Will Opposition Parties Finally Bring Harper Down over Detainee Issue - Election Anyone?

...sounds to me that Chester is terrified that Iggy might grow a spine.

Triphop wrote:

Miliken called everybody's bluff and now all the parties just want the whole thing to go away.

You got that right.

"Secondly, if by chance soldiers were implicated..."

They will be since individual soldiers decided who to take into custody and hand over to Afghan authorities. The buck stops with them. This is how the public sees it. Russel the Rapist is a red herring. Even after that arrest people avoid criticizing soldiers.

Another problem is loose lips and poor security with copies of documents. It now looks like Harper/MacKay, Iggy, Layton and Duceppe will have access to the documents but nobody else under oath of secrecy. And that's a good thing. There are too many loose lips and slobs like Maxime Bernier and cokehead Helena Guergis for even Harper to trust in his own party. Somebody from the NDP leaked voter info to the Canadian Tamil Congress to use to troll for Tamil names to solicit LTTE donations. The suspicion was Maurine Karagianis' office. You don't think sensitive info about things like security protocols will be leaked back to Afghanistan by al Qaeda operatives in MPs' offices? The FBI in the States had a terrific problem with Arabic and Urdu translators and CAIR consultants tipping off suspects over raids and searches. Layton, Ignatieff, Duceppe aren't going to give Harper ammunition on the national security and troop safety issues by letting stuff out and they have their shit together enough to not pull a Maxime. But backbenchers might, or might even just be slobs and lose documents like Bernier.

"It now looks like Harper/MacKay, Iggy, Layton and Duceppe will have access to the documents but nobody else under oath of secrecy."

...ummm no, there will be one MP from each party. Chance are it will NOT be the party leaders since they don't have time to read tens of thousands of pages.

Of course Harper will try to claim victory. What else do you expect from him - contrition???  But the important thing is that some MPs will get access to the documents and if they discover incriminating evidence - then we will hear about it. We may not see verbatim word for word transcripts - but I think that if the opposition MPs come across an unredacted document which is an e-mail directly from PM Harper ordering Canadians soldiers to torture - we will hear about it.

The key thing here must not be forgotten - that Parliament's order to disclose the documents has been defied, and that all the "opposition" parties are now complicit in that. They are terrified of Harper - and rightly so - but not enough to actually stand up to him.

Is there any chance that the Speaker will veto this agreement as not going far enough and order the parties back to the table?

LTJ  the cons are ready to go.  The war chest is full, ridings are full, the posters are ready all we need is the call.  Iggy and his league of wimps know they will lose seats.  They know the Dippers, Bloc and Cons will take seats away from them.  Any vote that comes to the house that would force an election or speaker ruling; the Libs will be either sitting on their hands or at home sick.  The only parties willing to bring down the Cons are the Dippers and Bloc.  Those parties have a back bone,  a little bent, but one none the less.

No election untill fall 2012.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all ... are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted ... deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government  [by whatever means necessary] ... "

Right beside the progressives.

Fuck it bring on the revolution I am so tired of this BULLSHIT...Ill take out my con friend first if need be. They, like chester, love the dishonesty and think of it all as just a game. A FUCKING GAME. We are talking about peoples live but for them its all a game. Call it kingmaker or whatever and most of the dunces in Ottawa play the same game even our own NDP. This has to stop right now. We have seen democracy slipping for years now and in the span of 4 year by using a minority government as the backdrop the whole thing has been smashed up(at least what was left).

I have seen people who are totally apolitical upset at whats happening but feel voting is still a waste of time. My mom pretty much a nun(she attended a nunnery at one point) swearing at the TV when ever Harper is on. And yet the smug asshole in the con party like kory the tory on P&P gloat about how dishonest they are. Even the panel talks about "the game"

Well for most of us its not a game. No more words its time for action. Greece is only the beginning. That is why they are trying to nip it in the bud.

The stock market crash was the banks flexing their muscles against Obama saying how he wanted to reign in the banks...well I guess its now pitchfork time as the peasants have had enough. Watch the dominos fall. Even though the market is doing well the rest of the economy is struggling at best. If the clawbacks in greece start taking shape in other countries we may take part in the worlds greatest change in history. Not some simple revolt in one country but a change worldwide.

how long till the net is "shaped" to no longer allow us to communicate. This is empowering people and allowing for organization. This will not be allowed to continue and places like canada with tolerant people are the guinea pigs for ever new designs by the wealthy on how to smash the poor just a little more. Direct their hate against themselves. I know I am on a bit of a rant but I NEVER thought I would see this country so f'd up in such a short period of time.

Suggesting that there is some ethnic predisposition to irrationality that leads to vandalism among Greek people is clearly prejudiced. You no doubt applaud all the vandalism that came with the American Revolution, yet get your knickers in a knot when its not centuries ago and layered over with years of "feel good" spin.

Triphop wrote:

Religious fruitcake poppy farmer acid tossing woman haters with RPGs aren't a good hill to die on, my friend. I don't think the NDP want to fight over this either. The Libs won't either cause they were in power when the handovers were starting.

Talking about backward medieval style extremist ideologies, you seem a little bit confused here. You don't seem to be fully alive to the idea that torturing people in order to determine their guilt or innocence by securing a confession is a medieval practice, one more in keeping with the inquisition, or the witch trials, just like "acid throwing'

Notice here, I am saying "determine their guilt or innocence", because that is indeed what is going on. Some of those tortured were let go because the Afghan's determined that they were innocent -- indeed the Canadian army complained that some detainees had been freed. This means that not all the people who have been tortured are, as you say, "Religious fruitcake poppy farmer acid tossing woman haters with RPGs."

But that is merely an aside. I know it is an uphill battle discussing such things as "principles" with NDP stalwarts but the fact is that even Nazi's have rights. Yes they do. I know it's shocking, but the fundamental principle of "rights" is that they are universal, and apply to all. And the reason for this is quite simple: If you support a system of justice that does not apply a universal code of human rights to any and all then they are not "rights" they are merely "privileges", to be given or taken away at the whim of the state.

In short, if "Religious fruitcake poppy farmer acid tossing woman haters with RPGs", don't have rights, you don't have them either. Don't worry. You will be fine. I don't actually think anyone will ever be coming for you, because I doubt anyone in power is at all worried about you threatening their power. When faced with their abuses of fundamental ethics and rights you seem more than happy to curl up in a ball, and start gnawing on some minor financial abuses by some back woods lawyer.

Why on earth would Harper be afraid of that?

In any case, like most politicos its quite evident that you aren't interested in anything concerning "principles" and "human rights" and all that rot, (could this be because you don't actually understand what they are?) and are more interested in what you think is politically tractionable, but I hate to break it to you, the erosion of the basic principles in law, order and due process that you are giving such short shrift, is the very same erosion, which will mean that your Devinder Shory "scandal" will also die on the vine.

JKR wrote:

Michelle wrote:

Yup, Harper wins.
Why vote? Time for people to focus their energy on making a difference in ways other than the political process. There's just no point anymore.

If progressives disengage from the political process, then Harper will truly have won.

It's not a political process that people have any influence over, that is the point.

Triphop wrote:

The Taliban dont live in Canada so they don't Have Charter Rights. They never signed the Hague or Geneva Conventions so they don't have those rights. You think rights are universal? Rights are different or even nonexistent depending on where you are or who you are. How about rights to armed defense or own property. We have neither in our constitution. Neither America nor Canada have rights to medical treatment. Women on native rezes here don't have the dower and gender equality rights women everywhere else have. Rights arent universal. You also just won't get any public sympathy for people who are in the news squirting acid on little girls faces for going to schools or people who claim inocence but have C4 residue on their hands. And any assignment of blame will inevitably entangle individual soldiers. Who do you think 95% of the voting public will get behind? This is why Layton is dropping his peacenik stance by claiming the Cons arent spending ENOUGH on the Navy. Any dirt on detainee handovers will also cover the Liberal era so Iggy wont press it. What will come out of this is a list of Recommendations for Detainee Transfers. Nothing more. People here who think this resonates with the public need to get out more and talk to people outside their Project Ploughshares circle. There is a big danger with progressive types here of insular thinking and ignoring what the majority of ordinary people think. Politicians in our plurality system have popular opinion as their bread and butter and wont piss off the public by coming down on Canadian soldiers over taliban rights.

I guess the SS executing Canadian prisoners during WWII was just fine, given that Canadians were not German, and therefore had no protection under German law. But I doubt that it would have been an issue that "resonated" much with the German public (full marks their for you) on the other hand being anti-semitic was something that German's could "get behind" in the 1930' -- Guess that must be alright since the object is getting elected, not doing what is right or wrong.

Handing over the agenda to the "right" by propagating the opinion that people in Canada are naturally "behind" increased military spending, and increased interventionism is just more un-evidenced assertion, and false populism. You and Layton think that you are making an appeal to popular opinion, but all you are really doing is adding weight to the arguments that the right will use gain further power. And when it comes down to it, now that you have argued their case for them, people are not going to start voting for wishy-washy liberal-NDP faux militarism, they will vote for the real, hard right militarism of the Tories.

People want alternatives. Aping right wing talking points, in the hope they will "resonate" for you, as well as they do for the right does nothing but reinforce their position.

You don't seem to understand at all. You just don't know how wrong you are. The "rights" of Afghan detainees, are just as much part of Canadian law, as any in the charter. It is irrelevant if Afghan's (not necessarily Taliban since we know some of these detainees were released -- I hope you understand that not all Afghan's picked up by Canadian forces are necessarily militants, but merely suspects) do not have charter rights: they have rights under Canadian military law and our obligations under international law.

In fact, their rights as combatants are covered in the Geneva Convention, and covered by the ICC, to which Canada is a signatory. That is just the legality. The implication of eroding those principles of "rights" in law which are most definitely part of Canadian law, means that they can do the same with any Canadian "rights" in law, even those that protect you under the charter.

How right am I? Very. For even now the US government, having made short shrift of the principles of international law for the past decade, have now put their first American citizen on its "terrorist" hit list for summary execution, based on secret evidence, and without a trial.

When they tied a rope around Saddam Hussain's neck and threw him over the balcony to his death people ran to the microwave to make popcorn.  What is going to get the people out of their armchairs and into the streets is the domestic economy. People who are so stressed that they dont know if they will have a pension or even a job in the next week or month or year cannot think straight or figure out who best represents their interests when the truth is none of them do.  They are all loyal to the capitalist state and that is how it is going to stay-  Unless we have an actual revolution.  End of Story.

RR

Triphop, you are wrong. Common Article 3 says you're wrong; the Supreme Court of the U.S.A. has recently said you are wrong. How many times do you have to be told you are wrong?

Every human being must be treated humanely. Every human being. Which part of that expression are you having trouble grasping?

What part of "did not sign the Geneva Accord and Hague Convention" do you not understand? What do you mean by humanely?

I really dont like that women on rezes like two I know lose everything including their kids when their husband dumps them. I don't like that Canada has no property rights meaning that a company in BC can take the land your house sits on because they want to mine clay for kitty litter under it. And I really don't like that it's still illegal to convert from Islam in Afghanistan or most other Muslim countries and that there is no sexual equality or laws against spousal battery. Why do you think people care about some guy caught with IED parts shooting at Canadian soldiers getting handed to AFGHAN police and getting his teeth knocked out by his own people? As for humane some of the complaints are a joke. Amnesty International cited dirty toilets. Really? Half the civilian kids in Afghanistan poop over holes in the ground. Broadening the scope of this to Guantanamo we have complaints about toilets facing Mecca and scented soap and being touched by women. Complete rubbish. And how in the heck are Canadians supposed to deal with enemy combattants? Build Canadian-run jails? Let them plant IEDs instead of capturing them? Please spare your sympathies for real horrors like the mistreatment of women and children in these societies and here. These are people who are actually in dire need of being treated humanely.

I'm pretty sure that there are very bad things in those documents too.  What I am talking about is all these condemnations of inaction before any documents have been looked at.  I know a few opposition MPs very well (in all three opposition parties even).  One of them I expect will be named to this committee.  I find it impossible to believe that if they find evidence of wrong doing that they won't find ways to make sure it is revealed.  Yet I see people condemning their actions before anything has even started.  I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt based on a stellar record on important issues, if nothing happens then that is the time to rail.

That is an amazing crystal ball to already know conclusively the outcome of something that hasn't happened yet.  Anyone with that gift should easily be able to provide me with the next Lotto numbers.

Well, BA, you go on observing the comfortable elaborate courtesies with your friends in Canada, who are now committed to what may be an extremely lengthy process. All I was asking was that, in the meantime, one of your friends might speak publicly and forcefully to the subject that matters rather more than their careers, which is that some Afghans are being tortured in Afghanistan tonight, and we inevitably have had something to do with that.

Cueball the charter only applies to people on Canadian soil. Or so says the Supreme Court. This means that foreign nationals in Canada are entitled to charter protection as in R vs Singh but not foreign nationals abroad. Me and you "signed on" to the charter by being on Canadian soil. Im not confused about rights because even things like due process and habeas corpus dont exist in many firstworld democracies. Rights are not universal and I agree thats bad. This isnt about what you think is right but what is legal and its perfectly legal to turn captured taliban combattants over to their countrymen. And yes these are captured armed Taliban irregulars not innocent dope farmers. You want Canadian run jails in Afghanistan then great. Go and convince Canadian taxpayers and politicians to pay millions of $$$ for them. Then tell the Afghans that you dont trust them to look after their own nationals even as NATO is trying to get them to build a civil society so we can leave as soon as possible. Lots of luck with that.

Bookish Agrarian I think the opposition will pretend to study the relevant materials then put together some kind of Recommendations for Detainee Transfers and move on. The Libs dont want this can of worms opened and the NDs won't press it. Belabouring this issue is pure political poison for everybody. Everybody will move on to something else. Miliken was smart to punt this back at the Commons.