The Scourge of Political Correctness

So I received a little pushback on my post about incorporating guns in the Remembrance Day activities of an Ottawa high school. I wasn’t surprised; just as when Charles writes about his white poppy, being semi-critical of any aspect of a Remembrance Day ceremony is going to elicit some emotional responses. That’s just part of the deal.

The post brought up the topic of political correctness, and I’m confident in suggesting that a sizable chunk of our readership here at The Politic will claim an antipathy towards political correctness. Much of conservatism has prided itself in being politically incorrect, as have I, at times – which is why I wrote such a politically incorrect post. [Read more]

Bring the soldiers home!

What the hell is going on in Afghanistan?

Contempt for Parliament from Thee but not from Me

I don’t have much use for any of the political parties right now.  I’m rather ticked off with both the Liberals and the Conservatives, but it’s the NDP who have particularly irked me the past few days.

I don’t have an issue with them refusing to buy in to the agreement on the release of documents relating to the detainee scandal.  I’m willing to believe that’s a principled opposition stance… I’m inclined to think it’s more partisan gamesmanship, but I can give them the benefit of the doubt.  The NDP certainly have reasonable cause for concern.  We have a government that has been trying to keep the entire matter quiet.  If I was in opposition, I’d be wary that they’re suddenly willing to have an open investigation.

Their decision spawned some typical partisan sniping:

[Liberal house leader Ralph Goodale] also suggested that the NDP’s decision to back away from the deal came as no surprise “because they just didn’t seem to be engaged in the reality and the substance that was involved here.”

Whether they were fully engaged or not doesn’t really absolve the other parties for behaving like children.  Anyway, it’s Ottawa, and a little childishness is to be expected.  Regardless, any sympathy I had for the NDP disappeared in but a few days.

“We’ve got to make sure that Karla Homolka doesn’t get a pardon and we want to work with the government to find a way to make sure that happens,” NDP Leader Jack Layton said.

I guess a principled stance is only worthwhile as long as it doesn’t preclude them from getting their vitriol on.  As the above quotation demonstrates, the NDP (unwilling to bend on the document issue) will sign on to whatever vengeful policy the Conservatives bring forward – no matter how ill-conceived such a manoeuvre – as long as it allows them to enforce their particular version of justice.

The Conservative party were found in contempt of parliament for their handling of the Afghan detainee file.  The NDP has shown that they don’t have much more respect for the parliamentary process.  So, dear NDP, the next time a principled stance is assumed to be political opportunism, this is why.

Years Later, DND is Concerned About Torture

Sure, it’s a little late, but General Walt Natynczyk wants to know what happened to the report on the torture by Afghan personnel of a detainee we handed over to them (and whom our soldiers then rescued from his torturers).  From CTV.ca:

The Canadian military has ordered a formal investigation into how a critical report on the beating of an Afghan prisoner remained buried at National Defence headquarters.

In June 2006 soldiers captured a suspected Taliban fighter and handed him over to local police, who then beat him to the point where the Canadians had to intervene.

A report on the incident, which undermines Conservative government claims that no prisoners handed over to Afghans faced abuse, was apparently uncovered only in December.

Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Walt Natynczyk ordered an investigation, which is headed by Rear-Admiral Paul Maddison, commander of Joint Task Force Atlantic.

Natynczyk’s deputy, Vice-Admiral Denis Rouleau, says the probe will look at the incident itself, why soldiers took the actions they did and how it was reported.

The report of the investigation is due March 1 and is to be made public shortly after.

Diplomat Richard Colvin testified before a special House of Commons committee in November that he repeatedly warned federal officials in 2006 and 2007 that prisoners faced the possibility of torture in Afghan jails.

This is good news, a little late, but good news nonetheless.  Will this help end the contention that no one was tortured, or that the torture was nothing more than just being beaten by a shoe.

I have more thoughts on the matter here, but I’d like to ask why it’s so controversial to suggest that we shouldn’t be complicit in torture when, apparently, our troops on the ground think we shouldn’t be involved in torture?

Stephen, If This Is It, Please Let Me Know

Dear Stephen,

It seems we need to talk.  Our relationship just isn’t what it used to be, and now that you’ve decided that we need a break for a few weeks, I think it’s time that we re-evaluate just where we think we’re headed.

I remember when we first met.  From what everybody said, you just seemed perfect, ooh, he’s soooo wonky.  Sure, you didn’t have the usual charisma that we’ve all come to expect, but that’s really overrated.  I was looking for someone of substance, and you were supposed to be it.  From that initial courtship, everything seemed good.  I knew that it would be an up hill climb, and that all the chattering classes would be predicting our failure, but I had faith in us.  Even if no one else saw in you what I saw, it didn’t matter.  You seemed like a keeper.

The initial flair of a relationship never lasts.  No one is the perfect vessel we believe them to be upon first meeting – one in whom we can pour all of our dreams and expectations.  Dreams linger and fade, and life interrupts honeymoons.  Through such stresses, all we need is to find someone who will still, in essence, be the person we always thought they were; be the person we always needed, even when blinded by desire.

We certainly had our share of ups, but we also had a few downs.  The downs seemed to mount, and grow, and envelop that initial flame.  I may have had some harsh words, but I was mature and confident enough to know that no relationship can be perfect.  There is no Suzanne Somers for my Patrick Duffy, but I didn’t care.  Waking up from a dream or nightmare, I still believed you were the right choice for me.

But I don’t know why you had to go after my friends.  I don’t know why you were so worried about what they might say.  I already knew you weren’t perfect, and I wasn’t expecting perfection; I was expecting the intestinal fortitude, the confidence, I was led to believe you had.  Unfortunately, your jealousy seems to have gotten the better of you.  Insecurity does wear well, Stephen, even on you.  I don’t know if I will be able to remain true to you, if you do not remain true to all the principles I thought we shared.

So here we are, the dark days of January.  Ottawa has been cold; Ottawa has been grey; Ottawa has been quiet.  I know you will return, but I know it won’t be as soon as you’d promised.  You say you need some time.  You need to get composed, take care of some housekeeping issues, and then come back fresh after the Olympics, ready take on everything anew.

I hope you get some rest, Stephen.  I hope you have the chance to reflect on the past few years we’ve spent together.  They’ve meant a lot.

I’m not a child.  I know that people grow.  I know that people’s priorities change.  I’m sad to think that yours have changed so much… or maybe it’s just that I never quite knew you to begin with… no, I don’t think that can be it.  I was prepared for some disappointment, but not this much.  You broke my heart, Stephen, you most cynical of pols.

We’ll talk when you return.

Farewell,

Jonathan

The Olympics, Prorogue and the Moral Vacuity of the Conservative Party

Well, the rumours aren’t true… well, at least the part about them being rumours are no longer true.

Parliament will not resume on January 25.  It will resume in March.  On March 3rd, we’ll have a speech from the throne.  On March 4, we’ll have the joy of a budget presentation.  There is a lot of conjecture as to why Parliament will be prorogued for two months, from the trite (MPs want to go to the Olympics) to the strategic (Mr. Harper wants to send some more Tories to the senate) to the abhorrent (the Conservative Party wants the whole Afghan detainee scandal to go away).  No matter the reason, it is cynical and distasteful.

If it is all about the Olympics – whether the desire to attend or the desire to avoid a tough session of Question Period during the Olympics – the Conservatives are children playing in an adult world.  Suspending a democratic legislature for the sake of international spectacle is not what a mature nation does, not when there are important issues to deal with.

If they are doing this to stack the senate, well, then they are who we thought they were: Politicians, of the same ilk as any other cynical politician, be it Jean Chretien, Belinda Stronach or Brian Mulroney.  In such a case, they deserve not only our scorn and ridicule, but also a little – just a little – of our pity.

But I’m not an idiot.  These issues may play into the political calculations (rarely would a government act without considering a variety of implications), but there is little doubt that they are trying to make the populace forget that this government is an accomplice to torture.  The Conservative Party has attempted to thwart investigations into the question of the treatment of prisoners in Afghanistan for months.  More and more evidence is appearing implicating various members of our government of, at the very least, unacceptable ignorance of torture.  As this story has grown and evolved, the government has acted all the more guilty, all the more complicit.  Where we once might have accepted a mea culpa, we must now only accept a scalp.  Sadly, not since Brian Mulroney was burned in electoral effigy, via the repulsion of Kim Campbell, has the Canadian electorate taken serious their duty to repudiate a governing party so greatly steeped in political transgression.  It is my worry that when responsible government returns in March and, later, when our current government is forced to stand before voters, the voters will shrug.

Writing at what is, generally, a fairly conservative web site, I fully expect vitriolic responses from Conservatives.  Once, reading about Levi Strauss, I witnessed him described as a conservative, in that what he wanted to conserve is liberal democracy.  It is those conservatives to whom I write.

(As always, you should be reading Scott H. Payne for insight on these matters.)

Mr. Obama’s Afghan Surge: What Do You Think?

As I mentioned, I did not watch Mr. Obama’s speech last night; I did, however, read the speech (which you can find here).  I have a quick post about it at my blog.  Basically, I don’t think Mr. Obama made his case for another surge, and I’m still inclined to think the U.S. should withdraw (though I am open to being dissuaded).

That being said,  I sincerely hope that Mr. Obama is right.  I’d like to see as little death and suffering (in the long run) as possible.  If this proves to be the way to achieve this, then I will be happy to have been proven wrong.

So, what do the readers of ThePolitic think?  Is Mr. Obama’s plan a good one?  Why or why not?

(For a few other interesting takes on the subject, check out Chris Dierkes, Nick Gillespie, Glenn Greenwald and Reihan Salam.)

I’m not Listening to Barack Obama

So the president is on TV to talk about his plans for Afghanistan (plans that had, I thought, already been unveiled).  Well, I’ve had enough.  He has been on prime time television a lot since the inauguration.  I’m interested in his plan, but I don’t feel like listening to another speech.  I think I’ll just read it instead.

Besides, Christmas Vacation is on.

We Demand a Public Inquiry into Torture

ThePolitic‘s favourite Ordinary Gentleman, Scott H. Payne, has decided he’s had enough of just writing about the Afghan torture/Richard Colvin affair.  He doesn’t like what’s going on, and he wants to see a public inquiry into the matter.  Accordingly, he has started an online petition:

Whereas, on November 18 former senior Canadian diplomat to Afghanistan Richard Colvin testified in front a House of Commons committee stating that most if not all Afghans handed over to Afghan authorities by Canadian forces in Afghanistan were subject to torture; and

Whereas, Colvin wrote as many as 17 memos via the appropriate channels attempting to alert the appropriate authorities reaching as far up as one of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s senior security advisers to the likelihood of Canada’s complicity in enabling the torture of Afghans via the appropriate channels of communications that have been heretofore ignored; and

Whereas, despite a long and distinguished career of service to his country, the Harper government has responded to Colvin’s testimony in a dismissive and cavalier fashion and has explicitly questioned Colvin’s credibility instead of addressing his concerns; and

Whereas, the government of Canada has not only failed to adequately address Colvin’s testimony, but has also acted in a questionable and potentially obstructionist manner towards a Military Complaints Commission whose purpose was to address those concerns; and

Whereas, the Canadian government has a history of failing to notify the Red Cross of any prisoner transfers in Afghanistan in a timely fashion; and

Whereas, the use of torture techniques by Afghan authorities in places like Kandahar is understood to be standard operating procedure; and

Whereas, the use of torture techniques on prisoners is morally abhorrent and anathema to the values of Canadian society and government;

Therefore, we the undersigned citizens of Canada demand that the government of Canada submit to and coordinate a full public inquiry into the serious allegations and concerns that have recently come to light around Canada’s involvement in delivering Afghan prisoners into conditions of torture by Afghan authorities.

We’ve had our own little debate about the matter, so I thought I’d let all our readers know in case they wanted to sign the petition.  Normally, I don’t bother with online petitions, but, considering that I decided to stir things up the other day, I thought I would, pace Scott, put my money where my mouth is.  So I signed his petition.

Fantastic News: U.S. War Deserter Allowed to Stay in Canada

It’s not a final decision, but a federal court has ordered the Refugee Board re-consider the case of Skyler James (previously known as Pte. Bethany Smith).  Ms. James is a U.S. war resister, who was to have been deployed to Afghanistan as a mechanic.

I won’t get into all the arguments for allowing Ms. James to remain in Canada (I previously wrote about her case here), but for those of you who have missed this story, Pte. Smith was serving at Fort Collins.  A lesbian, she enlisted via the offensive and illiberal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) policy, and was outed by her fellow soldiers.  Consequently, her life was threatened.

Under DADT, a soldier who is outed is to be granted a discharge.  The U.S. army, needing more bodies for their various wars, decided that could wait until after her tour… after she was shipped to Afghanistan to serve with people who wanted her dead.

Until the United States repeals this sexuality-based caste system, Canada should welcome any deserters who were forced to flee after being outed.  In the meantime, I’m happy Ms. James is safe in my hometown.  I’m proud that my country is protecting her.  It is now up to the Refugee Board to stand up against injustice.

By the way, Kyle at Vogue Republic presents a good argument against DADT here.

Next Page »