Where is the outrage on the Rabble's Front Page about the NDP's continuing support of the bombing of Libya?

57 posts / 0 new
Last post
Todrick of Chat...
Where is the outrage on the Rabble's Front Page about the NDP's continuing support of the bombing of Libya?

 

Initial Post

Todrick of Chat...

Where is the anger on the Rabble front page? Why are no there articles about this outrage of foreign policy?

Are the writer's at Rabble supporting the NDP's position? If any other party other than the NDP supported this war crime, there would be dozen of articles about the war criminals in the Conservative and Liberal parties.

If being progressive means you will not talk about the wrong doings of the NDP in public, then I will label myself as something different from now on.

Fidel

The NDP didn't launch this dirty war, the vicious toadies did. Welcome to the dirty war of worst-past-the-postian politicking. Because the NDP are going to play these toadies for all they are worth over the next four years.  No surrender. Scorched earth. Herr Harper will have to move to the States after that if he wants to continue snivelling and grovelling to US power. That's the best part.

Todrick of Chat...

I am not really surprised, I have been looking at other pro-NDP sites and there is no outrage about the issue at hand. It appears the top end party leadership and supporters are fine with this illegal war.

Frmrsldr

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

If any other party other than the NDP supported this war crime, there would be dozen of articles about the war criminals in the Conservative and Liberal parties.

Other parties than the NDP have supported this war crime (escalating the war on Libya.) All of them (except the Greens) in fact. 

Yet there are in fact, no articles on Rabble about the war criminals in the Consevative and Liberal parties since the vote to escalate.

Frmrsldr

Fidel wrote:

... No surrender. Scorched earth. Herr Harper will have to move to the States after that if he wants to continue snivelling and grovelling to US power. That's the best part.

You believe that the NDP has adopted a fatalistic approach, then?

The NDP is going to achieve what you describe above through enabling Herr Harper and his merry band of Cons in their programme of destruction.

Frmrsldr

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

I am not really surprised, I have been looking at other pro-NDP sites and there is no outrage about the issue at hand. It appears the top end party leadership and supporters are fine with this illegal war.

It's the same problem many antiwar/anti-interventionist Democrats in the U.S. face with 'their guy' in the White House.

They won't criticize the Afghan (Af/Pak) war after Obama had troop and drone strike surges of his own there. They won't criticize the Iraq war after Obama's footdragging when it comes to bringing the troops home. They won't criticize the Libya war, now that this is a war of his own.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I remember a comment not long ago that Rabble is the only place the NDP get a fair shake. Even when they're the wrong, apparently.

ETA: oops! Rabble did publish a great article calling for the return of the Waffle.

Time to put the Waffle Manifesto back on the NDP's table

http://rabble.ca/news/2010/12/time-put-waffle-manifesto-back-ndps-table

(it's BC - centric, but still good)

excerpt:

What is required is nothing short a "new kind of politics." A waffle of the 21-century, a new manifesto with a real vision that is not encumbered by the old divide of left and right politics. A kind of politics that rises above petty partisan debate about meaningless details and instead tackles the hard issues of the day. The issues relevant to us all young and old alike. An exercise that is positive and inclusive versus negative and marginalizing. No more divide and conquer instead unite and overcome.

eastnoireast

realistically, political parties will only go where they're pushed; so in many ways, this blatant failure by almost the entire body of elected canadian federal political representatives points to a failure at a much deeper societal level - the lack of a robust, proactive peace sector in canada, and indeed in north america.

the large (but reactive) canadian opposition to the (2nd) invasion of iraq helped limit canada's involvement (though we were still the 4th largest participant, after the u.s.,britain, and australia).

but little infrastructure is left over, let alone built on, so here we are again, how many years into afghanistan, how many months into libya, pinning our hopes on a political party to throw us (and more to the point, libyans) some scraps -  maybe some of those new mp's will vote against it...

-

but anyway here we are.  so in trying to understand the dynamic of the vote, and perhaps bring leverage to this ongoing situation, i guess a basic question in regards to the mp's is, do they really believe they are doing the right thing, or are they being opportunist / pressured?

if they're believers, then there is opportunity for education.  either way, then they must feel the displeasure of their constituents.

what do people think in regards to that question?

 

remind remind's picture

1. Rabble/babble is a NDP freindly sight? Who knew, that the type of attacks here constantly against the NDP constituted support and friendliness.

2. There are other "NDP friendly sites"? Could someone list them?

Slumberjack

Rabble certainly is NDP friendly.  Babble is somewhat less forgiving, and we certainly have very few stalwarts indeed to thank for that.

Caissa

Rabble is NDP friendly. How could expect anything else?

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Babble gets all sorts of NDP-critical contributors: right-wingers and Liberals masquerading as disgruntled NDPers (quite common at election time), right-wingers and trolls who can't tell the difference between an NDPer and anyone else on the left, left wing NDPers, left wingers who "critically support" the NDP, more left elements with a range of critical views of the NDP, and so on.

There are also a couple of NDPers who post here. lol.

Anyway, for loyal Dippers it's probably confusing at times. C'est la vie.

Slumberjack

N.Beltov wrote:
Anyway, for loyal Dippers it's probably confusing at times. C'est la vie.

A rolodex to sort out the growing list of contradictions might help.

Fidel

Frmrsldr wrote:

Fidel wrote:

... No surrender. Scorched earth. Herr Harper will have to move to the States after that if he wants to continue snivelling and grovelling to US power. That's the best part.

You believe that the NDP has adopted a fatalistic approach, then?

The NDP is going to achieve what you describe above through enabling Herr Harper and his merry band of Cons in their programme of destruction.

 

I think the NDP will take the same tack that left Lib Dems and Republicans are taking against Obama.  They will demand that the Harpers identify for the public record what their goals are in Libya and what the exit strategy is. The NDP will demand accountability and transparency, and our 24 percenters with 100% of power will bend and twist in the wind trying to avoid the fact that their policy for Libya is in-synch with that of Warshington, London, Paris and the same as it is for democrats in Ryadh, Manama, Islamabad, Tel Aviv and Cairo. 

And in four year's time NDP strategists will be proven correct in that Canadians will have forgotten all about Libya and moved on the more pressing issues, like the stubbornly high unemployment levels and shit show Tories bad record on the environment, pensions, and general all around incompetence. Come 2015 Harper will be about as popular as Brian Mulroney was by 1993, and about as electable as R.B. Bennett was by 1935. Canadians will wonder how in hell they were ever elected in the first place. And that's generally true of all bought and paid-for stoogeaucrats and senators alike who are invariably shoved into those jobs by big money interests. They are never really the people's choice. 

Todrick of Chat...

Day Two and nothing critical about the NDP's support of the illegal war being waged.

Even the Ceasefire.ca, another very friendly NDP site made a minor comment about the illegal war on thier website.

takeitslowly

men the outcome of the vote would not matter regardless of what the NDP does, i personally have a lack of interest in federal politics at the moment..I guess one of the reasons for the lack of coverage is that the decision was so expected from the NDP...Layton has never been much anti-war for the last couple of years, and its not something he really talks about on the campaign trial..so no suprises there..theres no point of complainning for this less than ideal vote from the NDP since the election result was already so distorted due to outdated electoral system, many have become so used to low expectation from federal politics..its not like there is another party choice

 

political apathy is one of the biggest winnners of the recent federal election, the people who have problem with the NDP not being left enough probably do not even care to write an article against the NDP when really theres nothing worthy of supporting or writing home about from the canadian parliament at the moment..

Slumberjack

takeitslowly wrote:
men the outcome of the vote would not matter...

I take it that you didn't intend to leave Remind out of the discussion?

takeitslowly

i didnt say men, i meant to say MEH!

LOL

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Todrick, both Derrick O'Keefe and Murray Dobbin have been writing extensively for months advocating against military intervention in Libya. Derrick, a former editor of rabble, leads StopWar and is one of the major national voices against he operation, so I don't know where you ascertained that rabble supports the NDP position. rabble also always accepts submissions, so if you or somebody you know wants to pitch a story or editorial, you are welcome to.

I do agree with you that it would be great to see more criticism of this absurd deja-vu invasion, including of the NDPs craven support. I am sure you will see more of it soon, as soon as Derrick blogs about it again, for example.

Todrick of Chat...

I understand that Derrick O'Keefe and Murray Dobbin have been writing about the illegal war in Libya however they have been abnormally quiet since Tuesday's vote.

Not one peep from them, normally they are very active about pointing out the errors of the conservatives and the liberals parties policies (within a few hours) about the Libya however when the NDP shores up the support for the war, they and the rest of rabble is silent on the issue.

I have my doubts that either will talk ill towards the NDP but I hope that I am wrong.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Derrick tweeted almost immediately about the NDP's shameful capitulation. Not on this site, of course, but even so. I don't see why he wouldn't repeat that criticism here.

Fidel

Yes it would be an ideal situation if Libya was the only country in the world where the USA and its white, powerful European allies were interfering politically and militarily for many years. In that case, the NDP would surely be the rat under the floor boards making chaos in a democratic and peaceful world order of things. But we know that is not close to the truth.

Rich and powerful white people in this country were expecting the NDP to be Johnny opposites to their hirelings in phony majority power. They wanted the NDP to sound like the Bolsheviks and Stalinists they accused Tommy and the CCF of being in the 1940s and 50s. The propaganda machine needs to clearly identify us as the enemies of everything good and wonderful here in the land of freedom and democracy. And we know that would be a terrible lie as well. The establishment media works on the basis of lies and propaganda, and I've seen it already in the newspaper with Monte Solberg referring to the NDP as axe murders with a consience on economic issues. The propaganda machine is waiting to pounce on the NDP at every turn. We can't let them. We owe it to too many people to run these stooges out of town on a rail by high noon next snap election call for short term political gain sometime in October 2015. Mark your calendars, buckle-up,  and then throw that date in the garbage, because Steve our big stooge with the vacant and lifeless eyes will be driving the bus for for the next four.

NDPP

the establishment media does indeed work on the basis of lies and propaganda  - so do political parties. Including the no difference party

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Backing the extension doesn't protect the NDP from anything, Fidel.  The people who would have bashed the party for that won't stop bashing it until they've made it agree to Blairize itself totally on foreign policy...which I assume even YOU would object to, since a government can't be hawkish on foreign policy anymore and still have the resources to make any meaningful social change at home.

Fidel

I think we should be clear about a few things.

They were Liberal and Tory governments that put Canadian troops in Afghanistan.

They were Liberals in government with Tories backing them up all the way on handing over Arar and Khadr to their torturers.

And it was this Tory governnment that sent war planes to Libya without any help whatsoever from the NDP - they didn't actually need NDP support. The NDP knows full well that they pulled no trigger on Libya.

Our corrupt stooges needed no prompting from the NDP only their bosses in Warshington.

When Uncle Sam orders our corrupt stooges to jump, their only response is to blurt out, 

HOW HIGH SHALL WE JUMP THIS TIME, UNCLE SAM,  AYE-AYE ON THE DOUBLE!

Their trained seals in Ottawa are Johnny on the spot when it comes to French kissing Uncle Sam's derriere. Uncle Sam's obedient lap dogs in Ottawa are always glad to do it and never balk or complain. They do what comes natural for them as always on-time every time, so let's not kid ourselves here that the NDP gave them any encouragement or the like. Canadians are embarrassed to hell about it long time, Ken. There is really no need to rub it in or drag the NDP into this disgusting, long time federal toadying to US power. Nobody kisses American ass better and for as long as the decades-long parade of vicious toadies and obedient lap poodles in Canada's two old line parties. Nobody!

lombar

"...so let's not kid ourselves here that the NDP gave them any encouragement or the like."

 

294-1

Fidel

lombar wrote:

"...so let's not kid ourselves here that the NDP gave them any encouragement or the like."

 

294-1

And how did the Liberals vote? We could be rich betting on how that party votes in favour of toadying to US Military and big oil agendas. 

At least with the NDP there's the odd surprise once in a while, like this. lol!

Apparently the NDP and Socialist International aren't supporting Qadaffi. 

Why not?

Frmrsldr

Fidel wrote:

And how did the Liberals vote?

At least with the NDP there's the odd surprise once in a while, like this.

Why not?

They [the Li(e)berals] are not our [the NDP's] teachers, right?Wink

2dawall

I have a huge disdain for how posters like Fidel give a knee-jerk defense/cover/support for the spinelessness of the NDP. I also do not assume, as others have, that because Murray Dobbin has not put up an immediate reaction to the NDP cave, that somehow he is a part of any deflection (rare for me to agree with Catchfire).

That being said, however, there is not much of a real articulate force against what is going on in Libya from a Canadian perspective save for the really marginal sites such as New Socialist. The Canadian Peace movement has been weak on analysis forever as I can remember. Too much neo-paganism, too much Johh Lennon lyrics/memorialization, too little infrastructure for real dissent. There as been way too much confusion about supposed righteous interventionism (ie witness the various Greens globally re: Kosovo during the early 90's). This goes to a real need for a renewal of intelligence, of intellectual self-defense (in contrast to empty pseudo-intellectualism a la Zizek). That is what is needed but we first have to agree to that; right here, right now that does not look good.

Merowe

2dawall wrote:

I have a huge disdain for how posters like Fidel give a knee-jerk defense/cover/support for the spinelessness of the NDP. I also do not assume, as others have, that because Murray Dobbin has not put up an immediate reaction to the NDP cave, that somehow he is a part of any deflection (rare for me to agree with Catchfire).

That being said, however, there is not much of a real articulate force against what is going on in Libya from a Canadian perspective save for the really marginal sites such as New Socialist. The Canadian Peace movement has been weak on analysis forever as I can remember. Too much neo-paganism, too much Johh Lennon lyrics/memorialization, too little infrastructure for real dissent. There as been way too much confusion about supposed righteous interventionism (ie witness the various Greens globally re: Kosovo during the early 90's). This goes to a real need for a renewal of intelligence, of intellectual self-defense (in contrast to empty pseudo-intellectualism a la Zizek). That is what is needed but we first have to agree to that; right here, right now that does not look good.

What ARE you on about?

 

 

duncan cameron

This was my take back in March. 

http://rabble.ca/columnists/2011/03/five-principles-driving-war-propagan...

The vote by the NDP was a political mistake. Ms. May got just what she needed: prominence on a divisive issue. The issue is not going away, and the NDP will change their position, or lose considerable respect in Quebec, and elsewhere.

No one wants to appear to support the Libyan dictator. That is what is driving the "government in waiting" group who now decide these questions inside the NDP. They are hoping the dictator will be ousted, and public interest will turn to other matters.

eastnoireast

Merowe wrote:

2dawall wrote:

I have a huge disdain for how posters like Fidel give a knee-jerk defense/cover/support for the spinelessness of the NDP. I also do not assume, as others have, that because Murray Dobbin has not put up an immediate reaction to the NDP cave, that somehow he is a part of any deflection (rare for me to agree with Catchfire).

That being said, however, there is not much of a real articulate force against what is going on in Libya from a Canadian perspective save for the really marginal sites such as New Socialist. The Canadian Peace movement has been weak on analysis forever as I can remember. Too much neo-paganism, too much Johh Lennon lyrics/memorialization, too little infrastructure for real dissent. There as been way too much confusion about supposed righteous interventionism (ie witness the various Greens globally re: Kosovo during the early 90's). This goes to a real need for a renewal of intelligence, of intellectual self-defense (in contrast to empty pseudo-intellectualism a la Zizek). That is what is needed but we first have to agree to that; right here, right now that does not look good.

What ARE you on about?

 

looks to me like 2dawall's on about  a) not liking blind faith (it's very unbecoming...)  b) everything doesn't happen in twitter-time  c) the canadian peace movement's got some growin' to do   d) we should be figuring out strategy but we're stuck at "oh yeah at least we're not the liberals".  yet.

 

@duncan cameron  -  i agree.  a strategic mistake _and shallow, morally indefensible reasoning.

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

The millions who protested against the invasion of Iraq were not condoning the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein. The moral imperetive to stop an illegal invasion was pretty freaking obvious. Regime change through military aggression is illegal. The no-fly zone UN resolution was just a pretext to initiate this assault.

Too many people have become immune to us western powers killing foreign people. Even though Canadian polls clearly indicate lack of support for the Libyan or Afghanistan "missions" that doesn't translate to thousands or millions taking to the street and demonstrating. The fact that the NDP, LPC and CPC are all on the same page just fuels cynicism and apathy. The last time people cared was when there was lively debate in the HoC and press regarding the invasion of Iraq. It sparked interest and concern and widespread, coordinated activism.

NDPP

if not rabble's front page then elsewhere. I expect we'll see a critical piece by Dobbin etc shortly. In the meantime:

The War on Libya: Canada's Parliament Endorses Military Escalation  - by  Michel Chossudovsky

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=25301

"...The Canadian parliament with one dissenting voice, votes in favor of extending Canada's participation in an illegal and criminal military undertaking. On Tuesday, after Canada recognized the NTC as Libya's legitimate government, Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird said the rebels are the true representatives of the Libyan population.

The broader implications of this 'humanitarian war' and Ottawa's role in the US-NATO military alliance, not to mention the cost of this military operation to Canadian texpayers has been barely mentioned in Canada's media.

The New Democratic Party (NDP) and the Bloc Quebecois which claim to be 'progressive' and 'anti-war' have given a blank cheque to the US-NATO sponsored war in North Africa.."

Frmrsldr

duncan cameron wrote:

No one wants to appear to support the Libyan dictator. That is what is driving the "government in waiting" group who now decide these questions inside the NDP. They are hoping the dictator will be ousted, and public interest will turn to other matters.

There's nothing in UNSCR 1973, the "No-Fly Zone" Resolution that permits regime change. Regime change/War of Aggression is illegal.

Fidel

Frmrsldr wrote:

duncan cameron wrote:

No one wants to appear to support the Libyan dictator. That is what is driving the "government in waiting" group who now decide these questions inside the NDP. They are hoping the dictator will be ousted, and public interest will turn to other matters.

There's nothing in UNSCR 1973, the "No-Fly Zone" Resolution that permits regime change. Regime change/War of Aggression is illegal.

 

We know and are disheartened by it all. And in a world of perfect information and perfect interpretation of perfect information, the NDP would look bad for their token support of NATO's mission in Libya.

The NDP is trying hard to get elected to federal government for the first time by 2015. And we can't ignore the fact that an obsolete electoral system is less than ideal and governing how parties appeal to the widest range of voters who still bother too in spite of the right's best attempts at waging war on democracy and killing the hope of electoral democracy. It's as Zbigniew Brzezinski once said about operation Cyclone that began in July 0f 1979 - there are bigger fish to fry than creating a few stirred up Muslims. As maniacal and racist as Z-biggy's justification for slaying secular socialism in Central Asia was at the time, the NDP may also be pursuing a larger agenda than simply giving the nod to those in power who didn't need or require the NDP's approval. Yes the NDP has, on the surface, capitulated to the military aggression against Libya. It is acquiescing to a right wing agenda in Africa that can not and will probably not be prevented by Canada's official opposition party anytime in the next four years.

We all know that in addition to what it looks like on the surface, the NDP could also be jockeying for higher ground on which they will pick their fight with these Reformatories. And we will have to choose our fights wisely. It is the nature of this worst past the post game. The rotten ones and their army of darkness will not be had so easily. They are more clever than we give them credit for I think...

So if you meet me
Have some courtesy
Have some sympathy, and some taste
Use all your well-learned politesse
Or I'll lay your soul to waste, um yeah

Frmrsldr

Will Canada adopt a Fair Voting system at the federal level within the next four years?

I think the sooner this process is started, the better.

clandestiny

 

so, WE Support The War on Tots?

(why wait until they can shoot back?)

 

The War on Tots is not a game

  that's played to pass the time,

  But is a fight for all that's good,

  which we are, versus them!

Our fighting men, so brave so few

   Go everywhere for peace

   Making safe a world at war

   but some yet try appease!!

Let's all support the war on terror

   If we're going to stay on top

 And as nits make lice, otherwise

   Lousy wars cost far too much!

The proof is in the bible ...

  a mighty army on the move

  Confronts a bunch of dirty tots

  when one of THEIRS steps forward!

Goliath was so strong, supreme

  faced boy David, but look who won!

Tthe war on tots is OURS to lose

  A lesson finally learned!

Bleeding hearts assume all tots

  prefer splashing pools to firefights,

But Goliath fell, he lost the war

    - IED or a slingshot stone

    - took unfair advantage of the game

  And the size of the fallen mighty!

Our needs are mighty, neverending

   Obama, plus Harper, military spending,

Around the world create resentments

   political correctness tie their  hands

  (while enabling others)  who then

Must be dealt with aggression!

They strike hard at nests of vipers

  shock and awe and bloody diapers

 war's not for the faint of heart

  The wars on terror they forced to start!

So do your duty, fall in line

  Maverick politicians tells it right!

Support the troops maybe out of style

But liberal news media remains defiant,  

Telling everyone on earth "You're  Goliath!'

while we pro-war patriots are 'just a child!" (re don cherry, hahaha)

--------------------

Slumberjack

Catchfire wrote:
I am sure you will see more of it soon. 

If I didn't know better, it's almost as if someone out there is peeking in on us occasionally.  I've recently chanced upon two front page articles laden with scathing remarks about the NDP's position.

NDPP

Just read Murray Dobbin's - excellent.

2dawall

Could you be more particular, more precise in what you find objectionable in what I said?

I am saying I do not like the NDP, its position on Libya nor do I care for how many here will just give a carte blanche defense of the NDP regardless of scenario .. BUT ... even if the NDP were truly progressive and sincere it would have no social room to make a case against attacking Libya. That currently no space has really been created in the Canadian political-social sphere to make an objection to what is going on in Libya. The peace movement has been weak for decades, misdirected, shallow as well. Even if somebody in the NDP wanted to take a position critical of the war against Libya, could they say they were speaking for any real base out there? No, because there is little discernible dissent on this issue. Beyond what corporations, governments, and their PR puppets have done to marginilize dissent, the social movements have been cannibalizing their own intelligence, embracing those trends (e.g. neo-paganism) which actually detract and dissuade others from understanding the real issues.

Merowe wrote:

2dawall wrote:

I have a huge disdain for how posters like Fidel give a knee-jerk defense/cover/support for the spinelessness of the NDP. I also do not assume, as others have, that because Murray Dobbin has not put up an immediate reaction to the NDP cave, that somehow he is a part of any deflection (rare for me to agree with Catchfire).

That being said, however, there is not much of a real articulate force against what is going on in Libya from a Canadian perspective save for the really marginal sites such as New Socialist. The Canadian Peace movement has been weak on analysis forever as I can remember. Too much neo-paganism, too much Johh Lennon lyrics/memorialization, too little infrastructure for real dissent. There as been way too much confusion about supposed righteous interventionism (ie witness the various Greens globally re: Kosovo during the early 90's). This goes to a real need for a renewal of intelligence, of intellectual self-defense (in contrast to empty pseudo-intellectualism a la Zizek). That is what is needed but we first have to agree to that; right here, right now that does not look good.

What ARE you on about?

 

 

Todrick of Chat...

Slumberjack wrote:

If I didn't know better, it's almost as if someone out there is peeking in on us occasionally.  I've recently chanced upon two front page articles laden with scathing remarks about the NDP's position.

A few days late and a dollar short in my view.

Plus there was nothing the scathing in the remarks anyways.

Fidel

Today's letter to me from Jack Layton

Jack Layton wrote:
Thank you for taking the time to write and share your concerns about the
extension of the UN sanctioned mission in Libya. I appreciate having the
benefits of your comments on this important matter.

New Democrats initially supported the mission's mandate to protect civilians
from attacks by the Libyan government. The fact of the matter is that the
African Union and the Arab League appealed directly to the UN and the
international community to get involved and help stop Muammar Gaddafi's
savage treatment of civilian Libyans and rebel forces. That is why we
supported Parliament's motion to join other countries like the United
Kingdom, France, Norway, Denmark, Spain, Belgium, Italy, Turkey, Qatar, UAE,
Jordan and Morocco in this UN mission.

However, we continue to be concerned about the potential of the mission to
creep beyond its mandate. We clearly said that Canada should take a strong
role in ensuring that diplomacy and humanitarian assistance are Canada's top
priorities. We pushed these views by tabling a number of substantive
amendments to the government's June 14th motion. To achieve transparency on
Canada's goals in Libya, we believe that it is crucial to:

- Make clear that the goal of the UN-mandated mission is to protect
civilians.
- Secure an increase to Canada's support for humanitarian assistance.
- Strengthen our diplomatic role with the acknowledgment that only a
Libyan-led political transition will end this conflict.
- Ensure improved oversight of Canada's involvement, including parliamentary
committee meetings and better information sharing.

In reinforcing our position, NDP Foreign Affairs critic Paul Dewar said: ".I
think amendments are required to support the humanitarian concerns that
exist, especially the internally displaced people and refugees resulting
from this conflict; to ensure that we investigate and prosecute rape as a
weapon of war, which is something my party has asked for in places like the
Congo; and to ensure that there is a strengthened diplomatic pledge by the
government to ensure that we fall in line with UN resolution 1973. I say
this because it is not a crisis that will be solved by Canada, by NATO or by
more bombing, but by diplomatic and humanitarian pursuit and making sure
that the UN is in the lead and is coordinating matters." (Hansard, June 14,
2011)

For your interest, please see attached a copy of the entire motion, (with
NDP amendments in bold), and a link to Mr. Dewar's full speech found here:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode...

New Democrats did not support this extension lightly nor will we support - any - further extension of the current mission.

Again, thank you for taking the time to register your views with me.

Sincerely,

Hon. Jack Layton, P.C. , M.P. (Toronto-Danforth)
Leader of the Official Opposition

Slumberjack

There he goes again with the 'current mission' caveat, which for him and his party has had a particular utility in the Afghanistan context, and why not for Libya it seems.  Perhaps he's clinging to the hope that one of those smart bombs will finally take Gadaffi out so as to relieve him from the burden of having to cast his lot once again with his partners in crime.  Nothing on that wish list will be observed through the NATO regime change missionary position, and he damn well knew it when he threw down his vote in the yes man affirmative.

Fidel

No he was simply looking at what the Socialist International, African Union and European social democracies were doing about Qadaffi promising "no mercy" for Libyan rebels which a number of world leaders on both the left and right interpreted as a declaration of intention to commit crimes. 

OTOH our current 24% stooges in power always-always wait by the private line to Warshington for further instructions. lol!

Todrick of Chat...

Fidel wrote:

No he was simply looking at what the Socialist International, African Union and European social democracies were doing about Qadaffi promising "no mercy" for Libyan rebels which a number of world leaders on both the left and right interpreted as a declaration of intention to commit crimes. 

 

That's the type of leader we need, someone who waits to see what other people are doing and follow them along blindly.

remind remind's picture

what you want the NDP to be white western centric and tell them all how it is from our viewpoint?

 

 

Fidel

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Fidel wrote:

No he was simply looking at what the Socialist International, African Union and European social democracies were doing about Qadaffi promising "no mercy" for Libyan rebels which a number of world leaders on both the left and right interpreted as a declaration of intention to commit crimes. 

 

That's the type of leader we need, someone who waits to see what other people are doing and follow them along blindly.

 

You mean other people as in the African Union, U.N. and Socialist International? Those other people?  This as opposed to taking orders from a couple guys heading up a military dictatorship in Warshington as per what Steve the Stooge and his pals in the Liberal Party have done on a regular basis beginning with Afghanistan? 

I think I see what you mean now. Carry on.

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

There's no mention of the Socialist International in that letter, Fidel?

Slumberjack

remind wrote:
what you want the NDP to be white western centric and tell them all how it is from our viewpoint? 

I thought that was what he was doing.  White western centric + telling them about our viewpoint = being lit up by explosives.

Pages