- Peter MacKay word unreliable - a euphemism for liar - you judge

Excerpt posted to: Ottawa Notebook, Torture weighs on Tories,
Jane Taber, December 10, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/torture-weighs-on-tories/article1395447/ Tab 7

Peter MacKay word unreliable - a euphemism for liar - you judge

Polls shows 61% of Canadians accept Mr. Colvin’s testimony over MacKay's, Harper, Hawn's refutation.

Surprise, Surprise, - not.

This is simply a manifestation of the 33%, or so, diehard supporters of Harper and the Con's, who, obviously, will support them, blindly and no matter what they say or do, to the bitter end. However, this is important to note and everyone in Canada should keep this in mind. One need only look at how Harper, Baird, Van Loan and all the Con's were able to rouse them with their call-to-arms a year ago.

My take on listening to people yesterday was that what Peter MacKay has to say is unreliable, whether that is a euphemism for liar, you judge.

I watched MacKay 'testify' at the Parliamentary Committee yesterday and the most striking thing to me was how closely it resembled the hallmarks of the guilty.

MacKay's viscous attack on Ujjal Dosanjh when he asked a question was totally predictable (see my posts yesterday) and typical of a person who is guilty and everyone knows he is guilty. In open court, very seldom do the guilty breakdown and admit their guilt, but to the jury watching their guilt becomes clear. Harper and MacKay don't want a public Inquiry, what could the reason possibly be.

Mr. Dosanjh accused Mr. MacKay of refusing to recognize that circumstantial evidence is enough, in international law, to stop a country from handing detainees to another, and accused him of thwarting the two ongoing investigations.

"There was substantial knowledge of torture in Afghan jails," Mr. Dosanjh said. "Every kid on the ground knew that. All the reports said that. Sir, you continued to transfer prisoners to torture in the name of Canada."

Mr. MacKay responded with controlled anger.

"I will respond to these outrageous allegations that I or any minister of the government would knowingly participate or collude in sending anyone off to torture. That is an outrageous, false and inflammatory accusation from somebody who has served in government and should know better." Pressure on MacKay cranks up after abuse confirmation, By STEPHEN MAHER Ottawa Bureau, 10 Dec. '09
http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/1156858.html


and,
Liberal defence critic Ujjal Dosanjh went after MacKay hard in the committee, saying "ignorance of facts is no defence and I ask you to step down and relieve yourself of responsibility."

Dosanjh said there was "lots of evidence that there has been substantial risk of torture."

MacKay called Dosanjh's attack an "outrageous, inflammatory, insulting allegation."

http://news.sympatico.ctv.ca/World/ContentPosting?newsitemid=CTVNews%2F20091209%2Fmackay_afghanistan_091209&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&show=False&number=0&showbyline=True&subtitle=&detect=&abc=abc&date=True

MacKay saying that he did not 'willfully', or 'turn an blind eye', allow Canadian troops to transfer Afghan detainees to Afghan authorities to be tortured, is an obviously tactic of the guilty. MacKay is a lawyer, not only that, he was a Crown Attorney (if I recall). He knows all these things and he ought to know that Canadians wouldn't get taken in. Why then, say it. Clearly for his 33% die-hard supporters. The threshold for transferring detainee to torture is far less than that.

The chances of MacKay not knowing this is remote. The chances of MacKay admitting this is remote.


"The jurisprudence from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and, most importantly, a recent decision from the International Criminal Court itself, has ruled that even if it is established that military and civilian commanders did not have actual knowledge, that is no defence to a charge of complicity in a war crime.
The standard that has been established is that persons in command must take all reasonable steps to acquire such knowledge and then to take all further necessary and reasonable steps to prevent the continuation of the war crime or to punish the perpetrators."
Errol Mendes "Ignorance is no defence when the subject is torture, Law puts onus on leaders to make every effort to learn about and prevent war crimes
Errol Mendes was a visiting professional at the International Criminal Court at The Hague this year. His book Peace and Justice at the International Criminal Court, A Court of Last Resort will be published early next year.
25 Nov.'09
http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/730337


Another interesting remark by MacKay - vis."I am proud to have associated myself with the military and the diplomats" [sic]. Sounds like a Freudian slip to me. And compare it to what Gar Pardy, retired Canadian diplomat, had to say the other day "Harper has been going around the world lately wrapping himself in the Canadian flag, but has achieving only to sully it". Clearly a strategy of Harper and MacKay is to identify themselves with the military. But, why. For one, they may be hoping it will save their bacon - keep in mind potential criminal investigations by the International Criminal Courts, not to mention for Canadian criminal laws. Other motives - you tell me.

Lloyd MacIlquham cicblog.com/comments.html

Excerpts Also Submitted to:

Natynczyk in the dark on Afghan prisoner's history, Steven Chase and Campbell Clark, 10 Dec.'09Tab 9

Opposition demands MacKay resign over detainees, CTV.ca News Staff, 10 Dec.'09

submitted: 11:35am, PST, 11 Dec.'09
Most Canadians believe Afghan detainees tortured: poll, December 10, 2009
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/12/09/ekos-poll009.html