Maybe if Mr Harper wasn't trying so hard to be buddy buddy with Mr Bush, our young men and women would not be overseas as a fighiting force to start with.

Sure they say the troops are haapy to be there....the alternative would be a military prison...so if you think they, the troops, are going to speak out and say "no get us out of here and back home" you are nuts!

So mr Harris take that back to your boss and tell him to bring them home...
or the vote you think I might give you won't be happening..... that is a for sure fact....

It is comments like this from Dick that make me wonder how this guy was ever elected let alone voted back in 2 or 3 extra times. We must live in one of the most blind voting ridings in the country. Dick embarasses me.

Hey Dick, check this out and then maybe write a new letter to the editor.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2007/apr2007/afgh-a27.shtml

Maybe Celine Dion the Lieberal leader will volunteer to adopt that misguided 12 year old who beheaded some guy. Its on Youtube. Just be nice to them Taliban. They'll come round to our way of thinking.

Harris is bang on. The opposition's outrage on this issue is nothing short bizaar. Of all the things in this world that go wrong on a daily basis, the Libs and dippers are wetting their pants because we gave captured prisoners to the proper authorities. THe crime? They didn't have a piece of paper assuring that the afgans would treat them like they were in Canada. These people cut off other peoples heads. They murder at will.
Wake up people. This issue is the last thing our country should be concerned about in Afganistan.

Dick Harris is right on the money about the whining from the opposition benches.

Canada is in Afghanistan because it is protecting our interests there. Our interests include:

1. A stable government that doesn't run training camps for people who have declared war on the west and see Canadians as "evil".
2. A society that protects human rights and the dignity of all persons. The Taliban prevented women from going to school and forces such practices as gential mutilation. It wasn't really big on tolerating alternate views of the world either.
3. A society that values culture and history. The taliban went around blowing up ancient monuments that didn't "fit".
4. Destruction of a dogmatic insurrection that sees its own people as legitimate targets.

We are not in Afghanistan for oil (we have plenty, they have very little), we are there to support our alliance commitments.
That is incidentally the same reason that we did peacekeeping during the cold war - it supported our alliance commitments. It never really kept peace, but it made sure that Canada could come to the table with a voice that deserved to be heard.

The soldiers that Canada has sent there are all volunteers. They are well aware of what they signed up for and what the possible consequences might be. They are helping to destroy a tenacious and cunning enemy so that there might be some stability brought to this war-torn land.

Also the commitment in Afghanistan was initiated by Jean Chretien, not Stephen Harper. Harper is just better at being realistic and getting things done on a wide range of issues - much better than the liberals have ever been. This government has been much better at giving the troops the tools to do the job than the liberals ever were. For the liberals it was always about show, not go.

Dick Harris missed the mark with his partisan attack on the democratic process. He shows very little class and even less insight for a man of his stature.

Sure the n.d.p. are hypocrites for just days ago supporting the mission, yet claiming in their rhetoric to be outraged about the current policy. That’s what a good opposition party is supposed to do in a democracy.

Is the rhetoric based on a reasoned view of something that can actually be changed in policy? That is the important question above all, I would think even Dick Harris would agree.

IMO the view is that we fail to honour our fallen solders, and all those who fell before them, when we fail to live up to our moral values, both unsaid as well as through law. With out that; what would be the purpose of being there in the first place.

The case in question is whether or not we failed to live up to our moral value when allowing partisans to be picked up on the battle field and then handed over to one side (even if it is our side); where they will then be tortured (which everyone agrees is not our moral value).

Do we enable revenge torture to supersede the rule of law? A strong argument has been made that we do, either wittingly or unwittingly. Now that it has been brought to our attention, each should be judged on how they handle this situation. Dick Harris obviously fails this test (democracy & upholding the rule of law). Others like the military leadership seem to get it and are already looking at ways to make improvements to remedy the situation and I think they have done an exemplary job in that regard.

IMO talk of war crimes on the part of Canadians is over the top rhetoric to get attention, talk of O'Connor retiring is also baseless.

The best the conservatives could do in this situation is show leadership in addressing the issue and refrain from undermining the democratic process by returning wild rhetoric with partisan politics that uses the solders for political advantage.

On this one I have to agree with Mr. Harris. For those of you who disagree, don't just read the headlines, do some research.

Dirtyrottenpartisan I disagree that Canada is in Afghanistan for Alliance commitments. That would undermine the whole mission if that was what we relied on as our reason for being there. That is not justification for this kind of war.

I think it is much better if the focus was on implementing the rule of law protected by a sovereign state that takes responsibilities for the rights, protection, and actions of its citizens. That is our best long term objective for our interest, and it is also why prisoner treatment by the Afghanistan government is of such a high importance to achieving the realistic goals of this mission.

One vision is the vision of empire and being loyal to that empire no matter what values the empire protects and enables.

The other vision is one of a common man with universal rights under the rule of law and democracy. A rule of law and democracy that when protected and enabled lead to a world where foreign problems do not become our problems, either in ownership or moral responsibility. The idea of independent and sovereign states.

Those that support Dick Harris are narrow minded and just don't get it. Probably paid political hacks. No reasoned arguments from that crowd, just talking points.

I wonder which Harper spin doctor wrote that piece for Dick. We hear from him so seldom that i thought maybe he had retired or passed on.

Most you people are just Morons, I have a IDEA!!!!!! Lets just not take P.O.Ws... JUST KILL THESE LOWLIFE ...Terrorists...SCREW ALL YOU BLEEDING HEART LIBERAL, NDP, TERRIOST, SUPPORTERS. Try supporting our troops not the Terrorists. Again screw most of You MORONS.

Well I m not sure I totally agree with you there Don, but, I will say that until this fiasco in Afganistan is no longer fought in the media it will continue to go on and on.

to seamutt, I have done lots of research on this and have a son and friend in the military....but you are entitled to agree with Mr Harris although it seems as if you are in the minority on this one...

In my opinion the letter to the editor clearly demonstrates what serving a few terms in Ottawa can do to the thinking process of a human being.

Better not to take Harris too seriously.He only spouts what he has been told to say by his fearless leader.
I do notice that he does keep getting re-elected though...what's up with that?
That's great if you want to be represented by a puppet!!
He is another one that is long overdue for a tune-up by the voters!

Here's an e-mail that was sent to me a few days ago and as far as I'm concerned it hits the nail right on the head. If your one of those tree huggin bleeding hearts you might not want to read this just in case it offends you.

Subject: What A Letter


WOW ........ Is this laying it on the line or what?

The lady who wrote this letter is Pam ##### of Pamela ##### and Associates in Atlanta. She has been in business since 1980 doing interior design and home planning. She recently wrote a letter to a family member serving in Iraq ....... Read it!

"Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001?

Were people from all over the world, mostly Americans, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from our nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania?

Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they?

And I'm supposed to care that a copy of the Koran was "desecrated" when an overworked American soldier kicked it or got it wet?

Well, I don't. I don't care at all.

I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11.

I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the
Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere possession of which is a crime in Saudi Arabia.


I'll care when Abu Musab al-Zarqawi tells the world he is sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling slashed throat.

I'll care when the cowardly so-called "insurgents" in Iraq come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques.

I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs.

I'll care when the American media stops pretending that their First Amendment liberties are somehow derived from international law instead of the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights.

In the meantime, when I hear a story about a brave marine roughing up an Iraqi terrorist to obtain information, know this: I don't care.

When I see a fuzzy photo of a pile of naked Iraqi prisoners who have been humiliated in what amounts to a college-hazing incident, rest assured that I don't care.

When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank that I don't care.

When I hear that a prisoner, who was issued a Koran and a prayer mat, and fed "special" food that is paid for by my tax dollars, is complaining that his holy book is being "mishandled," you can absolutely believe in your heart of hearts that I don't care.

And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled "Koran" and other times "Quran." Well, Jimmy Crack Corn and ---- you guessed it - - I don't care ! ! ! ! !

If you agree with this viewpoint, pass this on to all your e-mail friends. Sooner or later, it'll get to the people responsible for this ridiculous behavior!

If you don't agree, then by all means hit the delete button.

Should you choose the latter, then please don't complain when more atrocities committed by radical Muslims happen here in our great country.

I am not deleting this, I am sending it on, but only after I add:


--"Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the Marines don't have that problem."

-- Ronald Reagan

I have another quote that I would like to add AND.

I hope you forward this such as I have.

"If we ever forget that we're One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under."
also by... Ronald Reagan


“For Evil to Suceed, good men and women just have to sit back and do Nothing.”

Don,

Why are you so angry towards "US" ?

Your hatred towards most everyone and outbursts about killing, blowing up stuff etc. is really rather disturbing !

I am pissed with the majority of you Because, you fools support the Enemy. WE Are at war. It is OK for the Bad guys to GUT French Special Forces after they had been Captured, Have 12 year old Children Cut of heads of people that do not agree with the Lowlifes, Every Day these People most of you support, Kill women and children.....So a few get hurt after been Captured, We as Canadians DO NOT... GUT THEM... CUT OFF THEIR HEADS....AFTER CATCHING THEM, REMEMBER THESE ARE NOT SOLDIERS, THEY ARE MURDEROUS SCUM,TERRORISTS, THEY SHOULD HAVE NO PROTECTION UNDER THE RULES OF WAR. So you people that support them...Piss me off...

I think we should appoint Don Mackenzie a supreme court judge! :-)
Actually...what I REALLY think is some anger management would be warranted here!
jeez......

Don most of these people just don't get it. Their lives haven't been threatened. They just can't see past their Lattes. Well people open your eyes because one of these days we are going to get stung. Gofaster I am ex military so my eyes are not rose covered.

"The solution to Iraq -- an Iraq that can govern itself, sustain itself and defend itself -- is more than a military mission. Precisely the reason why I sent more troops into Baghdad." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., April 3, 2007

I am relieved to hear him state emphatically that *sending troops* is not a military mission.

Looks like the fates of Iraq and Afghanistan are being directed by a super intelligent mind.

:-)

The difference between us and the taliban is that we do care. If we lost that then we lost the war.

This should not be a war about revenge killings that fuels the cycle of violence.

George Tenet EX CIA chief sums it up best when he asks why we haven't been attacked by hundreds of Cho like characters in shopping malls across the nation on any given day if the terrorist network is directed at our civilization. This was the guy tasked with stopping that kind of scenario and he is now puzzled as to why that kind of scenario never played out. Maybe its because those that direct terrorist networks are the politicians themselves. Further evidence that the answers to terrorism are found in politics and not revenge killings.

A great man once said the greatest thing to fear is fear itself.

What I think is of importance in this debate is history. When the Americans first defeated the Taliban; nearly 2000 taliban foot soldiers surrendered with the white flags. They were nobody's stuck in a war they no longer want to fight and assumed if they surrendered to the Americans they would be afford the rights of a prisoner of war in American custody. The Americans had different ideas, and handed the taliban prisoners over to the northern alliance (taliban arch enemy for previous decade). The northern alliance then packed them all into shipping containers, drove them out into the dessert and let them all suffocate to death in the containers nazi style. Obviously that is a war crime committed on captured enemy through enabling the war crime and not taking responsibility for the safety of prisoners of war. Obviously that kind of action prolongs the war when the taliban can expect no mercy or rule of law if captured and handed over to their blood enemies no strings attached.

We lose our third party status by complicity and thus our ability to mediate an end to the conflict.

This is directly related to the taliban rejecting the imposed political process still run by those that showed them no mercy when they did capitulate. The war continues as a result and Canadians are being killed.

Do we as Canadians support a continuing war as the result of things like packaging up captured enemy combatants and putting them in containers to sufficate to death in the dessert, or do we support the rule of law, the moral high ground that de-moralizes our enemies and protects our solders on the front line by showing that we will treat them as equals under the law with their rights equally protected when they are removed from the battle field?

Those that advocate we should kill and enable torture rather than uphold the rule of law are the real nut cases here. It is only through the application of the rule of law that this war will end and Canadians will accomplish their mission and be able to come back home.

Yes Dick Harris, I include you in the nut case category that has no respect for the democratic process and worse yet the rule of law all in the name of empire justifications. Its about as un-Canadian as a politican can be.

If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. - George Orwell

-----------------

General
MacArthur's Warning
5-17-5

"It is part of the general pattern of misguided policy that our country is now geared to an arms economy which was bred in an artificially induced psychosis of war hysteria and nurtured upon an incessant propaganda of fear."

--General Douglas MacArthur, Speech on May 15, 1951

-----------------------------------

" I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the U.S., in the field of commerce and manufacturing, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it." The New Freedom. Woodrow Wilson, 1913

-----------------------------------

An important lesson taught at Harvard Business School is to embrace a finite number of strategic goals, and to make each one of those goals serve as many desirable ends as possible. The truism of this lesson is that if everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority. If you can’t focus on everything, then you need to be able to focus on those few goals which will have the broadest impact, leading to a future capacity to attain other desirable ends. No exact number of goals is the limit, but three is an awfully good number to aim at. Those goals should be mutually consistent, so that the step-by-step accomplishment of each one aids in the achievement of the others.

----------------------

Just heard on the news Harper might consider replacing O'Connor with Jay Hill as Defence Minister?

I would have to agree with Dick Harris on this issue.

While I think the policies and actions of the federal Conservative Party are far from perfect, I also feel the policies and actions of the three federal opposition parties (Liberals, NDP, and the Bloc Quebecois) are too far removed from reality.

The federal Conservatives will have my vote for many years to come.

Today's news on CBC:

Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay expresses that the fate of the NATO operation in Afghanistan was in trouble.

Richard Holbrooke, a former U.S. ambassador to the UN says he was struck during a recent visit to Afghanistan by how unpopular the government of President Karzai has become.

He also stated at a Brussels forum that NATO risks losing the war because of the "tremendous deterioration" in support for Karzai.

Don't be too tough on Dick, After his term is up he will be eligible for the pension that was his only reason for running in the first place. Can anyone remember anything he has ever done for this riding, good lord, you never even hear from him.

I am prepared to bet that he has no intention of running in the next election but will retire on easy street with his ill-gotten pension.

If his is a *sure* riding it will be a win-win for the Tories if he runs again: Dick gets re-elected, the Tories will have one more number to add to their total strength.

If the voters re-elect him it means that they are satisfied will all the things he didn't do or didn't get done.

Ain't politics a ball?

Diplomat, the real problem is that President Karzai and the northern alliance are back by India, as was the case in the civil war with the taliban before the west got involved. This is why when taliban are captured they were gone missing early in the war, and now are tortured by the so called government forces who are no other than the northern alliance for the most part but hopefully that’s improving.

Historically, Pakistan backs the taliban, which in a way is why India backs the northern alliance. Both countries have openly said they are planning for when NATO pulls out, and in Afghanistan this undermines the rule of law via things like revenge with an eventual NATO pull out the expectation.

This is why Canada's role should not be to pick sides in search of the cave responsible for 9/11, but rather to mediate as an honest third party that can provide legitimacy to the Afghan government long enough for the Afghan government to earn their own legitimacy. Giving the taliban softs an avenue to join the government makes sense, and first and foremost that starts with protecting their own prisoners of war from revenge abuse beyond the law I would think.

Dick Harris riding is a sure ridding because voters in PG don't care and easily buy into simple slogans and busily go back to work.

Most people in PG see the government of Canada as of little importance to their daily lives other than the income tax, gas tax and gst that they pay. Most will easily buy into the protest concept not expecting much from the federal government to begin with.

As soon as foreigners start killing - either accidentally or intentionally - their women, children and sustenance providers all the magnificent intentions blow away in the wind...

Past history ought to be studied and heeded in order to avoid the previous errors and atrocities against human beings, especially civilians, in military jargon usually dismissed as *collateral damage.*

If war can not be conducted without killing innocent non-combatants then such a war should immediately be brought to a halt, for ethical, moral and legal reasons.

If that leads to wars becoming virtually impossible except for the defense of one's own homeland against invaders - that is fine with me.

It's about time.

I wonder if Harris ever reads any of the opinions expressed here? He might learn something, which is rare for a politician.
My guess is considering his past performance,he really doesn't care!!