Didn't take too long for Harper to scare the pants off me

[blahblah]

Gets better Mag

Support for Tories up since election: new poll
Updated Thu. Feb. 23 2006 6:29 AM ET
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060222/poll_support_060222?s_name=&no_ads=

Most Canadians like government's direction: poll
Updated Sat. Apr. 15 2006 11:33 PM ET http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNe...0415/conservative_poll_060415?s_name=&no_ads=

Tories flirting with majority popularity: poll
Updated Wed. Apr. 26 2006 7:01 PM ET
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060426/tories_poll_060426/20060426?hub=Canada

Where can I seek refuge??? Fortunately I am in the National Capital..maybe one of the embassies will let me in.

 

[SellyCat]

Where can I seek refuge??? Fortunately I am in the National Capital..maybe one of the embassies will let me in.

The Iraqi of Afghani embassies...they've been liberated now.

Other more...um safe...candidates for asylum include: France, The Netherlands, Norway....Switzerland is always a popular choice.

 

[blahblah]

The Iraqi of Afghani embassies...they've been liberated now.

Other more...um safe...candidates for asylum include: France, The Netherlands, Norway....Switzerland is always a popular choice.

French embassy is near PM's 24 Sussex and Govenor General's ... I wonder how the new GG likes this new guy. OK maybe I ought to settle for the Saudi palace near the US embassy. And there is Stonorway on Acacia... Heck maybe I should just move to Montreal.

 

[atbell]

The Iraqi of Afghani embassies...they've been liberated now.

Other more...um safe...candidates for asylum include: France, The Netherlands, Norway....Switzerland is always a popular choice.

I'm just waiting for "New Switzerland" to be proclaimed in the interior of BC. All the neutrality, chocolate, watches and banking of Switzerland with some great cider and fields of weed. How can you go wrong?

 

[Colm]

I'm just waiting for "New Switzerland" to be proclaimed in the interior of BC. All the neutrality, chocolate, watches and banking of Switzerland with some great cider and fields of weed. How can you go wrong?

Vancouver Island declared itself der Neu Schweiz 5 years ago.

Didn't you know?

 

[SellyCat]

Vancouver Island declared itself der Neu Schweiz 5 years ago.

Didn't you know?

WAR!

 

[deafplayer]

so why were flags at Downsview airfield and the government offices at Yonge & Sheppard at half-mast?

 

[OTIS]

What an incredibly ignorant thing to say.

Seriously! Lets remain overly technical when it come to war. It makes you look hard, and able to make tough decisions! We're gaaards! BTW Ditto, parroting an academic categorical definition of 'a war' makes you sound like an indolent bore. We get it, life means little to you. Next.

It's obvious that under the pretext of 'concern' for the families this move limits the public's ability to digest the real costs of war. There are other ways to enable media access, and still keep the circus at bay. Setting up a single accessible feed at the base which all stations can tap is a typical way to get around this issue, but the fact that it’s not even considered says it all.

The facts are on the table. Images have always had a monumental role in war. Before the images of My Lai, there were My Lai massacres happening all over. But it was My Lai that uniquely had a photographer. The Abu Gharib scandal had already been many months old without uproar, and it was only with the surfacing of the images that had Rumsfeld drafting a resignation letter. The anxiety of government precisely exists with the fact that such images of war are not within the control of those pulling the strings of it. It presents an undesirable wildcard that can drain political capital instantly, and pull rugs out of previously solidly supported policies. To any government that wishes to exact greater control over the war they wage, limiting the ability of disruptive wildcards will become a primary concern.

 

[blahblah]

It's obvious that under the pretext of 'concern' for the families this move limits the public's ability to digest the real costs of war. There are other ways to enable media access, and still keep the circus at bay. Setting up a single accessible feed at the base which all stations can tap is a typical way to get around this issue, but the fact that it’s not even considered says it all.

The facts are on the table. Images have always had a monumental role in war. Before the images of My Lai, there were My Lai massacres happening all over. But it was My Lai that uniquely had a photographer. The Abu Gharib scandal had already been many months old without uproar, and it was only with the surfacing of the images that had Rumsfeld drafting a resignation letter. The anxiety of government precisely exists with the fact that such images of war are not within the control of those pulling the strings of it. It presents an undesirable wildcard that can drain political capital instantly, and pull rugs out of previously solidly supported policies. To any government that wishes to exact greater control over the war they wage, limiting the ability of disruptive wildcards will become a primary concern.

Also the fact that families were not consulted says it loud too. I wonder when Harper and Bush briefed Mr Jaap de Hoop Scheffer:

http://www.canada.com/story.html?id=c0654a3b-c61d-4a2e-bda4-6fa19d4370a7
Paul Ames, Canadian Press
Published: April 26, 2006
BRUSSELS, Belgium -- Governments in NATO countries must prepare public opinion for the risk of more casualties in Afghanistan as their troops move into the volatile southern region in an expanding security mission, the alliance's secretary general warned Tuesday.

De Hoop Scheffer briefed reporters before a meeting of NATO foreign ministers Thursday and Friday in Sofia, Bulgaria. Canada is being represented by Foreign Affairs Minister Peter MacKay.

About war images influencing public opinion... CBC had an excellent documentary LOOKING FOR AN ICON (here's the link to other interesting places dealing with this subject). http://www.cbc.ca/correspondent/060423.html

 

[blahblah]

What the Tory blogs are saying about the shameful media coverage of Harper's sensitivity for the families http://www.stephentaylor.ca/archives/2006_04.html

 

[man_slut]

so why were flags at Downsview airfield and the government offices at Yonge & Sheppard at half-mast?

Mutiny!

 

[judge wopner]

so why were flags at Downsview airfield and the government offices at Yonge & Sheppard at half-mast?

the flags were flown at half mast because 2 of the soldiers killed were from the toronto. this is standard military protocall.

i do agree the PM has no real business trumping the families wishes of showing the caskets, i kind of wish they came out with a more detailed explanation as to why they are blocking the images.

at the end of the day blocking htese images only brought more attention to them and the reality of the afghan mission. you'd think the con's would have known that.

 

[deafplayer]

The facts are on the table. Images have always had a monumental role in war. Before the images of My Lai, there were My Lai massacres happening all over. But it was My Lai that uniquely had a photographer. The Abu Gharib scandal had already been many months old without uproar, and it was only with the surfacing of the images that had Rumsfeld drafting a resignation letter. The anxiety of government precisely exists with the fact that such images of war are not within the control of those pulling the strings of it. It presents an undesirable wildcard that can drain political capital instantly, and pull rugs out of previously solidly supported policies. To any government that wishes to exact greater control over the war they wage, limiting the ability of disruptive wildcards will become a primary concern.

They didn't have too much to worry about in Vietnam...

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]There were more than 600 reporters in Vietnam at the time of the My Lai massacre. None of them broke the story. For more than a year after the event a soldier who had heard about it tried to interest Newsweek, and others, without success. Finally the story was broken by a freelance reporter based in the US, Seymour Hersh, who believed the murder of civilians by his country's soldiers was news. Only then did many of the correspondents tell their own 'atrocity stories'.

[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The walls of news organisations in Saigon had long been decorated with photographs of dismembered bodies, of GIs holding up severed ears and testicles and of actual moments of torture. In the Associated Press office someone had written on one of these: 'This is what happens when you speak to the press.' To the question why these pictures had not been sent usually came the reply that the agencies would not distribute them, because newspapers would not publish them. There were outstanding, honourable journalists and photographers who fought against this.[/FONT]

John Pilger describing what he found in Vietnam
http://pilger.carlton.com/

 

[SellyCat]

the flags were flown at half mast because 2 of the soldiers killed were from the toronto. this is standard military protocall.

i do agree the PM has no real business trumping the families wishes of showing the caskets, i kind of wish they came out with a more detailed explanation as to why they are blocking the images.

at the end of the day blocking these images only brought more attention to them and the reality of the afghan mission. you'd think the con's would have known that.

Divulging information about why they're witholding information would seem very counter-productive, wouldn't it?

The real reason they are doing it, is to prevent newspapers from using the images. Period. It's embarassing, and conservatives have EXTREMELY fragile egos. They cannot rule in an environment where they are being challenged by reality--it's simply incompatible with the nature of their politics, which is based on artificial, manufactured ideology, sentiment and discourse.

 

[blahblah]

Should
- Harper budget get a non-confidence vote?

Urban myth?
Saying goes 1 letter/email equals 100 who did not express an opinion. Wanna scare their pants?

Would you write your MP and party leaders about your opinion:
- Flag
- Media/repatriation
- Canadian involvement in Afghanistan?
- Secret signing of NORAD/NORTHCOM deal?
- Anything to annoy him?

 

[deafplayer]

- Secret signing of NORAD/NORTHCOM deal?

Dont know if you're referring to the latest one or the 2004 deal that entered us into the BMD... but that one was so pathetic... they dont even have to hide it....... its like in Colbert's White House Correspondents' Dinner speech....
Journalist: "Did Karl Rove commit a crime?"
Colbert: "I dont know, let me ask him.."


edit: dont know how to spell colbert

 

[blahblah]

Dont know if you're referring to the latest one or the 2004 deal that entered us into the BMD... but that one was so pathetic... they dont even have to hide it....... its like in Colbert's White House Correspondents' Dinner speech....
Journalist: "Did Karl Rove commit a crime?"
Colbert: "I dont know, let me ask him.."


edit: dont know how to spell colbert

You got Colbert correct
Talking about the one signed last week making it an indefinite arrangement. Don't know if anyone's seen the paperwork.

 

[blahblah]

I was referring to an article in the Toronto Star Fri or Sat but checking just now Harper says it will be put to vote.... forgive my potential error

Sat Apr 29, 07:27 PM EST

MONCTON, N.B. (CP) - A deal that would renew Canada's role in NORAD has not been finalized and will be debated by Parliament before it's signed, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Saturday.

Harper was reacting to reports that Ottawa has committed Canada to indefinite participation in the military alliance in an agreement that would give it new responsibilities to protect coastlines from terrorist attacks.