Is Conservative Government Guilty Of War Crimes?

[Liberalman]

Is Conservative Government Guilty Of War Crimes?

17 letters that was sent by a high level diplomat to the most senior members of the Conservative government on torture of Afghan detainees and no one bothered to pass it on to the people that mattered.

This is a great example when a government muzzles people that can create change.

The PMO, Canada’s shadow government decided to keep the Prime Minister and the MPs in the dark and take care of it themselves by telling the diplomat to stop writing letters and only use the phone for new information he found out.

If Stephan Harper and Peter MacKay had known the truth earlier then they would have acted faster.

The Conservatives do not want an inquiry because they know that inquiries can sink a government and trigger an election in a minority setting.

Peter MacKay was on CBC’s Power & Politics with Even Soloman and he tried to put his case forward but new question kept on coming.

I was surprised by the intense interview because the government owns the CBC I really thought it would be a subdued interview like the ones on CTV the only person that gets tough with the government politicians is Jane Tabor the rest are waiting for Senate appointments.

The Conservative government will fall over this and it will be interesting to see which MPs the PMO will sacrifice

 

[CDNBear]

If Stephan Harper and Peter MacKay had known the truth earlier then they would have acted faster.

You just answered your own asinine question...No.

 

[Liberalman]

You just answered your own asinine question...No.

You forgot to read the whole post

 

[CDNBear]

You forgot to read the whole post

Not at all, like most of you posts, the gist is illuminated in the title, liberal propaganda.

The rest of the post is more blatherings, without supporting evidence or fact.

Your question was "Is Conservative Government Guilty Of War Crimes?" You stated that Harper and Mackay would have acted faster, acknowledging they did act, had they been informed sooner. Thus answering your own asinine question, No, the Conservative Gov't is not guilty of war crimes.

 

[Mowich]

I find it very interesting that retired General Rick Hillier stated in today's Globe and Mail that he never once while serving in Afghanistan, heard a word from this diplomat about any 'torture' problems.

I suggest we wait for further information before jumping to conclusions about what actually did or did not happen.

But then, that's just my opinion.

 

[CDNBear]

I find it very interesting that retired General Rick Hillier stated in today's Globe and Mail that he never once while serving in Afghanistan, heard a word from this diplomat about any 'torture' problems.

I suggest we wait for further information before jumping to conclusions about what actually did or did not happen.

But then, that's just my opinion.

And a reason and intelligent opinion it is, good call.

 

[Mowich]

And a reason and intelligent opinion it is, good call.

I find that one has to get past all the media hype and political rhetoric then let the dust settle a bit before condeming or condoning. :smile:

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Well, it sure looks like somebody's guilty of something, but who and what is far from clear at this point. General Hillier, for the record, did not say he never heard a word from Richard Colvin about detainees being tortured, he said he doesn't remember hearing from him, a subtle distinction that might matter. I'm also a little disturbed that the response from the government so far has been to attack the messenger, instead of producing documentation on detainees we've handed over to the Afghan security forces, to show that we actually do know what happened to them. It's clear the government was aware of the possibility of torture three years ago, and negotiated a new prisoner transfer agreement with the Afghans in 2007 partly as a result of Colvin's warnings, which MacKay conceded, so it's a bit disingenuous to suggest they never heard from him about this or that he's not qualified to talk about it.

 

[CDNBear]

I find that one has to get past all the media hype and political rhetoric then let the dust settle a bit before condeming or condoning. :smile:

But of course. That's how critical thought is applied.

For some the challenge is keep their foot out of their mouth, from the word go.

Critical though, deductive reasoning, and rationed thought is the cornerstone of clear thought.

In this case, portions of the Gov't dragged their collective feet on a serious matter, and to that extent, someone should be held accountable after it is ascertained who and what. But to start asking questions like the title of this thread, (Which is more an accusation and typical hyperbole kneejerk reaction, then anything else.), is just ridiculous.

 

[Mowich]

Well, it sure looks like somebody's guilty of something, but who and what is far from clear at this point. General Hillier, for the record, did not say he never heard a word from Richard Colvin about detainees being tortured, he said he doesn't remember hearing from him, a subtle distinction that might matter. I'm also a little disturbed that the response from the government so far has been to attack the messenger, instead of producing documentation on detainees we've handed over to the Afghan security forces, to show that we actually do know what happened to them. It's clear the government was aware of the possibility of torture three years ago, and negotiated a new prisoner transfer agreement with the Afghans in 2007 partly as a result of Colvin's warnings, which MacKay conceded, so it's a bit disingenuous to suggest they never heard from him about this or that he's not qualified to talk about it.

Thank you,Dexter Sinister, I stand corrected. :smile:

 

[SirJosephPorter]

A public inquiry will be very appropriate. But as I discussed in another thread, I don’t’ see Harper ever appointing a public inquiry, for any reason whatever. A public inquiry never does any good for the party in power, if anything; it may end up harming the party in power.

So public inquiry may be ruled out, we probably will never know the complete truth (unless some enterprising journalist digs it up, but we are a bit short on Bernsteins and Woodwards here in Canada).

So I am afraid it will probably blow over, with people kept in the dark about the truth, and conservatives probably won’t pay any political price for their crimes (let alone any prison sentences).

 

[CDNBear]

So I am afraid it will probably blow over, with people kept in the dark about the truth, and conservatives probably won’t pay any political price for their crimes (let alone any prison sentences).

And what crimes would those be?

 

[Avro]

Why would a diplomat who just got a plum job in Washington lie?

Why, if nothing was wrong did the defence departmnet spend millions of dollars in 2007 to change the way prisoners were handled?

Not sure what to think about this one, but something seems fishy.

 

[CDNBear]

Why would a diplomat who just got a plum job in Washington lie?

Why, if nothing was wrong did the defence departmnet spend millions of dollars in 2007 to change the way prisoners were handled?

Not sure what to think about this one, but something seems fishy.

Agreed, although I don't know if "fishy" is the word I would use. Troublesome, seems more appropriate. But one thing is certain, the Con's certainly did change the way Liberals had set up how prisoners would be handled.

 

[Avro]

Agreed, although I don't know if "fishy" is the word I would use. Troublesome, seems more appropriate. But one thing is certain, the Con's certainly did change the way Liberals had set up how prisoners would be handled.

True...why?

What did they know?

It's not as if Richard Colvin isn't a credible witness, he is.

Good read by Chantel Herbert

 

[CDNBear]

True...why?

What did they know?

It's not as if Richard Colvin isn't a credible witness, he is.

Good read by Chantel Herbert

Never called his credibility into question. What I call into question, is the kneejerk reaction, as to culpability.

Considering the present party that forms the Gov't, changed how we handle PoW's. It would seem that matters were not ignored en mass, our Gov't directly, complicit in torture, as those with an agenda would have us all believe.

 

[Avro]

Never called his credibility into question. What I call into question, is the kneejerk reaction, as to culpability.

Considering the present party that forms the Gov't, changed how we handle PoW's. It would seem that matters were not ignored en mass, our Gov't directly, complicit in torture, as those with an agenda would have us all believe.

How about a kneejerk reaction to defend the government....I'm seeing that as well.

Yes, they did change it....why?

What did they know and if they did why would they cover it up?

I'm not taking a Liberal position here, Iggy condoned torture years ago in an open letter.

I just want to know who knew what and when and how long.

 

[CDNBear]

How about a kneejerk reaction to defend the government....I'm seeing that as well.

Yes, they did change it....why?

Because it was blatantly obvious prisoners were being tortured. That sort of flies in the face of our Nations collective conscience.

What did they know and if they did why would they cover it up?

I'm not taking a Liberal position here, Iggy condoned torture years ago in an open letter.

I just want to know who knew what and when and how long.

So do I, so lets watch the events unfold before we make any ration decisions about who's guilty of what.

 

[Liberalman]

Agreed, although I don't know if "fishy" is the word I would use. Troublesome, seems more appropriate. But one thing is certain, the Con's certainly did change the way Liberals had set up how prisoners would be handled.

The Conservatives knew about the torture but they were following the example of the Americans who opened their own prison in Gitmo and proceeded to torture their prisoners.

The Conservatives felt at the time that torture was a good way to find out about future terrorist attacks.

When the Conservatives saw that public opinion was going against them, that’s when they changed the rules and started the cover-up.

The Conservative government have to put up with the fact that they can't push human rights issues because of this fiasco.

The Conservative government will have to answer to war crime charges because they let the PMO make all the decisions and kept all the Conservative MPs in the dark.

Like I said before when you think the Conservatives have at a chance at a majority another skeleton falls out of their closet

 

[SirJosephPorter]

Like I said before when you think the Conservatives have at a chance at a majority another skeleton falls out of their closet

This definitely is a skeleton in their closet. Liberalman. The question is if it will do any lasting damage. I remember when Liberals had a majority; skeleton after skeleton did not hurt their popularity. Finally Gomery was the straw that broke the camel’s back.

My feeling is that if Harper sits on it, does nothing, it probably will blow over. I don’t see any lasting damage to conservative popularity as a result of this one scandal. Now, if they have say ten of them that will be a different matter, the cumulative effect will be devastating. But as to this one scandal, all Harper has to do is sweep it under the rug.