paroxysms of moral outrage to some

justified moral outrage to others.

This is scary shit.  It shows clearly where harper wants to take us, and some of those who back him.

It shows what we stand to lose, and it shows the utter contempt and disregard those people who want to take us there have for our civil rights, human rights, and privacy rights.

At what point will more people start asking what, exactly, are we protecting?  Certainly not our rights, as they are considered small sacrifices for this vague, ever-broadening term called national security.

Just a brief bit from the article which talks about some of what has comme out of Wikileaks this week:

The dispatch goes on to state that Judd "derided" recent Canadian court judgments that threaten foreign governments' intelligence-sharing with Canada. "These judgments posit that Canadian authorities cannot use information that 'may have been' derived from torture, and that any Canadian public official who conveys such information may be subject to criminal prosecution," the cable says.

Guys!  Do you really think there are witches?  Do you really believe all those guys (including her own brother) slept with Anne Boleyn?  Hey, it must all be true.  They confessed, under torture.

Even if these vicious animals who think that torture is just an ok fine tool for us but totally barbaric when others do it, information obtained through torture is unreliable.  So Judd can be as full as contempt as he wants for us bleeding hearts who really believe that when we signed agreements opposing torture, we really meant it.  You can't win hearts and minds by torturing people as part of a plan to stop those you are torturing from...torturing people.

Judd credited Prime Minister Stephen Harper's minority Conservative government for " 'taking it on the chin and pressing ahead' with common sense measures despite court challenges and political knocks from the opposition and interest groups," according to the document.

Sure, let's just ignore a couple of centuries of carefully, thoughtfully  designed law and use that good old fashioned Tim Horton's crowd common sense.  I mean, when your goal is to protect rights, fuck rights, eh?

So I ask again:  what is it that our rights are being sacrificed to protect?

Nice ruling if it applied to anyone who gave a damn about democracy

"It is the view of the chair that accepting an unconditional authority of the executive to censor the information provided to Parliament would, in fact, jeopardize the very separation of powers that is purported to lie at the heart of our parliamentary system and the independence of its constituent parts," Milliken told the House.  "Furthermore, it risks diminishing the inherent privileges of the House and its members, which have been earned and must be safeguarded."


The odds that the CONs will abide by the ruling - they have two weeks, are about as good as Velacott marrying McVety and holding their reception at The Lookout Bar.

Milliken offered them a few outs.  Two weeks to plan a challenge to the ruling by appealing to the Supreme Court; two weeks to form another tail-dragging strategy so that they simply go through the motions of trying to comply while putting up endless barriers to any info release and hope, as they have, people will tire of the issue; trigger an election (I doubt they'll do this considering their weak position).

Nicholson's words give a big clue as to the tactic the CONs will use immediately:  "Our government will not compromise Canada's national security, nor will it jeopardize the lives of our men and women in uniform."

Just what they've been using so far:  hiding behind the troops, and refusing based on security concerns without allowing impartial eyes to decide if such concerns are valid.

Not a hollow victory for democracy, but the battle to defend it ain't over yet.

What Canadians want

While it’s nice to see the CONs have post their brief lead  - if it was real at all - I wish the drop had been attributed to something other than the Guergis-Jaffer story.  While it does have to be pursued because corruption, influence peddling, and political interference are serious issues, I would much rather Canadians had been reacting to the two other big stories: the government’s cover-up and manipulation of information, and the torture of detainees.

I doubt even the Guergis-Jaffer thing would be getting much attention if sex and drugs weren’t mentioned.

This does not reflect well on our media, nor on the public.

Murder, war crimes, contracting out torture linked to our military?  The government taking measures so outrageous to cover this up and prevent witnesses from talking that the approach has been called Kafkaesque?

There was a time I would have thought - no way!  Not in my Canada!

But it is happening, here in this country we have been so proud of because Canadians, so it goes, just don’t tolerate that crap.

Well, we are tolerating it, and it isn’t crap.  Through our apathy, through our weakness for flashy headlines screaming of sex and drugs, and the private and public lives of public figures, we fail to support the demand for serious, thorough, independent investigation into the allegations of murder, torture and cover-up.

Without the public’s pressure demanding the truth come out without interference, the government will keep hiding any wrongdoing on their part, and the abuses will continue.

If they are allowed to get away with it in this very serious, international issue, we are truly screwed.  The public will show government that it need not be held accountable, that the public does not have the right to be informed.

What follows is a snowball effect.  We get used to less and less info and become more apathetic.  Government becomes more confident that it can violate the will of the people by deceiving them and counting on that apathy, and it becomes more corrupt.  A handful of special interest groups with lots of money hold the real power because they are the only ones lobbying, and they push for legislation that favours them, while the rest of us are no more than cattle - low wage earners and mindless consumers.

If we start to get fed up, we’ll just be tossed another Guergis-Jaffer story to distract us, or we’ll be shown infomercials to stir up blind patriotism, or we’ll be told of how severe measures are necessary because the world is a scary place full of criminals and terrorists who are out to get us and destroy our democracy.

Meanwhile, our democracy is being destroyed by three things: the very government we elected to protect it, the powerful, wealthy self-interest groups pulling the government’s reins, and out our pathetic apathy.

Yes, let us demand answers to the Guergis-Jaffer thing, but only as it relates to wrongdoing that affects our country.  Any corruption needs to be addressed and stopped.  But we cannot pick and choose what we will take interest in based on its entertainment value.  Keep the government’s heels to the flame on accountability, openness, and the respect of all laws - international as well as domestic.

Canadians should care about whether or not our military and government is complicit in murder, torture, and cover-ups.  Isn’t that what we so proudly say we oppose?

About that whole Canada is better now than four years ago thing, Harper...

This was inevitable.

You have no weight pressuring other governments on respecting democracy when you fail to do it yourself.

The government of Hugo Chavez has responded to Canadian criticism it was "shrinking democratic space" in Venezuela by saying it will take no lessons from an "ultraright" government that "closed" Parliament to avoid an investigation into the handling of Afghan detainees.

Chavez’s government didn’t stop there, either.  It went on to accuse the Harper government of seeking to damage Venezuela itself.

"I am talking of a Canada governed by an ultraright that closed its Parliament for various months to (evade) an investigation over the violation of human rights -- I am talking about torture and assassinations -- by its soldiers in Afghanistan," said Chaderton.

No Canadian has accused our soldiers of torture and assassination.  Accusations from Canadians have been that the elected government knew about, and enabled torture, and that the fault rests with that government’s deliberate cover-up of how they failed to halt the transfer of detainees when they knew they were being handed over to a group that would most likely torture them.

But by riding endlessly on the theme that anyone who seeks an investigation into the transfers is attacking the soldiers, Harper assured the troops would become a target of such attacks.

After a trip to Venezuela, Peter Kent, minister of state for the Americas said Canada was concerned over the Chavez regime's decision to suspend the licences of several cable television stations and over the deaths of two students during protests.

"These events are further evidence of a shrinking democratic space in Venezuela," Kent said in the release. "During my recent visit to Venezuela, I heard many individuals and organizations express concerns related to violations of the right to freedom of expression and other basic liberties."

Uh-huh.

Sort of like this?

By proroguing Parliament to avoid investigations into his own complicity in the Afghan detainee issue, Harper has cost Canada a great deal of credibility and weight in its international efforts toward democratic rights and freedoms.

Bastard.

This is the song that never ends...

The CONs have repeatedly stated - with no little indignation - that they never, ever received direct warnings about the torture of detainees.

It seems they...lied. Yes, folks, and we have names. MacKay, O’Connor, and Day.

Three federal cabinet ministers and a senior government official met the head of the International Red Cross in the fall of 2006 as the humanitarian organization tried to focus Canada's attention on alleged abuses in Afghan prisons, The Canadian Press has learned.

...While the details of the meeting are secret, enough was said about Afghanistan to generate a report from MacKay's office a month later which flagged the Red Cross president's concerns.

The contents of the report, one of thousands of documents filed in the Military Police Complaints Commission investigation of torture allegations, are censored. The email was titled: Re: meeting with ICRC president re detention issues.

Harper and Co., you can prorogue but you cannot hide.

Our Chickenshit PM

Others have already written about this so I really only want to add my voice.
    
More at The Galloping Beaver and Canadian Cynic

Rumours swirling around Ottawa suggest the Conservative government is thinking of shutting down Parliament until after the Olympics, killing some of its own bills but also ending the discussion of Afghan detainees that is nibbling away at Tory popularity.  The rumours suggest that Parliament would return in March, when the Games are over, with a new budget that could be used to provoke an election.

Here we go again.  Parliament shut down to save Steve’s ass until he can get together enough fuzzy, shiny, happy photo ops to climb up in the polls then deliberately spark another election.  What the fuck happened to “Stay the course,” Stevo?  Oh yeah, caught with your dick hanging out happened.     Caught with it hanging out on your precious international stage happened. 

So, Cut-and-Run cowardly Steve, that proponent of transparency, wants to shut down government while we are still reeling from a recession.  Does he think we will all just forget about the torture allegations until March?  No, this was what he considered his Titanic, remember?

But opposition members of the Special Committee on the Canadian Mission in Afghanistan have asked to hold special meetings before the session resumes. Among other high-profile witnesses, they want Defence Minister Peter MacKay and his predecessor, Gordon O'Connor, to return for more interrogation about what they knew of the torture allegations. The committee could not sit during prorogation.

With memos like this coming out -

"The Canadian provost marshal in Kandahar has told ISAF that he would be pleased to provide the information but that he has received explicit instructions from National Defence Headquarters ... not to do so," Mr. Colvin's memo says.  
   (h/t Impolitical )

- Steve will not want MacKay or O’Connor going before the committee.

There is no justification for Harper to prorogue Parliament.  To do so does not serve the country.  It serves only him and his flunkeys.  It costs all of us as we pay our MPs regradless of whether they sit or not.  It costs us since any Bills now on the table are dead and the whole expensive process has to be repeated.

The most critical piece of legislation before the Senate is the bill that enriches the employment insurance program.

Sure.  Because Harper really, really cares about ordinary Canadians, right?

It also costs us because these undemocratic tactics become easier and easier to pull off each time since the commonplace becomes more acceptable.  That costs us the integrity of our democratic system.

Maybe Harper will be able to pull this off again.  But if we sit back without raising our voices, without writing letters and e-mails, then we might just as well buy him a lovely dictator’s uniform for Christmas and be prepared to thank him as we kiss his boots.

"absurd."

A few other words come to mind, but that's a fitting one.

Hey! Fellow Canadians!

This concerns all of you.

Federal officials assured the Red Cross in 2006 that Canada would take an active role in monitoring the fate of Afghan prisoners - but for critical months behind the scenes did little more than manage the political spin, secret memos show.

The records, examined on a confidential basis by The Canadian Press, show the Harper government placed a greater emphasis on drafting "key messages" to the public and preparing "approaches" for embarrassing disclosures than on dealing with the human rights of prisoners.

(...)No. 1 on the eight-point plan for officials was to "Prepare standard key messages (ie. importance of adhering to obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law regarding the treatment of detainees.)"

Point No. 8 in the plan was to "consider supplementing the existing arrangement" in such a way to include the "guarantee of access for Canadian authorities to individuals transferred by the (Canadian Forces)."
h/t to Impolitical for that story.

This speaks of a broad problem with this government, so even if you somehow convince yourself that sure, torture is bad, hmm-kay...but the detainee issue is different because it’s just anout them thar terr’ists who throw acid in the faces of little girl, drafting key messages to avoid embarrassment or accountability is always the priority of Steve & Co.

What if there was, say, a dangerous, deadly bacteria in a common food source?  Do you want to take the chance that this government might place spin above the health and safety of Canadians?  Could Harper go that far?...Oh...right -

The news agency reported that Ritz fretted about the political dangers of the crisis, and then quipped: "This is like a death by a thousand cuts. Or should I say cold cuts." 

The handling of something as serious as torture and Canada violating the Geneva conventions shows what lengths this government will go to in order to protect the false image it constantly promotes.

A respected former diplomat was aghast that "developing the spin" would take priority over dealing with an issue as urgent as possible torture.  "This is one of those situations where - once again - presentation has taken the place of substance," said Louis Delvoie, Canada's former high commissioner to Pakistan.

And this applies to any situation, even those affecting those Canadians who don’t give a damn about what happens beyond our borders -

"It's a rather sad commentary on what is taking place. You (should) deal with the substance of an issue and then you develop the communications plan as a separate and subsequent item to explain how you're doing it and what you're doing."

A bonus bit on those precious troops Harper and Baird are so concerned about -

Errol Mendes, a human-rights law expert, said the paper trail demonstrates that the Harper government viewed the war as a political exercise, where image-branding trumped policy.  "Throughout all of this the military has been used as a political prop and that is dangerous," he said.  "Governments come and go but the military as an institution remains and the damage this kind of approach can leave is severe."

We are likely to see more of this message massaging and crafting, paid for by...us.

Taxpayers are being asked to pay an extra $1.7-million this fiscal year to help bolster Stephen Harper's communications support services – just as the Prime Minister's Office begins distributing government videos of Harper to the news media.  Supplementary estimates tabled last month by the Privy Council Office, the Prime Minister's bureaucratic back office, boosted internal operational spending by almost $7.3-million for 2009-10. That's on top of existing budgets.

Oh great!  More of this nonsense, but costlier.

In the last two weeks, the PCO started sending news organizations links to new videos in the same way the PMO has routinely distributed photos shot by Mr. Harper's official photographer.

Besides being a ridiculous expense to taxpayers (just so Steve can pretend to be a real PM), this push to produce his own media outlet over which he has complete control threatens impartial journalism:

The photos, and now the videos, have sparked a debate over media access and when the use of government-produced and approved images may be appropriate in an independent news media.

“It's not access,” said Chris Waddell, who holds the Carty chair in business and financial journalism at Ottawa's Carleton University.  “Access is an opportunity to ask questions and an opportunity to engage in independent work according to journalistic principles. What they're giving you is public relations.”

To which Mr. Message himself answers:

“The media can't have it both ways,” Mr. Soudas recently told CBC.  “They can't criticize us for not providing enough information, and then criticize us for providing too much information.”

Well, yes we can, Dimitri.  Yes we can.  The info you provide through PMO releases is stilted, incomplete, and allows no avenue for challenge or questioning. 

It gives the illusion that Canadians are being kept up-to-date on what the government is doing, what studies have uncovered, what goals and plans are, how our money is spent.  But it is only the illusion that Harper wants us to buy into.

It’s like relying solely on the testimony of a pathological liar when that same liar is the one on trial.

update:  The Imp tells us to just say no.

Turning it around

And rightfully so.

These are the types of statements that should be consistently used since the CONs are determined to hide behind the troops:

(Hansard, Dec. 4, 2009)

Mr. Marcel Proulx: When will the government launch a public inquiry to uphold Canada's credibility and protect its international reputation?

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc: Why did the Conservatives impose their poor judgment on these brave generals? Why did they prefer to order a quick transfer when they were aware of the risks of torture?

The government in power has to take responsibility for that power.   Their actions and orders affect those subject to them.  They put us (including the military) at risk.  They want to be in power?  They need to accept responsibility for wielding that power.

Thank Azathoth for ADSCAM, eh?

Think about it.  What a great bargain for the wingnuts.  It cost taxpayers roughly 40 million.  With the CONs at 36% average, that’s about 17.5 mill to them.

The Economic Action Plan signs, paid for by the taxpayers, cost between $800 to $7,000 each to produce and install.

The ten per center flyers used for partisan attack ads - also paid for by the taxpayers, is up to 10 mill a year and expected to go higher.

And there are the giant photo op checks with partisan logos which we paid for.

Let’s not for get the in-and-out scam that could cost us another mil. 

But Adscam just keeps on giving and giving.  It has been used to counter attacks such as the in-and-out scam, dubious contracts, and now:

In response to this vile rant on the torture allegations, wingnut Hunteroffortune says:

Liberals are seeking truth, Manboy? Right, they should be seeking the truth of where the 40 million they still owe us taxpayers is. That would be seeking truth. The political leader that needs to be questioned is Chrétien, for the missing millions but also, how much did he and his cabinet know about this "supposed" torture.

Sure, because nothing...nothing is as bad or will ever be as bad as Adscam and all Conservative ills are to be ignored as a result.  Not even enabling torture.

In his piece of pontifical poo, Charles Adler wonders: There must be some days when you ask yourself the question, "Who stands up for Canada?"

Not people who are asking for a public inquiry, according to Mr. Blind Patriotism. 

Now I do understand that the more refined among you, who loathe our military and loathe our foreign policy and loathe everything that Canada stands for,  I understand that the nuanced among you who sit on your fat arses in upscale coffee shops sneering at people who you think of as low rent fools, think I am embellishing some serious issues in order to dismiss the issues. I am not here to dismiss anything except your so-called feigned interest in our country's place in the world.

Wow!  With 49% of Canadians finding  Richard Colvin’s testimony credible as opposed to 10% siding with federal government ministers, there are a hell of a lot of folks with big butts sitting around in upscale coffee shops. 

If I can save enough, I should invest in one.  But of course, it will need extra large seats for those large asses.  Isn’t yours a little on the hefty side, Adler?

Dude, it’s because we love our country, our military, and our foreign policy (or what it once was) that we want this matter cleared up.

Get a brain!  Moran. 

Hiding behind our military: it’s what the Conservatives do...

...when they aren’t attempting to assassinate their character.

Several instances yesterday in the House (highlights mine throughout):

(Hansard, Dec. 1, 2009)
Peter MacKay: what again is so irresponsible, so inflammatory and so false is for the hon. member to try to parse her words and suggest somehow that the Canadian military was complicit in torture, suggesting that those hard-working, honest officials and military on the ground would deliberately transfer detainees, Taliban prisoners, to Afghan authorities knowing they would be tortured. That is a backhanded way to cast aspersions on the good work being done by our military and our professional public service. That is what those members are doing.

And what words was Jennings trying to parse?  This is the exact question that drew Baird’s response:

Hon. Marlene Jennings: this is yet another new version of events from the Minister of National Defence. His version changes every day.  The Conservatives deliberately hid the fact that, for 18 months, they regularly turned Afghan detainees over even though there was a real and serious risk that they would be tortured.

    How can the Prime Minister go to China and defend human rights, particularly with respect to Tibet, when his own government is guilty of violating those same human rights?

No mention of the military or public servants.

How dumb is John Baird?

No one really knows, but he showed us again yesterday how monumentally dishonest he is and how he also draws attention to the military in respect to torture as a means of dodging the real issue.

Baird: it is interesting that the leader of the Liberal Party stands in his place and characterizes remarks made by General Gauthier.  It was his own defence critic, the member for Vancouver South, who called General Gauthier's comments before the committee morally weak and legally flimsy.

    The general is a Canadian hero. He is a Canadian hero who spent 36 years in uniform, and that is the kind of respect he gets from the Liberal Party and the official spokesman for the Leader of the Opposition. It is shameful.

 Thus implying that Canadian military heroes should not be doubted since it is disrespectful.  Remember that for what comes later.

Meanwhile, what was really said, and by who:

This is what Mr. Dosanjh said on (CTV’s Question Period Sunday): “I believe the situation now is the issue is not about who knew what and when. I think they all admit that they knew and the generals’ defence, as someone said, was morally weak and legally flimsy.”

The “someone” Mr. Dosanjh is referring to is Toronto Star columnist James Travers, who wrote in a column on Saturday: “For all its sound and fury, the counter-attack that politicians, bureaucrats and generals mounted this week was morally weak and legally flimsy.”

Mr. Baird used the column by Mr. Travers, which Mr. Dosanjh quoted from, to accuse the Liberals of being anti-military, anti-soldier, anti-war hero and by extension, anti-Canadian.

Back in the House, Ignatieff tries to get Baird to focus on the issue.  Which is pointless, since in addition to Johnny being dumber than anyone can say, he’s a partisan hyena.

Mr. Michael Ignatieff: our side of the House did no such thing. We hold General Gauthier in the highest respect.  The issue here is that all of the evidence in this affair, including that handed over to the Military Police Complaints Commission, was so heavily redacted as to be useless....We need to get to the bottom of this. Why will the government not accept that we need a judge, an independent inquiry, and full access to the documents so that we can finally get to the bottom of this affair?

Not content with falsely accusing Dosanjh of making certain statements, Baird, in his very next comment, adjusts his wingnut, ignores the question and further distorts his first lies to imply a direct attack against Gauthier -

Baird:  the leader of the Liberal Party says one thing but the facts suggest something else.   His defence critic said that this general, this Canadian war hero, was weak and flimsy.    


 What does that remind me of?...Oh yeah...The 13th Warrior -
"You dig like a dog.
"You are calling me a dog?"
"No, I said you dig like one.  Like an animal."
"So now I'm an animal?"

Lets go back to May, 2008 and see how well Baird defended a “Canadian hero who spent (30+) years in uniform.”  One of Canada’s most decorated officers, at that.  

John Baird, the environment minister, tried to shout down Liberal MP Marlene Jennings who came to Dallaire's defence and loudly applauded when 29-year-old Tory MP Pierre Poilievre suggested that Dallaire sounded like a member of the Khadr family, an insult so stupid and infantile that Anders' slur against Nelson Mandela immediately came to mind.

Incidentally, Dallaire’s words in reference to international rights of child soldiers apply to this case as well:

"If you want black and white, and I'm only prepared to give it to you," (Dallaire) responded. "You're either with the law or not with the law. You are not allowed to go against (international) conventions and if you do, you're going down the same road as those who absolutely don't believe (in the law)."

So...what are you saying, guys?  Looking into allegations of wrongdoing is taboo if it can be in anyway connected to the military, even if they were not the ones covering things up?  And retired generals are god-like beings whose word must never, ever be questioned because to do so is un-Canadian?

Unless, of course, the retired general happens to be a Liberal Senator who is very much interested in uncovering the truth and applying international rights - even to those some Canadians may not like.  

In what has been an increasingly testy parliamentary debate season, Tory MPs Jason Kenney, Pierre Poilievre and John Baird spent last week attacking Liberal Senator Dallaire over his strongly worded criticism of the government's handling of Canadian child-soldier and Guantanamo-prisoner Omar Khadr.

...Kenney compared the most decorated Canadian soldier of his generation to a "mob of wacky protesters." A day later, John Baird, the environment minister, tried to shout down Liberal MP Marlene Jennings who came to Dallaire's defence and loudly applauded when 29-year-old Tory MP Pierre Poilievre suggested that Dallaire sounded like a member of the Khadr family, an insult so stupid and infantile that Anders' slur against Nelson Mandela immediately came to mind.

Harper's bunch are scum.  Every last one of them, even those who keep silent throughout this when they cannot help but be aware of the use of the troops as a diversion.  Hell, they all get the speaking notes.  Anyone of them could stand up, do what's right and support an inquiry, but cowardly and politically ambitious as they are, they sulk home to their families with their hyena slink and pretend they are virtuous people who care about honesty, transparency, and human rights.

Yeah, sure.  You just go ahead and tell your families that.

Make yourself heard

There is no compromise on this issue.  It is not one to sit back as we hope our party of choice positions itself.  It isnt something to turn away from because we are too busy.  It concerns us all.

  
Via Another Point of View,  Via Thwap's place: 

    Pursuant to the goal of bringing accountability and the rule of law to Canada, and starting the process of getting the harpercons into the prison cells they're inevitably going to be thrown into, Alison at Creekside   has a link to an online petition for a public inquiry into torture.  

    Please sign it and send it.