These are the scumbags our troops are fighting to defend
Fri, 2008-02-01 11:51
#1
M. Spector
These are the scumbags our troops are fighting to defend
Fri, 2008-02-01 12:18
#2
I was just about to post on the same topic. I thought there was little left that could shock me about our murderous mission to Afghanistan, but I admit that this story did it. Not the evil of the "governor" - the first time I saw him interviewed on TV, I had him pegged as a cowardly gangster - no, it was the callous cold cynical killer's responses of the politicians when confronted with their crimes.
quote:
In Question Period Friday, Conservative MPs did not deny or refute the allegations, choosing instead to dismiss Opposition questions about Mr. Khalid as [b]“histrionics and hyperbole.”[/b]
ETA: Here is the thug himself - know thy enemy:
[img]http://images.ctv.ca/archives/CTVNews/img2/20070430/160_11p_khalid_07043...
[ 01 February 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]
Fri, 2008-02-01 12:30
#3
remind
quote:
Two days later, the Harper damage-control was in full swing. He sent diplomats to inspect the main secret police prison in Kandahar [b]on April 25, 2007.[/b]
So Harper et al, knew shortly after April 25, 2007, but yet kept on transfering prisoners until the first part of November, and indeed they are still fighting a lawsuit that would block the transfers of detainees.
Again this begs the question; just what ARE they doing with those they capture/detain nowadays?
I, like unionist, am not surprised at this revelation about Kahlid and Karzi, and furthermore I am glad it has been exposed.
Perhaps Canadians will wake up and realize just what their tax dollars are being spent on and just what the implication is for ALL Canadians.
[ 01 February 2008: Message edited by: remind ]
Fri, 2008-02-01 12:40
#4
M. Spector
Other threads to remind us of why we're sending troops to fight in Afghanistan:
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=003596]K...'s Afghanistan sentences to death profeminist student[/url]
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=001913]K... plans to re-introduce Taliban-style religious police[/url]
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=003289]A... - the freedom we're fighting to defend, Part XLVII[/url]
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=002878]M... Joya Kicked out of Afghan Lower House[/url]
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=002719]RAWA statement on International Women's Day[/url]
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=001834]R... on journalism in Afghanistan[/url]
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=001770]A... here comes the new gang. A lot like the old gang[/url]
and last, but not least:
[url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=001168]Who are we fightin' for?[/url]
Fri, 2008-02-01 14:47
#5
Well. Their thugs do the deed and our thugs do the coverup. And on both sides, the respective citizens enjoy 'democracy' !
Will come voting day when Harper will be asked to account. I am sure this 'sword of democracy' makes him shake in his boots.
Never mind. just deluding myself, like most Canadians.
Sat, 2008-02-02 13:39
#6
From the article:
quote:
[The governor Mr. Khalid] wouldn't have been in a room with a prisoner to discuss anything with them, he said."Never, never, never," he said. [...]
But Mr. Khalid said people in prison will say anything to be freed.
"I think this is clear for everyone that if you have some prisoner in the jail they will accuse everyone," he said. [...]
Mr. Khalid also said he didn't recall meeting with Mr. MacKay in Kandahar in November when Mr. MacKay says he raised the issue of the treatment of prisoners with Afghan authorities.[/qb]
This is one of those rare cases where I think MacKay is lying about meeting Khalid, and Khalid is lying about not recalling the meeting. [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]
Sat, 2008-02-02 14:31
#7
Hmmm...what is the difference between this governor and various detainments of "youths" on terrorism charges?
The "youths" are accorded multi 100 post threads attesting that they are merely suspects and that the authorities and media should not jump to conclusions because the "youths" are innocent until proven guilty.
The governor,on the other hand, is condemned in this thread in unseemly haste, solely on the Globe and Mail's innuendo.
Why, in the opinion of posters participating in this thread, does the "youths" deserve the benefits of doubt accorded to those accused and not convicted and the govenor deemed guilty based solely on a biased media report?
If I were to answer my own question, I would say that it depends on whether the accusation fits into the political bias of the poster and that this lynch mob should take a quiet moment to consider how [i]they[/i]are no different than any other lynch mob.
Shameful lack of perspective from otherwise intelligent individuals who [b]do[/b] know better.
Sat, 2008-02-02 15:25
#8
quote:
Originally posted by jester:
[b]Why, in the opinion of posters participating in this thread, does the "youths" deserve the benefits of doubt accorded to those accused and not convicted and the govenor deemed guilty based solely on a biased media report? [/b]
I don't know if the "governor" is guilty of particular torture charges or not.
I do know that he is a shameless puppet of the U.S. and NATO and an accomplice in the torture, dispossession, and murder of the Afghan people.
I know I've seen him interviewed, and he makes me ill. It must make you ill too, to see a political leader (even a phoney one propped up by the biggest armed forces in the world) say shit like:
quote:
But Mr. Khalid said people in prison will say anything to be freed."I think this is clear for everyone that if you have some prisoner in the jail they will accuse everyone," he said.
I think he should be locked up and the key thrown away.
Even if he's "innocent".
So, in his case, I'll make an exception to the usual rule.
Sun, 2008-02-03 03:38
#9
jester, your characterization of the babblers in this thread as a "lynch mob" is unacceptable. Strangely enough, I came to this thread because someone sent me a complaint about M. Spector calling you a slimy little weasel. Which is also unacceptable (don't play their game, M. Spector).
But you're completely trolling here, jester, and I would say that if you can't make your points without saying such things about babblers and starting a flame war, then you should probably stay out.
Sun, 2008-02-03 06:21
#10
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]jester, your characterization of the babblers in this thread as a "lynch mob" is unacceptable. Strangely enough, I came to this thread because someone sent me a complaint about M. Spector calling you a slimy little weasel. Which is also unacceptable (don't play their game, M. Spector).But you're completely trolling here, jester, and I would say that if you can't make your points without saying such things about babblers and starting a flame war, then you should probably stay out.[/b]
I'm not trolling at all. Not even a little bit.Especially not completely - is that valley girl speak,by the way?
I'm trying to be succinct rather than stringing a whole bunch of 8 cylinder words together that even the author can't decipher after the first phrase.
On revisiting my words, I do realise that the analogy is not quite what I intended. It wasn't my intent to call these posters a lynch mob,rather to point out that having the correct political bias does not change the fact that all those charged are considered innocent until proven guilty.
I appologise for the inadvertent characterisation of these posters as a "lynch mob". The analogy is to the use of unsupported innuendo to foment an emotional antipathy to an event or individual as opposed to the legal framework all accused are entitled to in Canada.
Which brings me to the next point - do we as Canadians have the right to impose our legal and cultural values on a tribal culture rooted in medieval values?
I'm continually amazed that after expending considerable effort to pose a particular issue, I am attacked for trolling. I [b]am not[/b] defending the governor at all and [b]have not[/b]suggested that he isn't guilty of all the accusations against him.
This is the way my mind works - I analyse an issue internally as far as I can and then pose the results for discussion.
[b]I am not[/b]taking a position on the issue,I am opening it for discussion from which I try to find a resolution based on principle,not the shifting sands of emotional judgement.
For the record,on many issues,I agree with Spector. I have great respect for his intellect and although I'm aware that he can flip out, I was not trying to provoke him.
Rather than assuming,why not simply ask me for clarification? This point revolves around both unfinished debate with Spector regarding Canadian values or the lack thereof and with unionist about whether principles can be bent if one considers the cause just. Neither of those discussions involved flame wars.
Sun, 2008-02-03 06:24
#11
I have no problem with the rest of your post. The problem I have with your post is that you characterized babblers who have posted in this thread as a "lynch mob". You could have made your point without it. So next time do it that way. This is a warning.
Sun, 2008-02-03 06:32
#12
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
[b]I have no problem with the rest of your post. The problem I have with your post is that you characterized babblers who have posted in this thread as a "lynch mob". You could have made your point without it. So next time do it that way. This is a warning.[/b]
And good morning to you too. I have already appologised.
Sun, 2008-02-03 06:35
#13
Like, whatever. Totally. Apology, like, accepted.
Sun, 2008-02-03 06:57
#14
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
[b]I think he should be locked up and the key thrown away.
Even if he's "innocent".
So, in his case, I'll make an exception to the usual rule.[/b]
What makes me ill,among other events in Afghanistan is that an estimated 25% on the foreign aid donated to Afghanistan is finding its way out of the country and into the personal wealth of various functionaries of government.
We've had this discussion previously about making exceptions and I am still not convinced that exceptions should be made,no matter how righteous the decision is.
If you recall, I have made the point that those who are most vociferous in pleading for Canada to stay the course in Afghanistan are those who benefit the most from government corruption vis-a-vis skimming off whatever funding comes their way.
The US is not interested in a stable Afghanistan or greater south Asia. They want a destabilised area that thwarts a pan-islamic hegemony. The US wants to thwart Iran and the geopolitical ambitions of Russia and especially China in the region.
In this regard, the use of pliable locals to furthur American ambitions is desirable and the effects of this policy on local inhabitants is of no consequence to the US.
My particular connundrum is to come to terms with a principled R2P strategy for Canada based both on Canadian values and respect for the cultural values of failed states.
We are not about to change feudal societies in the developing world that are based on tribal animosities who settle disputes with medieval dispatch but we can make a difference in moving their societies forward.
Sun, 2008-02-03 07:25
#15
quote:
Originally posted by jester:
[b]What makes me ill,among other events in Afghanistan is that an estimated 25% on the foreign aid donated to Afghanistan is finding its way out of the country and into the personal wealth of various functionaries of government.[/b]
Where does the rest go... to munitions?
quote:
[b]We've had this discussion previously about making exceptions and I am still not convinced that exceptions should be made,no matter how righteous the decision is.[/b]
The so-called terror suspects being held for no reason that the public can fathom for the past couple years in Mississauga are subject to Canadian law. They are innocent till proven guilty, and they are entitled to a public and expeditious trial.
Except, of course, if they're Muslims entrapped by shady highly-paid Sharia-spouting police informers and agents provocateurs, in which case they are subject to national security and have no rights whatsoever.
As for the "governor" of Kandahar, if he were in Canada, he would be subject to the same protections our law affords. Perhaps we would actually apply them in his case.
But he is in occupied Afghanistan, where suspects are butchered in their beds and bombed in their villages, posthumously dubbed "Taliban" (which is something subhuman, don't you know), and triumphant press releases issued by our macho uniformed servants. They don't get a trial, not even charges.
I don't like the "governor". I have judged him based on his title, his stand on the occupation, his attitude toward "his" people (I mean the Afghan people here), and his response to the allegations against him. I pronounce him guilty.
There! He's just had a fairer trial than the people he is [b][i]"alleged"[/i][/b] to have tortured and the ones whom his masters murder on a daily basis. I even took into account his statement of defence as reported in the MSM.
So, it's not really an exception. He's in a different jurisdiction, and I've applied the legal standards appropriate to his situation.
Sun, 2008-02-03 07:42
#16
quote:
So, it's not really an exception. He's in a different jurisdiction, and I've applied the legal standards appropriate to his situation.
So what you 're saying is that you are judging the governor according to the cultural imperative of his peer group?
Sun, 2008-02-03 07:47
#17
quote:
Originally posted by jester:
[b]So what you 're saying is that you are judging the governor according to the cultural imperative of his peer group?[/b]
Sort of. Like trial by jury, right? Actually, a more accurate analogy could be captured this way:
[i]He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.[/i]
Sun, 2008-02-03 08:00
#18
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
[b]Sort of. Like trial by jury, right? Actually, a more accurate analogy could be captured this way:
[i]He who lives by the sword, dies by the sword.[/i][/b]
Thats the way it works in feudal societies but what right do outsides have to pronounce judgement in these matters?
There is a great passage on the workings of tribal society in The Punishment of Virtue by Sarah Chayes. According to Ms. Chayes, this resolution method is quite effective.
Sun, 2008-02-03 08:22
#19
quote:
Originally posted by jester:
[b]Thats the way it works in feudal societies but what right do outsides have to pronounce judgement in these matters?[/b]
I'm not an "outsider". I pay the troops that prop up this scumbag. He hasn't worked out. I have decided to fire him and turn him over to the local population for handling.
Also, my statement about "living by the sword" was descriptive, not prescriptive. It's just a fact of life. That's why our high-tech troops will continue to die embarrassing deaths at the hands of home-made IEDs until they are finally given permission to leave. So it is written, so it shall be done.
Sun, 2008-02-03 10:44
#20
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
[b]
That's why our high-tech troops will continue to die embarrassing deaths at the hands of home-made IEDs until they are finally given permission to leave. So it is written, so it shall be done.
[/b]
Why are these deaths embarrassing?
Sun, 2008-02-03 10:52
#21
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]Why are these deaths embarrassing?[/b]
Where do I start?
The troops are allegedly there to help the people.
The insurgents are allegedly some alien force whom the people hate.
The troops (of many foreign armies) have every imaginable modern high-tech piece of equipment and they constantly brag about their killing power, the indestructibility of their vehicles, etc.
The insurgents have nothing of the kind.
The troops brag about their valiant fighting ability and ridicule the insurgents for always have scores of dead after face-to-face battles. (By the way, you never heard of "dead and injured" Taliban counts, did you? Only dead.)
The cowardly insurgents can't look our brave heroes in the eye, because they will just wilt in the face of the Fiery Sword of Righteousness.
So they hide amongst the people (treacherous bastards disguise themselves to look just like "the people") - the very people who hate and despise them, you know - and they have the absolute run of the roads and the countryside. They plant their home-made contraptions at will, and blow up the Angels of Mercy right in their indestructible vehicles. And they can't be stopped. And it will go on forever.
If that's not "embarrassing", I need a new dictionary.
Sun, 2008-02-03 10:56
#22
remind
Don't know, but what I find embarrassing is the whining that the "insurgents" are not playing fair, by using their IED's.
Sun, 2008-02-03 10:59
#23
You mean [b]our[/b] mines... [img]redface.gif" border="0[/img]
Sun, 2008-02-03 11:31
#24
Unionist
Thank you for your reply, I was not sure what you meant in your original post.
Remind
IEDs are a great weapon. Yes… it is embarrassing to hear people whine about them.
Martin
I am still not sure what mines you are referring to, however if you care to answer my questions in the mine thread, that way we are not disturbing this thread.
Sun, 2008-02-03 12:00
#25
remind
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]IEDs are a great weapon. Yes… it is embarrassing to hear people whine about them.
[/b]
Are you trying to infer that I am supportive of their use and think that they are a great weapon, webgear?
Moreover, what is embarassing is not how you appeared to be trying to skew it, it is the fact that for some reason, that the media, the Canadian military and the CPC government are trying to say it is NOT FAIR of Afghans to use them.
Much like the British whined when they were fighting the FN's of this continent, about how they fought "unfairly" because they did not stand in formation and allow the Brits to shoot them, and conducted stealth warfare instead.
Sun, 2008-02-03 12:36
#26
quote:
Originally posted by jester:
[b]What makes me ill,among other events in Afghanistan is that an estimated 25% on the foreign aid donated to Afghanistan is finding its way out of the country and into the personal wealth of various functionaries of government.
[/b]
Including those of the Canadian gov't presumably, in a "mice will play" scenario.
Six years of "reconstruction", involving the expenditure of hundreds upon hundreds of millions of $$$$, seems to have yielded very little in the way of tangible results.
We've seen pictures of some road work, a few bags of cement placed strategically near a site for a "planned" police station and a coat of fresh paint on a window frame containing broken panes.
Not a helluva lot, IOW.
The "rebuild Afghanistan" meme, shilled relentlessly by the MSM and the PTB since 2002, seems to have undergone a shift in emphasis lately: it now follows an "after we achieve military security" we'll build schools and clinics etc. timeline. Last years effort seems to have consisted of micro-loans for sewing machines, hard to monitor in any realistic way and buying some rent-a-cops, ditto.
This entire woebegotten farce is really starting to stink, in addition to merely smelling bad.
If I didn't think otherwise, I'd swear Mulroney was in on it.
Sun, 2008-02-03 12:59
#27
I was not inferring anything. Nor was I trying to skew anything.
I was agreeing with your post.
I believe the Afghans are fighting fairly and have never thought differently (the exception of suicide attacks in some cases), they are fighting a classical counter insurgent war.
Sun, 2008-02-03 13:16
#28
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
[b] Are you trying to infer that I am supportive of their use and think that they are a great weapon, webgear?[/b]
Remind, how could you conclude that Webgear was talking about you? I thought his response about people whining about IEDs was painfully honest.
Sun, 2008-02-03 14:01
#29
I got the same impression as remind did. It's those damn cut-and-dry sentences.
Sun, 2008-02-03 14:04
#30
remind
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]I was not inferring anything. Nor was I trying to skew anything.I was agreeing with your post.
I believe the Afghans are fighting fairly and have never thought differently (the exception of suicide attacks in some cases), they are fighting a classical counter insurgent war.[/b]
Thank you for your clarification, I guess I was expecting you to disavow, or skew it, in order not to state that the tactic they are taking is warranted, given the situation of actual warfare, my apologies.
However, by your noting that the "Afghans" are fighting fairly, are you not in actual fact stating, that we really are occupying Afghanistan, and that we are not there for benevolent reasons? I believe it is.
Mon, 2008-02-04 15:11
#31
As an example of the incoherence of Canadian policy in Afghanistan, it is instructive to read Rosie Dimanno in the Toronto Star today.
She says that Canada cannot impose values on Afghans.
Now, I thought she meant that maybe Canada had no business having soldiers there, or that assisting women in gaining equality was not really what it is all about.
But no! SHE meant that we cannot force our views on TORTURE on Afghanistan. If they wanna torture, then it is not our business.
quote:
Afghanistan is a sovereign nation. We cannot impose our values, our Charter of Rights and our international covenants on them.
quote:
It is profoundly naпve and inexcusably paternalistic, however, to pretend that Canada can reinvent Afghan culture by exporting our precious ethics when that country is still very much under siege.
quote:
Living in Afghanistan is a daily challenge and that anxiety contributes to an environment of distrust, menace and cruelty. But we make a mistake if calibrating their wrongness against our sense of rightness and righteousness.
So, remember, we are not there to change anything for the better. That would be to impose our values.
[url=http://www.thestar.com/columnists/article/300148]http://www.thestar.com/...
Mon, 2008-02-04 15:31
#32
quote:
It is profoundly naпve and inexcusably paternalistic, however, to pretend that Canada can reinvent Afghan culture by exporting our precious ethics when that country is still very much under siege.
That's rich. We can't respect the Geneva Convention there, because their country is under siege... [b]by us[/b]!
That should read [b]specious [/b]ethics...
Mon, 2008-02-04 15:49
#33
quote:
Originally posted by remind:
[b]
However, by your noting that the "Afghans" are fighting fairly, are you not in actual fact stating, that we really are occupying Afghanistan, and that we are not there for benevolent reasons? I believe it is.
[/b]
I was stating that the Afghans are excellent warriors, their tactics are very good and worthy of in depth study.
The mission in Afghanistan will be written in a new chapter in counter-insurgency warfare manuals.
The insurgents may lack certain qualities in some areas of war fighting however their abilities in other areas are above standard in many ways compared to other western military forces.
The Afghan insurgent is admirable opponent.
Mon, 2008-02-04 15:53
#34
I posted these items elsewhere, but it looks like they belong more accurately under this thread topic.
"Sentenced to death: Afghan who dared to read about women's rights
By Kim Sengupta
Thursday, 31 January 2008
A young man, a student of journalism, is sentenced to death by an Islamic court for downloading a report from the internet. The sentence is then upheld by the country's rulers. This is Afghanistan – not in Taliban times but six years after "liberation" and under the democratic rule of the West's ally Hamid Karzai...."
[url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/sentenced-to-death-afghan-w... Independent[/url]
=====
"Revealed: British plan to build training camp for Taliban fighters in Afghanistan"
By Jerome Starkey in Kabul
Monday, 4 February 2008
The Afghan government claims they prove British agents were talking to the Taliban without permission from the Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, despite Gordon Brown's pledge that Britain will not negotiate. The Prime Minister told Parliament on 12 December: "Our objective is to defeat the insurgency by isolating and eliminating their leaders. We will not enter into any negotiations with these people."
The British insist President Karzai's office knew what was going on. But Mr Karzai has expelled two top diplomats amid accusations they were part of a plot to buy-off the insurgents.
The row was the first in a series of spectacular diplomatic spats which has seen Anglo-Afghan relations sink to a new low. Since December, President Karzai has blocked the appointment of Paddy Ashdown to the top UN job in Kabul and he has blamed British troops for losing control of Helmand.
It has also soured relations between Kabul and Washington, where State Department officials were instrumental in pushing Lord Ashdown for the UN role.
President Karzai's political mentor, Sibghatullah Mojaddedi, endorsed a death sentence for blasphemy on the student journalist Sayed Pervez Kambaksh last week, and two British contractors have been arrested in Kabul on, it is claimed, trumped up weapons charges. The developments are seen as a deliberate defiance of the British...."
[url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/revealed-british-plan-to-bu... Independent-Our Taliban[/url]
================
"From The Sunday Times
February 3, 2008
US plan for Afghan troop surge
Michael Smith
"THE conservative Washington think tank that devised the “surge” of US forces in Iraq has come up with a plan to send 12,000 more American troops into southern Afghanistan.
A panel of more than 20 experts convened by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) has also urged the administration to get tough with Pakistan.
The US should threaten to attack Taliban and Al-Qaeda fighters in lawless areas on the border with Afghanistan if the Pakistan military did not deal with them itself, the panel concluded.
The AEI’s “Afghanistan Planning Group”, set up at the request of US officials, spent last weekend putting together preliminary proposals that centre on a surge of US troops in the south...."
[url=http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article3295444.ece]In AEI We Trust[/url][/QB][/QUOTE]
Mon, 2008-02-04 16:03
#35
M. Spector
Thanks, contrarianna. BTW that first item is the subject of a [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=13&t=003596]s... thread[/url].
Wed, 2008-02-20 20:51
#36
[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7256064.stm]Is the scumbag starting to feel nervous?[/url]
quote:
The governor of the Kandahar province in Afghanistan has criticised British attempts to negotiate with the Taleban.Assadullah Khalid told the BBC that the way two European experts were trying to negotiate was a mistake, and that is why they were expelled last year. ...
"We are talking for reconciliation, not giving more power to the terrorists," Mr Khalid said.
Mr Khalid said the fight against the Taleban was still going well despite three suicide bombings in Kandahar in as many days this week.
Mon, 2008-04-14 17:33
#37
You know, I really want to be able to look towards the NDP for leadership in standing up against this war...but they just keep fumbling the ball. Man, it ain't that complicated is it?
Mon, 2008-04-14 18:20
#38
Boom Boom
Anything goes when political advantage is to be had - right? [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]
Mon, 2008-04-14 18:47
#39
Frustrated Mess
quote:
[God forbid Canada should be seen as meddling in Afghan affairs!]
I'm sorry, but the absolute absurdity of politics always has me doubling over. A couple of thousand heavily armed troops, with $100,000 shells, bringing Christian values and [i]democracy[/i]TM to Afghanistan is [i]not[/i] meddling in Afghan affairs.
Its like Americans blaming Iran for violence in Iraq. If wasn't for the corporate media lending credibility to it all with the seriousness of somber faces and masquerade of objectivity, it would be a self-writing global farce.
Mon, 2008-04-14 18:50
#40
Dewar is an ass. Isn't he the one who praised Harper for being the first to pull out of Durban II - until the NDP yanked his idiotic statement from their website? Now he's defending the "sovereignty" of a puppet government propped up by U.S. and Canadian troops! Are these characters actually accountable to anyone when they open their mouths, or are they just given free rein?
Mon, 2008-04-14 19:04
#41
Frustrated Mess
Free reign. Idiocy is often a basic requirement for being a pundit in the corporate press.
Mon, 2008-04-14 19:34
#42
By the way, [url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080414.wafghan15/BN... is Canada's choice for the next governor of Kandahar:
quote:
When asked to name possible contenders for the job, several politicians in Kandahar city volunteered a surprising candidate: a cultural adviser and translator for Canadian Brigadier-General Guy Laroche. Like many of the Afghan staffers who serve with the Canadian Forces, the 28-year-old graduate of Carleton University uses only a pseudonym, “Pasha,” to keep his identity secret for security reasons. ...“I'm very happy if Pasha replaces the governor, because he's an experienced person, a very good man,” said Haji Mohammed Qassam, a provincial council member.
Hey, that Haji guy is a great suckhole and bootlicker - he will go far!
And what's wrong with Canada picking one of its own to govern Kandahar? After all the lives of our young people that we've sacrificed?? After all the Afghans we've killed, tortured and built schools for?
We've earned one or two governorships, minimum!
Mon, 2008-04-14 19:55
#43
Yes, I think Canada should rate its own General Ripper at large. We're denying Afghans our national essence.
Mon, 2008-04-14 20:00
#44
The last six posters have reinforced my belief in humanity. Thank you and good night!
Mon, 2008-04-14 20:30
#45
I've been called worse. And same to you!
Fri, 2008-08-15 10:17
#46
Another [url=http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/08/15/khalid-governor.html?ref=rss]sc... bites the dust:
quote:
The controversial governor of Kandahar, who former Canadian foreign affairs minister Maxime Bernier once suggested should be replaced, has been removed from his post, the Afghanistan government announced Friday.Asadullah Khalid has been replaced by Rahmatullah Raufi, who has served for three years as the chief of the Afghan National Army forces for five southern provinces, including Kandahar.
Khalid had been considered a strong leader, but in his three years as governor he faced criticism that he wasn't effective enough against Taliban insurgents.
He was also among Afghan officials alleged to have participated in torture of detainees, but Khalid denied the reports.
Who would have guessed, back in April, that scumbag Bernier would precede scumbag Khalid down the political drain?
Mind you, I'm predicting that this was all prearranged. Watch for Bernier to be parachuted into Kandahar riding, and vice versa.
Sat, 2009-03-14 00:02
#47
[url=http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/student-facing-20-years-in-... facing 20 years in hell[/color][/url]
Sayed Pervez Kambaksh, the student journalist sentenced to death for blasphemy in Afghanistan, has been told he will spend the next 20 years in jail after the country's highest court ruled against him – without even hearing his defence.
The 23-year-old, brought to worldwide attention after an Independent campaign, was praying that Afghanistan's top judges would quash his conviction for lack of evidence, or because he was tried in secret and convicted without a defence lawyer. Instead, almost 18 months after he was arrested for allegedly circulating an article about women's rights, any hope of justice and due process evaporated amid gross irregularities, allegations of corruption and coercion at the Supreme Court. Justices issued their decision in secret, without letting Mr Kambaksh's lawyer submit so much as a word in his defence.
Sat, 2009-03-14 01:33
#48
M. Spector
[b]Another [url=http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/08/15/khalid-governor.html?ref=rss]sc... bites the dust:[/b]
Call off the [i]schadenfreude[/i]!
The scumbag just got kicked upstairs:
Now, just two months after Khalid was quietly replaced by Rahmatullah Raufi, a former Afghan army general, President Hamid Karzai has named him minister of state for parliamentary affairs.
The charismatic former governor landed the position despite having led a provincial government that was dogged by whispers of corruption and accusations that he himself took part in the abuse of prisoners - a charge he has vehemently denied. - [url=http://canadianpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5jGLPBMDEjCbfjQzV1d9OVBC2E5...
Originally posted October 30, 2008
Edited for formatting March 14, 2009
Sat, 2009-03-14 04:30
#49
"These are the scumbags our troops are fighting to defend"
But in the 1980s, western newspaper reporters from Pakistan to New York and Toronto said they were real good guys.
Tue, 2009-03-31 15:43
#50
M. Spector
[url=http://rabble.ca/babble/international-news-and-politics/remember-when-af... thread[/u][/color][/url]
Mon, 2010-04-12 23:33
#51
The MSM think people are stupid and have no memory. We reported (above) about this torturer Khalid at the beginning of 2008. Now they have this huge revelation:
[url=http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/04/12/afghan-governor-human-rights... governor's rights abuses known in 2007[/url]
CBC News has obtained top-level government documents that reveal Canadian authorities were aware as early as spring 2007 that a governor of Kandahar praised by senior Canadian officials was also notorious for human rights abuses.The documents also reveal that Chris Alexander, a top Canadian official working with the United Nations, alleged that Asadullah Khalid had ordered the deaths of five UN workers in a bombing.
How utterly shocking! Really!
If there were any opposition parties in Ottawa, one could imagine someone standing up in the House calling for Canada to withdraw, immediately, from Afghanistan, and pay reparations to the Afghan people for the murder and torture to which we have subjected them for the past decade.
Don't hold your breath.