When dealing with The Chickenwankers, that collection of "Progressive" bloggers who lacks the courage to decide for themselves who may or may not comment on their blogs, one can expect one thing above all others:
The intellectual dishonesty and cowardice of The Chickenwankers truly knows no bounds.
A typical case in point is Sister Sage's Musings proprietor CK. In a recent post there, she decides that the CBC is afflicted with "Liberal derangement syndrome" for reporting on the most recent development in the allegations regarding the torture of Afghan detainees:
"It never seems to stop. This time, it appears that the CBC is now afflicted with LDS. It is now helping the Harpercons do that whole 'blame the Libruls' thang back in order to deflect and distract. Yikes!"Apparently, in the mind of CK, the role of the CBC isn't to report the news -- not by a long shot. Rather, CK seems to think that the role of the CBC is to suppress any story that doesn't directly benefit her ideological agenda.
And it would now seem that the CBC is off the reservation.
For those not in the know, it turns out that Liberal party received even more warnings about the potential torture of Afghan detainees than a recently re-revealed story in La Presse indicated.
Recently, Eileen Olexiuk, who was the second-in-command of the Canadian embassy in Kabul, recently reported that she warned the Paul Martin government on many occasions that torture was common in Afghan prisons.
Her warnings went unheeded.
"I don't think anybody really cared, quite frankly," she said.
The Martin government had apparently considered establishing a Canadian detention centre in Afghanistan, or handing detainees over to US Forces to be held in their facilities. Both options were rejected out of fear of a Guantanamo Bay-esque scandal.
Instead, the Liberals ignored the warnings regarding torture, and negotiated a prisoner transfer agreement with the government of Afghanistan that did not allow Canadian forces sufficient monitoring powers over detainees transferred -- an oversight that the Stephen Harper government has since corrected.
An apologist for anything left-wing no less esteemed than fellow Chickenwanker John Baglow insists that if the Liberal Party is guilty of anything, it's of signing a flawed PTA.
Baglow previously insisted that the obvious Liberal complicity in torture be discounted out of "Canadian fairness". "Canadian fairness" apparently doesn't apply to the governments that actually fix the problems left behind by their predecessors.
CK goes on to insist that the Liberal Party isn't very troubled by the notion that their complicitly would -- or, rather, already has -- come to light. Admittedly, Ujjal Dosanjh certainly doesn't seem worried.
"We want to be transparent, and learn what mistakes were made, and who knew what and what was hidden from the public, either by the Liberal government or the current Conservative government," Dosanjh insisted.
Of course, Dosanjh has every reason to be confident. His party has been doing everything it can to make an issue out of the highly-questionable Richard Colvin allegations for months, all while the media declined to report on the pre-2006 timeline.
All but overheard in Liberal Party circles was "seriously, do you believe this? Do you fucking believe this? It's a matter of public record that our government negotiated and signed the PTA under which the torture took place, and the media isn't saying 'boo'. We get to tar the Conservatives for our supreme fuck up! Do you believe this? It's too good to be true!"
If CK and John Baglow are guilty of anything, it's of two things.
The first is trying to sell something that was too good to be true. They both knew, just like any Canadians who have paid even passing attention to this story, that the Liberal Party made the torture of detainees transferred by Canadian forces possible in the first place.
The second, clearly, is an act of historical revisionism. They are just as guilty as anyone else for the phenomenon of the orphan timeline, a bizarre rhetorical approach to the matter that has attempted to omit the entire pre-2006 timeline and the entire post-2007 timeline from the public discourse.
Having invested so much time and energy in peddling a derangement syndrome to anyone foolish enough to listen to them, they simply cannot bring themselves to admit that if the Conservative government is guilty of anything it's of not taking torture allegations seriously enough. The Liberal Party is clearly guilty of the same.
Considering the well-known Al Qaida/Taliban tendency to falsely claim torture, it would be hard to blame either.
The difference between the two, of course, is that the Conservative Party didn't sign a fatally flawed Prisoner Transfer Agreement despite having been warned.
The Liberals did.
CK and John Baglow may consider themselves free to desperately try and spin that.
Oh Brother! We're still obscessed aren't we? Keep in mind, that the Liberals did vote in favor or an investigation. Harper continues to hide evertything. Since you think you're so smart, why don't you explain that one? If Harper has absolutely no complicity in this, then logic would dictate that he not only does have nothing to hide but also he should be seizing this opportunity to further decimate the liberals.
ReplyDeleteSpare the national security B.S., if there's nothing in the file.
Funny how the CBC would publish this now, when Steve has nowhere left to go and no one left to blame.
Nah, if he was soooo innocent in all this, he should practise what he preached at his election campaigns of having accountable gov't and allow the investigation to go on, but none of you seem to be interested in accountable government, are you?
Perhaps it's also time for you to be truthful, like your other neo-con friends. Just admit that Muslims don't count and that the torture must go on...we all know that's what you're thinking.
Oh brother, indeed.
ReplyDeleteThe facts speak for themselves. The Liberals were warned numerous times prior to negotiating and signing the PTA about the prevalence of torture in Afghan prisons, and still negotiated and signed a document that helped facilitate the torture of Afghan detainees transferred by Canadian forces.
Precisely what do you think the CBC should have done with this particular story, CK? Do you think the CBC has some kind of duty to help the Liberal Party conceal its direct complicity in that torture?
That's what this whole thing boils down to. You're wailing about the fact that the CBC would publish a story that puts Canadians back in touch with that pre-2006 timeline. And it certainly took them long enough.
Considering that it took them so long, the Liberal Party couldn't help but be confident enough to hold such an inquiry, knowing that getting the media to publish anything about that pre-2006 timeline has been like pulling teeth.
And when they finally do, just look at the reaction they get. They get lil' ol' CK, pretty much suggesting that stories about the warnings the Liberals got before they signed tha agreement that facilitated the torture in the first place basically shouldn't be published.
It seems to anyone who isn't a lunatic that this entire story looks very different once that pre-2006 timeline is included, and it seems to me that that is what you really resent.
And speaking of things you resent, do you find it funny that I allow you to comment here, while you continue to wet your pants at the idea of having to engage dissenting views at your own blog?
Maybe that's too deep a thought for a Chickenwankers back-up singer.