq, American policies have turned the population against them. The sad part is that Canada's feeble aid efforts are marginalised by a tribal culture that does not differentiate between occupying nationalities - they are all enemies.
Ah, tribal culture - so that's why those Afghans aren't thanking us...
Why stop there? The whole pack of 'I didn't see that email' jowly porkers in expensive suits should walk the plank.
What is the symbolism of the dude in the hoody?
In his book, (just out) A Soldier First: Bullets, Breaucrats and the Politics of War, tricky Rick attempts to cover his ass on the earlier controversy, and plows on in singularly insensitive fashion:
"Things had changed after spring 2006, however, when we moved south of Kandahar and our soldiers would often take prisoners after firefights with Taliban or in other operations...the decision was made...that the right thing to do was transfer prisoners to the Afghans and let the Afghan judicial system, fledgling though it may have been, handle them. After all, Afghanistan is a sovereign country and, almost without exception, it was Afghans that we were detaining."
Hillier writes - in classic Blimp fashion: "We thought we had a good process in place, although obviously it was not perfect. Eventually - no surprise - people back in Canada started squawking about the issue. Opposition politicians and several specific individuals were trying to spin the story for their own purposes, and the result was that screaming newspaper headline insinuating that Canadian soldiers were abusing detainees."
He continues: "This suggestion that Canadian soldiers were not abiding by the laws of war coincided with complaints that the Afghans were abusing some of those handed to them. Their judicial and prison systems were still somewhat nascent, and there was always some risk that abuse would occur. That, unfortunately, is not abnormal in failed states and occurs even in solid countries like Canada. After indications that some abuse might have occurred (ed. the Globe pointed out that it had) the CF felt it was a necessity to have Candian officials make regular, unannounced visits to Afghan prison to ensure the people we transferred were being treated humanely. "
He plows on, about the Manley Report of January 2008 and the "improvements in prison infrastructure and Afghan police training..." But, of course, the general's concerns came late, after admitting that, yes, shit happens. Which makes the sounds from the government benches these days, expressions of pure flatulence.
Ever hear of Abu Ghraib?
Whassamadda? Fish not biting? You run out of friends to chat with in your 'the Afghan people will win' fantasy world?
You're pushing it.
How about some substantive comments instead of this trash.
He's an Islamophobic troll, not worth responding to - I forgot for a moment, and I apologize for commenting on one of his posts.
This person has caused a lot of Canada's problems in recent times, and he needs to be taken down a notch or three.
Hillier as Chief of the Defence Staff
On February 4 2005, he became Chief of the Defence Staff. At the change-of-command ceremony he repeated his call, more broadly, for increased military funding. "In this country, we could probably not give enough resources to the men and women to do all the things that we ask them to do," he said, with Prime Minister Paul Martin and Defence Minister Bill Graham looking on. "But we can give them too little, and that is what we are now doing. Remember them in your budgets." His willingness to speak openly and on the record about the Canadian Forces' financial resources, and about the Defence budget in particular, distinguishes Hillier from previous Chiefs of the Defence Staff.
After his appointment, Hillier maintained a very high profile, frequently talking with the media and arguing his case for defence planning. He has been called the most prominent Chief of the Defence Staff in decades, with popularity not just in the military, but among a broad spectrum of Canadian civilians.
In case you miss the serious bits. Serious responses for serious issues.
What is it that raises your ire? Not rising to the bait of provocations or having the temerity to make light of them?
Absolutely - I even watched Battle of Algiers very recently for the first time in decades - would love to see Z again, it had a major influence on my world view at the time. You're quite right, today's events are a case of nature imitating art. Nothing much has changed.
When was the trial? Or, in your world, is a trial is an unnecessary nuisance when it conflicts with your agenda?
I thought labeling was contrary to babble policy, or is that policy also only reserved for those who do not drink from your poisoned chalice?
The intent to paint me an "Islamophobic troll" contrary to any evidence or even the courtesy of asking my position is simply a disingenuous attempt to frame my stance on issues in an unfavourable light that, if repeated often enough, will have me banned.
Your alarcity, unionist, to use foul play to furthur your biases stand in stark contrast with your perpetual claim to all the moral high ground. Your reach exceeds your grasp and, it does you no justice.
Canuquetoo get off your high horse. While I wouldn't necessarily characterize you as "Islamiphobe", at least based on this thread, your remarks about "Afghan tribal culture" reek of white western privlige and superiority. Stop it. If you don't like unionists posts don't read them.
The image that you refer to as "the dude in the hoody" has become a symbol for the issue of torture by western forces in Iraq. I'm a bit shocked anyone would not be familiar with it.
Google Abu Ghraib and just look at images. A picture is worth a thousand words. See what's been done in our name. Tribalism indeed.
I would hope that folks are not shooting from the hip here. The misuse of one word should not bring out the politically correct lynch mob. It has happened before, with tragic results.
Lies based on lies based on lies. The entire setup often looks so utterly corrupted that the nazipoohs can race around knocking over fax like they was bowling pins (and the nazipoohs themselves bowlingballs) w/out worrying what the OPPOSITION says- and get this: the media is liberal, so whattaya expect? Meanwhile, on cbc's 'Ideas' the other evening Paul Kennedy was talking with some phony liberal frontman named 'Wolf' who is selling a doorstopper ('the case for liberalism'?) and ...well, didya know the junyer Kristol is a 'romantic' for thinking western democracy/freedom can be transplanted to Iraq/Afghanistan etc via shock'n'awe warfare? And the geebush admin was the most 'conservative' in US history? And liberal ignatief knows that terrorism has got to be fought, which hamstrings his criticisms (and nevermind that the US, Britain and Israel- along with their puppet states re saudia arabia- spend two thirds of entire global military budget, whilst 'alciada' doesn't even have a state base to operate in)... How do you fight such seamless dishonesty? It's a plain fact they say, that the 'war' in Afghanistan has been going on for 'generations' according to the talkers on 'Sunday Edition' (actually, Afghanistan was easily one of freest places on earth up until late 70's-there was a huge 'hippie' colony there of western expats- and that was while it was considered under the Soviet umbrella...the carter cia then began funding the 'muhajadeen'in order to ruin the USSR, which the MSM has been celebrating recently, as if nobody recalls the real history)
If the liars weren't so untterly despicable, there'd be no inspiration to carry on, imho. The people really seem bovine indifferent, or overwhelmed.
We should start a separate thread to list the official and unoffial lies
THREE COLOSSAL LIES TOLD TO CANADIANS AS TO WHY CANADIAN TROOPS ARE IN AFGHANISTAN
1. Canadian military is there in Afghanistan because Afghans and Iraqis planned and executed 9/11. (It was actually planned and carried out on US soil by the US military, CIA, and their "al-CIA'duh" pals )
2. We're there to liberate women
3. We're there to stem the evil tide of terrorism.(Our largest trading partners are the world's foremost exporter of terrorism and torture)
Hey, Canuqetoo, this is just par for Babble. Trolls and trash if you're not one of "them" and like unionist said - "not worth responding to". Don't know what's wrong with calling a tribe a tribe.
You don't like my comment - so you attack babble? And you "don't know what's wrong with calling a tribe a tribe"? Which tribe is that? Which tribe, kathleen? Which tribe was your buddy referring to? Did you catch the name? Or since they're Afghans, you and your buddy can just assume they're part of some "tribe" which doesn't allow them to appreciate Canadian largesse?
It's racism, western supremacism, xenophobia, and Islamophobia. We are all prone to it, because we are raised to be so superior to third world people (including the indigenous people right here) that we can even justify sending troops with guns to murder them, without having received an invitation, and think that we're doing something good. You may not like the terminology, but it's better to call this behaviour what it is, than to succumb to it - [b]don't you think?[/b] And if you don't know what's wrong with it, then I feel sorry for you.
Torture and abuse of prisoners by Americans at Abu Ghraib, Iraq. Remember Pvt. Lindy England? If not, watch the DVD "Taxi to the Dark Side", if you have the opportunity.
I couldn't find a petition to charge HarperCo with war crimes yet.
Would you consider writing one for us?
David Swanson at AfterDowningStreet has done some great work on justice.
Update: He's pretty busy but says he is pleased we are working on this and invites us to go to this link
Does anyone really think this latest 'scandal' will cause any self examination whatsoever within any political party? Yes it's once again temporary news and political vendors will be selling quotes of outrage. So get your quotes while their hot because when the next election comes there will only be tumbleweeds rolling across the foreign policy landscape. And I most certainly include my own party.
Thanks for the lecture. I'm an ordinary progressive Canadian, not a PhD of political correctness.
People get excited here, canuquetoo, and forget others would like to join in without fear. My use of "tribal" (once) has led me to shun the word hereabouts - even though it was used in the most innocuous fashion. It is too bad, since it's very difficult to discuss some events without its use. But those events are never discussed, because the politically correct will not let one get farther than our imperial past. We are bound to wear that damned bird around our necks forever, and never come to grips with the new reality of the new "imperialisms" on the rise. We created them, you see, and now have to do penance (well, not we, but our forbears) and never ever forget.
By the way, I hear over CBC radio that now Walt Natynczyk has weighed in saying that yep, Canadian Forces have had to from time to time stop handing over prisoners. (That's all I caught).
I agree, I think this issue will get no real traction.
I can only paraphrase Orwell: 'all pigs are equal but some pigs are more equal than others' when I ponder babble policy de jure and babble policy de facto.
While lurking, I thought babble was an interesting place for an inquiring mind but after dealing with unionist's relentless non-sequitur that disagreeing with his position equals disagreeing with the anti-war movement and experiencing oldgoat's dedication to inclusiveness and diversity, the potential here for open discussion seems limited.
After spending good money on Pervez Musharraf's self-serving autobiography, I wouldn't waste the breath needed to stand at the till to purchase Hillier's drivel. I did, however, get good value for the amount spent to purchase Sarah Chayes' excellent work: The Punishment of Virtue which goes into some detail about the tribal culture of southern Afghanistan and the intricacies of inter-tribal relations. This, plus reading South Asian papers online, is the basis for my arguments that American policy is counterproductive and harming efforts to form a central government because Afghans have tribal based cultures that do not lend themselves to centralised control.
This umbrage at the usage of "tribal" is a strawman to use as another club against any poster with the temerity to challenge the ideology of the more extreme element of babble.
For the moderators, de facto enforcement of policy is more the convenience of moving the saltbowl to regulate those who sit below the salt (with apologies to Thomas B. Costain) than principled enforcement of policy de jure.
The problem was not the use of the word "tribal", but the imperialist racist arrogance of denigrating Afghans, and this is the "sad part", of being too backward in their culture to distinguish between Nice White Western Invaders (Canadians and their aid efforts) and the Bad Guys. They're not advanced enough to see that We Are Their Friends.
But I didn't realize that that information came from a [b][i]book[/i][/b], so I retract my umbrage.
When news of the torture broke, it was the result of the release of the Abu Ghraib torture photos, the hooded man being one of them. Photos and motion picture images were taken by U.S. Army prison guards with their cell phones and camcorders. Some of the torture was extracurricular activity that the soldiers did for their "amusement". Behavior that was endorsed by then U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in his infamous "Torture Memo".
Concerning this particular photograph, the hood was used as a blindfold - part of sensory deprivation. The man could have been exposed to loud heavy metal music or the drone of the fans that made the prison cells uncomfortably cold (many were in fact, subjected to this). Temperature was varied from uncomfortably cold to uncomfortably warm.
This particular man was forced to stand on a box with his arms outstretched in the manner as you can see by the image, for hours. This is called a "stress position". Wires were placed on his fingers of both hands. I believe a wire was also placed around his penis. He was ordered to maintain this position. He was also told (in this particular case actually not true) that if he changed his position, the movement would be sensed by the wires and that he would be shocked by jolts of electricity.
This and in other sickening ways, is how amateur "prison guards" at Abu Ghraib, Iraq and Bagram, Afghanistan prisons (keep in mind, before the treaty Gen. Rick Hillier signed with the Karzai government concerning the handing of PoWs to Afghan authorities, the Canadian military handed Afghan PoWs to the U.S. Like the U.S., the Canadian military took a dragnet approach and captured large numbers of prisoners - all to please the Bush administration and the Pentagon) amused themselves.
All in the name of fighting the" War on of Terror".
Of all the military persons I've heard on this subject, only former Gen. Rick Hillier supports the government and attempts to discredit Richard Colvin. All the others support Mr. Colvin.
I fear Hillier may be harboring future political aspirations. He only seems to be concerned about his own worthless hide and is not too concerned about the image of the Canadian military that only just recently he was the head of.