Harper is lying on Afghanistan report

11 posts / 0 new

Fri, 2009-10-16 14:03

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

Harper says he never saw Afghan torture warning

Quote:
TORONTO — Prime Minister Stephen Harper says he never saw reports by a Canadian diplomat warning of possible torture in Afghan prisons nearly four years ago.

He is a bald faced liar. How do I know? Because Harper is a control freak. Nothing is said or done by his government without his knowledge and the approval of his office. For him to micro manage every aspect of government, including approving minister's statements, and then claim not to know anything about this, despite spending two years attempting to make it go away, requires a childlike, or Conservative, suspension of disbelief.

What's incredible is that he lies like a psychopath. Not even Nixon could do that.

Fri, 2009-10-16 14:38

Sean in Ottawa

Weasel words-- never saw the reports "at the time" he says-- at what time? The time they were written? Technically if he saw them five minutes later you could say never saw them "at the time."

And why doesn't the journalist press for more and ask at what time?

Fri, 2009-10-16 15:32

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Even if Harper isn't lying, it doesn't in any way absolve him of responsibility. The message was there to be read and acted upon, and if Harper and those for whom he is responsible (i.e., everybody) failed to read it and act upon it, it's their own fault, and therefore his responsibility.

This is a "my dog ate my homework" excuse.

Fri, 2009-10-16 15:45

Sean in Ottawa

Or the flip side of the "I was only following orders" excuse. Of course it is bullshit.

Sat, 2009-10-17 00:17

Frmrsldr

The policy of handing Afghan PoWs to Afghan authorities by Canadian troops was the result of a treaty Gen. Rick Hillier signed with the Karzai government in 2005. This should never have happened as the act was one of a military authority usurping the position of head of state of Canada. At the very least, Parliament in 2005 or 2006 should have reviewed and either signed or not signed the treaty. Paul Martin and Stephen Harper were grossly negligent in their duty as Prime Minister for acquiescing and allowing the treaty to stand. From 2005 to March 2008 (possibly even still, depending whether the treaty was abrogated and a new one signed in its place), in this area of foreign policy, Canada was represented by a de facto military dictator.

That Harper is unaware of this is bullshit. Otherwise, why is he engaging in Nixonian stonewalling and obstruction of justice over the Military Police Complaints Commission's hearing into this matter? If Harper had nothing to hide, then the Commission would vindicate him, make him look good and Harper would be assisting, rather than obstructing the commission.

Sat, 2009-10-17 19:40

remind

This is just unbelievable and people so do not care it seems.

Sat, 2009-10-17 20:04

E.Tamaran

I think it's up to Afghans to determine whether torture should be carried out in their own country.

Sat, 2009-10-17 22:09

Fidel

E.Tamaran wrote:

I think it's up to Afghans to determine whether torture should be carried out in their own country.

Right! They should be free to torture one another without any help from NATO, which is now an obsolete acronoxymorononym since the end of cold war.

Sat, 2009-10-17 22:14

Frmrsldr

E.Tamaran wrote:

I think it's up to Afghans to determine whether torture should be carried out in their own country.

The issue actually is not about whether we should allow or prevent Afghans from carrying out torture in their own country. Although the inability to control our Afghan puppet president makes our government look bad.

It is about the Canadian government and military knowing that Afghan authorities torture, yet concluding a treaty with the Karzai government whereby Afghan PoWs held by Canadian troops are handed over to Afghan authorities rather than held in a Canadian, or transfered to an American run prison, and thereby the Canadian government and military is legally culpable for their torture - not that that matters in the end, as we know detainees have been tortured in American run prisons such as GTMO (Cuba), Abu Graihb (Iraq) and Bagram (Afghanistan).

Sun, 2009-11-01 01:18

#10

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Frmrsldr wrote:

It is about the Canadian government and military knowing that Afghan authorities torture, yet concluding a treaty with the Karzai government whereby Afghan PoWs held by Canadian troops are handed over to Afghan authorities rather than held in a Canadian, or transfered to an American run prison, and thereby the Canadian government and military is legally culpable for their torture - not that that matters in the end, as we know detainees have been tortured in American run prisons such as GTMO (Cuba), Abu Graihb (Iraq) and Bagram (Afghanistan).

And yet Canada has no agreement whatsoever with the USA regarding the treatment of detainees it hands over to them, even though the USA is a notorious torture state.

Funny how all the media attention is focused only on the detainees handed over to Afghanistan.

Mon, 2009-11-02 00:20

#11

Frmrsldr

M. Spector wrote:

Funny how all the media attention is focused only on the detainees handed over to Afghanistan.

The Canadian media hasn't had much to say about detainees captured by American forces or handed over to them and how they are treated. You'll find this article interesting:

The Star wrote:

KUALA LUMPUR: A British Muslim detained for three years at the controversial Guantanamo Bay prison manned by the United States, revealed that the youngest detainee he knew was a nine-year-old boy who was also tortured like the rest.

Ruhal Ahmed's story was among more accounts of atrocities committed against the detainees at Guantanamo, told before an open commission hearing which began Friday on the sidelines of an international conference to criminalise war.

The testimonies before the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission Hearings will be submitted to a tribunal in conjunction with the Criminalise War Conference and War Crimes Tribunal 2009 spearheaded by former Malaysian prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

Dr Mahathir said that the tribunal's decision would be forwarded to the United Nations for further action.

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2009/10/30/nation/20091030191203