The word from afar -

The word from afar


After tabling his economic update over Siberia, the Prime Minister responds to last night’s House vote from Beijing.

“The government of Canada has taken all necessary actions in all instances where there is proof of abuse of Afghan prisoners,” Harper said. “I think the opposition has nothing to do when it is talking about something that happened three years ago.”


The word from afar

  1. Übermensch have no past.

  2. Tabling economic update over Siberia .. maybe he was inspired by stories of how former Soviet dictators sent their political detractors to labour camps in Siberia?

    Or maybe he just wants to provide fresh material for Feschuk?

  3. DoublePlusGood performance from our PM. Word from the Ministry of Truth is that Vaccine rations are up 20% this week!

  4. *note, talking about the past does not apply when minions slam previous Liberal governments.

  5. Boy, that sounds terribly close to admitting Colvin was right.

  6. Maybe, at this point, he's just baiting you into continuing the off-putting, credibility-sapping hyperbole.

  7. Wait a minute. Didn't Peter MacKay say there's never been a proven allegation of abuse against an Afghan prisoner transfered by Canadian Forces?

    Doesn't this complete contradict that?

    • Exactly!!

      Another to add to Well's bucket list…"that was three years ago: move along folks"

  8. Next time he addresses this mess i'm betting he's wearing a cirque de soleil funny nose and floating in a space shuttle, not wearing the safety space diaper…

  9. Just for the record, I don't think there's some hidden case of quote-unquote "proven" abuse out there that Harper & Company are specifically covering up.

    I think there was plenty of proof that torture was routine in Afghan prisons, there were no special protections in place to ensure it didn't happen to people we detained, there were no investigations of alleged torture and the Conservatives basically decided to wait until a proven case of torture walk right through the door (reported by Nicolas Gosselin below) before doing anything about it.

    Now they're just playing a semantic game about what constitutes "proof" and they're parsing the language so finely that they're having a tough time keeping their stories straight.

  10. “I think the opposition has nothing to do when it is talking about something that happened three years ago.”

    Wasn't the Gomery Commission started 4 years after the Sponsorship Program was suspended? Even Sheila Frasier's investigation didn't actually begin until over 4 years after the first alarm bells were raised, and her initial report came out over 3 years after the program had been suspended .

  11. Politically, rejecting an inquiry makes all kinds of sense for the Tories.

    The "closed and unaccountable" Liberals called in Gomery, and look where they ended up. Our new "open and accountable" government knows enough to dodge certain combinations of words, like "public" and "inquiry".

  12. So, if a guy rapes and beats a woman and it happened three years ago we shouldn't deal with it?

    So, he said something that happened three years ago – is he admitting he's hiding something?

  13. Are members of the armed forces supposed to salute the Prime Minister?

  14. Absolutely right. Just as the Sponsorship Inquiry a just and deserved inquiry 4 years after the fact, so too is an inquiry into the Afghan detainee issue. It is not a matter of tit-for-tat or what's fair for one in fair for the other. It is, simply, what must be done in these kind of instances. We have an absolute right to know if our current government aided and abetted the torture of human beings via their willful ignorance to ignore the import of the facts on the ground!

  15. Yes, but only with contempt in their hearts!

  16. Meh.. no news here folks. Remember:

    Harper's Issue Resolution Stages
    Stage 1: Deny it's news.
    Stage 2: If it's still making headlines, deny that any judgement can be made until we get more information.
    Stage 3: If it's still making headlines once more infomation comes out, call it old news and deny that we should be bothering with it.
    Stage 4: If it's still making headlines, begin legal proceedings against some aspect of it and deny that comment can be made on any aspect while the case is before the courts.

  17. Reading Ibbitson's piece, and then the comments below, is a delight.

    To be fair, he did use the word "insouciant" and talk about sipping Chardonnay, so he kind of deserves it.