Harper has no respect for the fallen soldiers!!!!!!!!!

[FiveParadox]

Re: Harper's Reversion to a Deprecated Convention

:arrow: Order?

Some of the comments being made here are bordering on attacks on each other; I would once again direct the membership of Canadian Content if their passion and emotion in terms of what can be a very contentious issue (most issues concerning the Canadian Forces would tend to be in this category) should be expressed in a new thread at Wreck Beach, rather than questioning the character of other members.

:arrow: Reverting to a Deprecated Convention

It should be noted that Section 17 of the rules that govern the half-masting of the National Flag gives the Prime Minister of Canada the authority, on the advice of the Department of Canadian Heritage and the recommendation of the Clerk of the Privy Council, to order the flag at whatever locations he may deem appropriate to be lowered under circumstances which could be deemed to be "exceptional". I would suggest that this was perhaps the method behind the previous Government of Canada appearing to have begun a new practice — since the deaths of members of the Forces are no longer as commonplace during combat as they once were, I would suggest that their deaths would, in modern times, be considered "exceptional", and to that end, I would support having the flag flown at half-mast on such occasions.

Other than Section 17, however, I can identify no sections that would otherwise provide for the flag to be lowered on the Peace Tower, or any other federal building, as a result of having had members of the Forces killed on duty.

 

[Hank C]

................

 

[Finder]

Re: Harper's Reversion to a Deprecated Convention

:arrow: Order?

Some of the comments being made here are bordering on attacks on each other; I would once again direct the membership of Canadian Content if their passion and emotion in terms of what can be a very contentious issue (most issues concerning the Canadian Forces would tend to be in this category) should be expressed in a new thread at Wreck Beach, rather than questioning the character of other members.

:arrow: Reverting to a Deprecated Convention

It should be noted that Section 17 of the rules that govern the half-masting of the National Flag gives the Prime Minister of Canada the authority, on the advice of the Department of Canadian Heritage and the recommendation of the Clerk of the Privy Council, to order the flag at whatever locations he may deem appropriate to be lowered under circumstances which could be deemed to be "exceptional". I would suggest that this was perhaps the method behind the previous Government of Canada appearing to have begun a new practice — since the deaths of members of the Forces are no longer as commonplace during combat as they once were, I would suggest that their deaths would, in modern times, be considered "exceptional", and to that end, I would support having the flag flown at half-mast on such occasions.

Other than Section 17, however, I can identify no sections that would otherwise provide for the flag to be lowered on the Peace Tower, or any other federal building, as a result of having had members of the Forces killed on duty.

gawd ok, ok Javert..

Mogs... no hard feelings btw, I get pretty passionate as well when I debate, as I am sure you do.

 

[Jersay]

Queen Regulations and Orders.

Gotcha.

 

[Hank C]

...................

 

[Jersay]

Will you please stop deleting and and reposting Hank. Say what you want to say man, but in a respectful way.

 

[Hank C]

Socrates the Greek wrote:
To place the Canadian flag on half mast has always been the tradition in order to show the out most respect for a country that is in the process of saying good buy to fallen young man and women while serving their country.

Nope your wrong. If you knew anything about the military and its traditions, you would know that has not "always been the tradition" as you have stated, but rather the tradition is what the Tory government is now reverting back to.

talk about an uneducated public :roll:

 

[Hank C]

Will you please stop deleting and and reposting Hank. Say what you want to say man, but in a respectful way.

:lol: sry had to do it one more time......

im bored and waiting for my supper to arrive, and I want that guy who started the thread to respond 8)

 

[zoofer]

This thread was to trash Harper not to show any dis-gust with how soldiers deaths were mourned. Hard to imagine anything slimier or low down than that agenda.

Keep the flags up

National Post
Published: Monday, April 24, 2006

Amid the grief surrounding the deaths of four Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan on Saturday, a purely symbolic issue leapt to prominence: the correct way for Canada to honour their sacrifice.

On Sunday, it was reported that the Conservatives would not lower flags to half-mast on Parliament Hill, as had been the practice of the previous Liberal governments. Said Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor, "we have returned to the 80-year tradition of remembering all casualties of war or operations on one day -- November 11."

Set amid news from the front, a debate about the placement of our flag may seem trivial. Yet it is a debate worth having, for it symbolizes the larger discussion taking place in Canada about our role in Afghanistan.

That debate may be defined thus: Are we at war against the Taliban, or are we at peace? If the former, then military casualties are an expected, if tragic, consequence of our deployment. If the latter, and our soldiers are to be seen as peacekeepers, not combatants, then every death should be regarded as an aberration and, therefore, an occasion for national anguish and soul-searching.

We believe the answer is clear: Canada, like the rest of the civilized world, is at war -- not only against the Taliban, but also against every other entity that seeks to pervert Islam into an excuse for senseless slaughter. It is also a war to bring stability and freedom to Afghan society. In this war, as in all wars, people will be killed. And sometimes, those people will be Canadian.

Should we lower the flag every time that happens? A little history is in order here. During the period between 1939 and 1945, when this country battled victoriously against the German-bred ideological precursor of Islamofascism, we lost about 45,000 fighters -- almost one per hour.

In other words, Saturday's horrific roadside bombing -- though the greatest single loss our military has suffered to enemy forces since Korea -- was, statistically at least, a normal afternoon by Second World War standards.

The four Canadian men who gave their lives for Canadian security and Afghan freedom on Saturday should be mourned as heroes. But as the inheritors of a proud and stoic Canadian military tradition, they would not have wanted their deaths to be an occasion for grief on such a scale that it undermines their comrades' mission. Once Parliament -- and, by extension, the nation -- begins treating death in the field as something extraordinary and unexpected, we will have tacitly embraced the myth that our mission in Afghanistan will be peaceful and bloodless.

Our government owes it to our troops, and to all Canadians, to be more truthful. The dead will be mourned on Remembrance Day, when their names are read alongside those of the others who've fallen to protect this nation. Until then, keep the flag raised high.
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/....html?id=d04956c5-49a6-4a24-8b7e-594ba6e609bd

 

[zoofer]

We believe the answer is clear: Canada, like the rest of the civilized world, is at war -- not only against the Taliban, but also against every other entity that seeks to pervert Islam into an excuse for senseless slaughter

Obviously some nutters have not registered that we are at war.

 

[Socrates the Greek]

We believe the answer is clear: Canada, like the rest of the civilized world, is at war -- not only against the Taliban, but also against every other entity that seeks to pervert Islam into an excuse for senseless slaughter

Obviously some nutters have not registered that we are at war.

Hey Zoofer if I don’t like war you cant make me, if your big time leader Harper wants you to fight a war that will come back to bit you go right ahead. The bottom Line Harper switched the method of morning on the agenda to undo what is ever done by the libs. Who has a slimy agenda?
I did not post anything else other than the point that I felt uncomfortable with the Harpers way my way or the highway. I suppose that is a part of open government. Hey Hey Hey give me a brake Zoofer

 

[elevennevele]

RE: Harper has no respect

What this is really about is that the current government expects a lot more causalities. Thus making the loss of our soldiers not as exceptional in circumstance anymore.

Tradition is simply that. Tradition and reasoning are different things. One can make a reasonable conclusion that the lowering to half mast is always a show of respect to the loss of those who the country deems as exceptionally worthy which can fly in the face of any old handbook on historical protocol. We don’t lower the flag for any other reason than some sort exceptional loss and I’ve never heard of a family who lost someone complain that the government paid tribute to their loss with flag lowering.

That’s what it always comes down to and anyone who argues technical protocol over the choice of symbolic gesture is going a bit far. The government makes protocol and that can always change with each government.

Having a flag at half mast all the time however would symbolically weaken the image of the country. Again it’s a policy change, because they expect many more causalities to come.

I expect Harper will use the Canadian flag as it suits him personally.

 

[Colpy]

Re: RE: Harper has no respect

Wow, the ignorance in this thread as me angered to the point of d.isgust in my society. Gotta love the typical civy knee-jerk attitude. Before you berate a Government for doing something, do your research. The actions by the Liberal party were a DIRECT disgrace to every soldier that has fallen overseas and an afront to over a 1/2 decade of tradition. Here's my post from another thread, hopefully it'll educate you as to fact, but i'm not holding my breath:

The flag was NEVER suppose to fly at half-mast when a soldier is killed. The Liberal party, in all their ignorance, broke a tradition dating back over 50 YEARS. The reasons that flags do not fly at half mast for soldiers killed in action are as follows:

1. If excessive casualties are taken over a sustained period, the Maple Leaf would perpetually be at half mast. Flying a flag at half mast for an extended period is a sign of disrespect.

2. A soldier, when killed, is said to have made the ultimate sacrifice for his/her nation, and as such as earned themselves a special place in our society. In Canada we fly a flag at half-mast for people, not paladins (i'm not talking about DnD with your nerd friends paladins either).

3. Following World War II, it was decided that when a soldier was killed, the tradition of not lowering the flags would continue, except at the following locations:

i. At their parent base (i.e. CFB Edmonton)
ii. At their parent unit (i.e. 3 PPCLI)
iii. At their home town (i.e. Vancouver, and this is option to the city)

This lowering of a is not so much a sign of someone dying and therefore the location showing their respect. It is an announcement to everything that one of their own has been killed. For example, when Robert Costall was killed, the only flags at CFB Edmonton that were flying at 1/2 mast were the Base Flag and 1 VP's flag, the rest, were at full-mast.

4. Contrary to popular belief, a flag is not flown at half-mast on a whim. There are specific rules governing the flying of a flag at half-mast. They are as follows:

The Canadian Flag may be flown at half-mast starting on the day of the death (or the day the news is broken), until the day of the funeral, but is not to exceed 5 days.

Considering that soldiers are more often than not killed overseas, the repatriation of their bodies often takes MULTIPLE DAYS, and even more days following before the funeral. Considering this, it is impossible to accomodate both the repatriation process and the rules of flying a flag at half-mast. If you fly the flag longer, that is considered a sign of disrespect, something the Liberals did on a constant basis.

There you have it, why we don't flying flags at half-mast for dead soldiers. Bitch and moan all you want, but by doing so you prove your ignorance in regards to military tradition. I will say that I find it funny how you instantly blame the Conservatives, when in reality they're righting a wrong carried out by the ignorant and uncaring Liberal Government. Lastly, Jersay, i'm not sure what they're teaching rentals these days, but it's obviously not military etiquette. Might want to leaf through the QR and O's.

My two cents.

Get over yourselves. I suggest you put down your xbox controllers and crack a book and become educated as to the history of your nation and the military traditions steeped in it. Until such a time, keep your off the cuff remarks to yourself.

Thank you so very much.

I knew the tradition was NOT to fly the flag at half-mast, but I wasn't sure why, and so could not engage in the argument.

You have certainly cleared things up.

Harper is honouring military tradition.....good for him.

 

[Colpy]

This thread was to trash Harper not to show any dis-gust with how soldiers deaths were mourned. Hard to imagine anything slimier or low down than that agenda.

Keep the flags up

National Post
Published: Monday, April 24, 2006

Amid the grief surrounding the deaths of four Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan on Saturday, a purely symbolic issue leapt to prominence: the correct way for Canada to honour their sacrifice.

On Sunday, it was reported that the Conservatives would not lower flags to half-mast on Parliament Hill, as had been the practice of the previous Liberal governments. Said Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor, "we have returned to the 80-year tradition of remembering all casualties of war or operations on one day -- November 11."

Set amid news from the front, a debate about the placement of our flag may seem trivial. Yet it is a debate worth having, for it symbolizes the larger discussion taking place in Canada about our role in Afghanistan.

That debate may be defined thus: Are we at war against the Taliban, or are we at peace? If the former, then military casualties are an expected, if tragic, consequence of our deployment. If the latter, and our soldiers are to be seen as peacekeepers, not combatants, then every death should be regarded as an aberration and, therefore, an occasion for national anguish and soul-searching.

We believe the answer is clear: Canada, like the rest of the civilized world, is at war -- not only against the Taliban, but also against every other entity that seeks to pervert Islam into an excuse for senseless slaughter. It is also a war to bring stability and freedom to Afghan society. In this war, as in all wars, people will be killed. And sometimes, those people will be Canadian.

Should we lower the flag every time that happens? A little history is in order here. During the period between 1939 and 1945, when this country battled victoriously against the German-bred ideological precursor of Islamofascism, we lost about 45,000 fighters -- almost one per hour.

In other words, Saturday's horrific roadside bombing -- though the greatest single loss our military has suffered to enemy forces since Korea -- was, statistically at least, a normal afternoon by Second World War standards.

The four Canadian men who gave their lives for Canadian security and Afghan freedom on Saturday should be mourned as heroes. But as the inheritors of a proud and stoic Canadian military tradition, they would not have wanted their deaths to be an occasion for grief on such a scale that it undermines their comrades' mission. Once Parliament -- and, by extension, the nation -- begins treating death in the field as something extraordinary and unexpected, we will have tacitly embraced the myth that our mission in Afghanistan will be peaceful and bloodless.

Our government owes it to our troops, and to all Canadians, to be more truthful. The dead will be mourned on Remembrance Day, when their names are read alongside those of the others who've fallen to protect this nation. Until then, keep the flag raised high.
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/....html?id=d04956c5-49a6-4a24-8b7e-594ba6e609bd

Damn I miss the National Post!

No longer availible in eastern Canada.

I guess now its the Was National Post.

 

[zoofer]

Damn I miss the National Post!

No longer availible in eastern Canada.

I guess now its the Was National Post.

That is weird. You can read the NP on line.
Some articles are for registered subscribers. $10 a month for on line edition.

 

[elevennevele]

Re: RE: Harper has no respect

The government makes protocol and that can always change with each government.

It's easy enough to understand for example that certain measures during the time of World War 2 would necessitate different protocol than what can be accommodated during times where a country is in a state of relative peace.

This shift in policy is just a sign of things to come. I can’t say I feel good about it.

 

[missile]

I,too,miss the Post. If they had been more diligent in the delivery process,they would still be in this area.

 

[BitWhys]

Finder may be trying to be nice, but I've certainly got hard feelings about what I see in this thread. The Macho Superiority I see displayed here, and its not too hard to determine who I'm talking about, is EXACTLY the trash talk that truly disparages the sacrifices that are being made. Such self-righteousness is shameful and I would hope any real soldier that happens to read this thread would quietly wish to distance him or herself from sentiment of the speaker.

 

[Jay]

It's a natural reaction to the silly post that started this thread.

 

[BitWhys]

my my my
Coverage of fallen soldiers banned

OTTAWA - The Conservative government is refusing to allow media to cover tonight's return of four Canadian soldiers killed in Afghanistan, a surprise decision that has critics accusing Prime Minister Stephen Harper of adopting American-style tactics to limit public exposure to Canada's casualties.

From the start of the Afghan mission four years ago, media have been permitted to cover the solemn ceremony that surrounds the unloading of the caskets of soldiers killed overseas.

But tonight, reporters and television crews attempting to cover the return of the bodies of the soldiers killed by a roadside bomb north of Kandahar on Saturday will find themselves barred from the base on orders of Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor.

O'Connor defended the decision, saying he kicked out media to respect the privacy of the families.

"It is a private and solemn event between the families and the Canadian Forces," a defence spokesperson said on behalf of the minister.
...
Yesterday, as MPs returned to the House of Commons for the first day of business since the deadly attack, they held a minute of silence to mark the Armenian genocide, but not for the Canadian deaths.
...
Two weeks ago, Lincoln Dinning, of Winghan, Ont., wrote to the Prime Minister asking the government to lower the flags on Parliament Hill when a Canadian soldier is killed in the line of duty. But in a cruel twist of fate, Dinning's son, Cpl. Matt Dinning, was among the four soldiers killed in Saturday's blast.
...
"When the troops were in Korea and they got killed, there was nothing for them. You'll find most Korean veterans will think the same way," said Terry Wickens, Ontario regional president for the Korea Veterans Association of Canada.
...
He lauds media coverage of the work of the soldiers in Afghanistan. But he says that many Canadians are still in the dark about the purpose of the mission and, as a result, he worries the dramatic publicity surrounding combat deaths will undermine support.

"The fence-sitters could really drive the polls in the direction of let's get the hell out of there because they don't really understand why the sacrifices are being made," MacKenzie said in an interview.

With files from Tonda MacCharles

Noteworthy piece of history I was waiting for. Bullshit about the press banning. If public opinion IS so easily swayed then maybe the military doesn't know wtf its doing there either. I sure didn't hear anything demonstrating competency coming out of our government during the debate.