One of the first stories I read this morning was this one. Hillier Mum on Abuse.Apologies, but when I read the following, I'm afraid I laughed out loud:
"I haven’t followed it," Mr. Hillier said Friday in Halifax.
"I’m really not even in the mood or the ability to comment upon it, at this point, because I have not followed it in detail."
Really? He's not following a story that could heavily impact on his legacy?
There are a few things to consider here. Immediately following Hillier's testimony, the government, MacKay specifically, went on at length to not only to buy every word of what Hillier said, but to frame everything in terms like, 'decorated war hero' etc., and while I don't question that, it must be noted that often in the same breath he was discrediting Colvin and painting quite a different picture of his character.
It struck me then that Hillier has a hell of a lot to lose if things were not done properly. You'll remember that both he and Gauthier never really answered many of the questions but preferred rather to emphasize their specific duties and how hard it was on the ground.
Both were either directly dismissive of Colvin or inferred that he was in no position to know or understand the realities of the situation in Afghanistan.
To me, that in fact bolstered Colvin's description of these two men in terms of how they were difficult to deal with and did not put much stock in civilian observations.
That Hillier is now saying that he isn't following any of this is ludicrous. His successor came out this week and contradicted not only government claims, but military. Do you seriously believe that Hillier isn't intimately aware of that?
Could it be that he is so arrogant he believes that he'll simply be taken at his word, (previous testimony)? Or could it be that he knows this government has his back because of course that means protecting their own?
I don't know what it means to be honest, but I can say I don't buy it for a second.
This issue is obviously not going away given the vote in the House of Commons last week. I know the government intends to ignore it, as they ignore everything our democracy compels them to do, but I'm certain that no one in the opposition is going to let this go and it could get ugly.
13 comments:
Agreed what issue?
Shoe-gate from three years ago?
Shoe-gate from three years ago?
Is shoe-gate when someone throws his shoes at someone liberals don't like and the cheers would of been even louder if they would of hit the mark?
Did you miss the coalition, they have the smoking gun. A detainee (murdering scumbag) taliban got roughed up with some shoes after being released by our military.
Our military were uneasy about the local police and went to investigate and found him with a bloody nose. (Bam!) Proof!
I don't think he was picking his nose, so it may have been the shoes.
Sheesh if you liberals are going to cry torture and cover up, try to get the story straight.
At least wafergate had a video.
Canadian Senseless, did you conveniently forget that Harper, Layton and Duceppe formed a coalition in 2004. Is that any different then when Dion, Layton and Duceppe did that? if you say yes, your brain is denser then I originally thought. If I were you and the Cons, I would give up on this coalition bit because there is evidence on record for anyone
to read that tells Canadians that
Harper did it first. Dispute that fact if you can. And prove it while you are in denial.
BTW, CS,you said Did you miss the coalition, they have the smoking gun. Obviously you missed it. Denial just doesn't cut it. It happened and the story won't go away either.
Marie,
Personal insults does not change the facts. The coalition is protecting the Harper led government.
If the coalition does not act immediately with their new evidence and remove confidence of this government they must be found complicit in the allegations of war crimes and torture cover up as well.
If I was a regrssive I would be very ashamed if the coalition fail to stand up and protect human right abuses.
Oh yawn, CanadianSense is all over the blogosphere with this coalition crap as if it makes a diddly bit of difference to the issue of the day - the detainees. You know, the usual Con troll talking points of nothing at all.
I wonder if perhaps Hillier's had advice from a lawyer to say nothing and this mum thing is just his way of saying no comment. He has to know what's going on. He went through papers, etc. the prepare when he was questioned in Committee - how stupid does he think people are?
Oh yes...typical RoformaCon trick....see that shiny thing over there? Isn't that right CanadianSense.... How much you being paid to distract from the facts?
KNB - the government line on this is to simply pretend it never happened, and even if it did it is not important (hence con supporters throwing terms like "shoegate" around).
They obviously believe that if they get up in the House and lie, over and over and over again, this is going to go away.
They may be right, but I do not think the media are going to allow this one to go away.
In any event, ever the good soldier, Hillier is touting the party line: This stuff is trivial and beneath his attention.
"If the coalition does not act immediately with their new evidence and remove confidence of this government they must be found complicit in the allegations of war crimes and torture cover up as well."
Ha ha ha
This is the new line from the con supporters. "If it is that bad then force an election!"
It is the weakest of the weak arguments out there right now (and there are a lot of them). The opposition's role is to hold the government accountable. In this case, that means digging to find the truth.
The reason con supporters are demanding an election is because they know an election will prevent the truth from coming out. They prefer it when the media is focused on the opposition, because when it is focused on Harper things do not look so good.
It would be irresponsible in the extreme for the opposition to demand an election every time they disagree with the government. That irresponsibility would be increased here, when we do not even have the full story, thanks to the government's desperate attempt to cover it up.
Anyway, why would anyone take someone who refers to the torture allegations as "shoegate" seriously? CS seems to actually think if he trivializes the allegations people will agree with him.
Don't argue with him - just feel sorry for him.
Gayle,
You can state the allegations are true and than excuse the coalition parties who can stop this government immediately.
The Coalition have enough votes to stop this lawless government over these allegations. It is called accountability and parliamenty democracy.
You have now retreated like most hypocrites on this matter.
Where are your principles and morals don't you care about human rights abuses and the testimony of Colvin?
Shoegate fieldnotes was the smoking gun and Colvin have been supported by another group of retired civil servants.
No guts on your allegations, conviction?
Never mind. I see CS has been schooled over at the Macleans blogs. I suggest we simply refer him to the responses he got there when he tries to peddle this nonsense.
I hope Santa finally gets you that life you've always wanted.
As an aside, try paint thinner for that giant L on your forehead.
Too funny.
Don't blame General Hillier for his reaction.
He is seeing his legacy as a war hero being ripped to tatters and his civilian political ambitions along with it.
His reaction is understandable.
Post a Comment