Fox News network is reportedly one of the highest rated in the USA. I’ve never been a particular fan of it, I’ve generally found a lot of their reporting more along the lines of a national gossip show, sort of like the broadcast version of the National Enquirer. I’m a Canadian, so for the most part, what passes as news south of the border isn’t really my business.

I’ve grown up with an awareness that a lot of Americans have very little awareness of their neighbour to the north. I can remember as a kid encountering other children in Algonquin Provincial Park, (that’s in Ontario) and them asking me what ’state’ I came from. When I told them I lived in the Province of Ontario, the usual response was “what state is that in”?

I well remember how strange I thought those kids to be that they couldn’t fathom that they were standing in the province I came from. It was later I learned that ignorance came from a lack of information about this country and even less interest in knowing.

Back to Fox News. One of their so called news shows is called “Red Eye” hosted by Greg Gutfeld. For the most part Gutfeld and the cronies who participate on the show with him think they are rather funny in their perspective. Sort of Fox’s answer to the Leno or Letterman. Read the rest of this entry »

Minister of Veterans Affairs Greg Thompson has ordered a review of the treatment the crew of the ill-fated HMCS Chicoutimi has received since the fire on board the submarine in 2004. Since the incident of the 56 crew on board roughly half are either about to or have left the military due to medical reasons. Most of those are struggling to get pension entitlements.

It appears that so called experts are arguing over what could have been present to have caused a cluster of illness amongst the crew. I don’t know, 5 days in a partially burned out sub would be bound to harbour potential medical time bombs. That should be a bit of a no brainer. When our service men and women get placed in hazardous conditions the benefit of the doubt should go to them and the last thing they should have to do is battle for benefits. Read the rest of this entry »

A month ago I was willing to cut Defense Minister Gordon O’Connor some slack in regards to the treatment of detainees after being turned over to Afghan authorities. I’m not now.

After misleading parliament either deliberately or through sheer ignorance of his own portfolio he traveled to Afghanistan and worked out an agreement with the head of the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission, that they would inform Canada of any reports of torture of detainees handed over by Canadian troops.

Isn’t that a bit like asking the perp to report on the other perps? What is known about this person other than O’Connor thinks he can trust him? Considering the less than structured governmental situation there, O’Connor should have come up with a solution which saw Canadian troops in closer scrutiny of the fate of detainees until such time the Afghans could show they deserved to be trusted with them.

The Globe & Mail has written an in depth article about 30 Afghans who claim they were tortured after being turned over to Afghan authorities by the Canadians. (I’m linking to another blog who has copied the article as the link at the Globe will likely end up being behind their subscription wall) Now, there is no indication in the article over how long of a period these detainees had been captured or if any of the alleged abuse took place in the last month. That doesn’t make the allegations any less serious and O’Connor should have been aware of the severity when he made this rather tenuous agreement.

It is rare that I can even remotely agree with Taliban Jack Layton but while Harper and O’Connor are dismissing the reports of abuse as “allegations” and “rumours” this is a serious matter involving the treatment of detainees. While NONE of those interviewed reported any abuse by the Canadians, it is against international law for us to be handing over detainees to criminal treatment. Transfer of any detainees needs to be halted immediately and yes, this time round, O’Connor needs to go. So far, Harper is defending him.

Two Canadian professors have been garnering themselves lots of air and press time on this issue, Amir Attaran and Micheal Byers. While many of their points are valid in that the Geneva Convention prohibits turning prisoners over to abuse or torture and that doing so is tantamount to a war crime. There is no specific evidence that Canadian troops and indeed the command structure has knowledge of this happening.

It is interesting to note that Byers appears to have an axe to grind when it comes to Canada’s involvement in Afghanistan and in particular against General Rick Hillier. One that beating hell out of the truth to grind doesn’t seem to bother him, Daimnation has an interesting piece on an earlier torture of the trust by Byer.

As for Attaran, he is a lawyer and immunologist who has written extensively on a range of subjects. It is interesting to note that he has been both a paid and unpaid consultant for NGOs (non governmental agencies), most in siding with NGOs on this issue. The timing seems almost fortuitous that this issue is back before the public at the same time that a controversy between the Afghan government and NGOs is heating up over who knows best what is good for Afghanistan. The Afghans are not happy with NGOs tendency towards paternalism and self serving methods of keeping their recipients dependent on them.

Attaran’s call for Canada to build our own detention facilities in Afghanistan is not necessarily to be rejected out of hand. Doing so could solve several problems in the long run. NATO’s approach of engaging Afghans in taking part in projects in order to learn could be employed here. Locals could be engaged to build the centre and the Canadians could undertake to train Afghan security forces in the proper handling of detainees while keeping those same detainees under careful watch.

We’re training their army, their police, their justice system and even their bureaucrats. It seems pretty obvious that training the jailers how to treat detainees in a democracy is part of the puzzle that needs to be addressed.

The British service people released from Iranian captivity on Wednesday have provided their version of events at a press conference yesterday. As was speculated on during their captivity, the men confirmed that they had been subjected to coercion which resulted in their apologies on Iranian TV for straying into Iranian waters which resulted in their capture.

The service people made a deliberate decision to surrender to a more heavily armed force which had them outnumbered. Their ship was not nearby at the time as they were operating in water too shallow for the larger ship to enter to render aid. The group had moments to make their decision, knew they were outnumbered and outgunned and were aware that an aggressive response on their part could well escalate tensions in the region worse than they already are.

Once in captivity they were subjected to psychological torture in order to gain their compliance, or appearance thereof. The little bit of communication they could do between themselves, they agreed that the objective was to get out of there as quickly and as safely as possible. So, the apologized if they tresspassed and allowed the Iranians to film their ‘confession’, not that there was much choice in the matter.

Publicly the military are standing behind their troops decisions. Some British civilians are second guessing their actions. Questions like ‘where is only giving name, rank and serial number to captors gone to’ have been asked. First of all, Britain and Iran are not at war. Secondly, were they at war, near as I know, Iran is not a signatory to the Geneva Convention and as such would not be likely to respect their captives right to confine their response to name, rank and serial number.

Even the war those young men and women are engaged in that puts them in that region is hardly conventional. I can hardly blame a young officer for recognizing he was outgunned and using discretion as the better part of valour rather than becoming the trigger for an explosion just waiting to go off in that region.

Meanwhile, the never diplomatic or tactful Americans can’t seem to hold back from trying to impose their worldview on the situation. Retired Army Colonel Jack Jacobs in his commentary on MSNBC ripped into the actions of the British servicemen which proved more how much of a dinosaur he is than made a point. He quotes the US Army Code of Conduct “I will never surrender of my own free will. If in command, I will never surrender the members of my command while they still have the means to resist.”

Umm… Jack, lad… that is the US Code, hate to remind you ol’ boy but it is a British matter not American. As much as he might think that the US is the centre of the universe, it isn’t. Expecting those service people to fight regardless of the force arrayed against them is absolute foolishness. Fifteen dead heroes are just as dead as 15 fools. The British are mature enough to know that sometimes you swallow your lumps and live to fight another day. Those young service people did the right thing.

None of the men who fought the Battle of Vimy Ridge are around to speak for themselves but veterans groups have been lobbying the government to fly the Red Ensign at the 90th Anniversary ceremonies at the Vimy Memorial in France in April. Seen here on a WW1 recruiting poster.

It appeared briefly this week they had failed to sway Veteran’s Affairs, who are responsible for the care of the memorial which stands on ground given to Canada by France following WW1. They maintained that protocol required that only the Maple Leaf be flown on federal soil. Harper intervened with his wishes that it be flown for the event due to its historical significance. I don’t often agree with the boy Harper, but I do this time.