- Harper, Hears a Must Read - Rear Admiral Paul Maddison's Report

Submitted: 1:05pm, PDT, 7 May, '10 CBC News
Soldiers confused Afghan detainee policy: board, May 7, 2010, CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/05/07/afghan-detainee-incident-review.html

"Harper was the one who up'ed the action of our troops in Afghanistan to out and out combat when they took over in '06.

Harper had a pressing and urgent obligation to take every step to ensure it was done in a fashion that accorded to International Law. Turning a blind eye, willfully or negligently ignoring, is not only a violation of the sacred trust placed in them when Harper took the Oath of Office, it was foreseeable that it could placed our troops in the the very tenuous position of allegations of violating serious International Laws.

People in Canada can understand with this out and out fighting in Afghanistan things were happening much, much faster and made it more difficult to get a complete handle on, and sympathize for our generals and troops. "
[cicblog: 1 Dec.'09]

This is in line with what Rear Admiral Paul Maddison, president of the inquiry board, has come out and said today.

"I would be very surprised if Canadians, to a person, would not stand up and support our men and women in uniform, if the truth were to be revealed."
[cicblog: 27 Dec.'09, 03 January, 2010, 6 March, 2010, 09 March, 2010, 27 Apr.'10]

And with this report I can't see it any other way.

"There is little doubt that the Canadian people will close ranks and stand behind our soldiers so that they have little fear of prosecution.

However, I am unable to suggest the same for Stephen Harper, Peter MacKay and/or any Con that might be responsible."
[cicblog, 27 Apr.'10]

more to follow

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog

***

Submitted: 1:26pm, PDT, 7 May '10

"For whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee, Stephen.

Harper is renowned as a strategist, so perhaps he has previously prepared position to fall back on. I wonder what that could be.

How many will be surprised if it comes out that there can be found no damning evidence after Harper leaves office."
[cicblog, 17 Apr.'10]



"CBC News asked Natynczyk on Thursday, "Do you have any fears of people poring over those documents?"

Natynczyk responded: 'Not at all, not at all.'

. . .

Another, of course, is that even if representatives of Opposition parties in Parliament are allowed to view un-redacted documents, how can they be sure that nothing has been withheld, nothing has been misplaced or 'lost'. The only way is through the power to call witnesses, examine these witnesses and cross-examine these witnesses conducted by people trained, experienced and skilled in such matters.

For example, we might infer that because none of the 'Three Generals' mentioned when they testified [Parliamentary Committee] on, or about, 8 Dec.'09, that they had no fears of people poring over these documents that they, at that time, must have had such concerns. The fact that they don't now, suggests that whatever it was they had concerns over, no longer gives concerns. The International laws have not changed, domestic laws have not changed, the underlying facts have not changed (based on the belief in the immutability of truth and reality). So, what has changed to cause these concerns to 'disappear', we are left with 'the evidence'. "
[cicblog, 30 Apr.'10]

After listening to Rear Admiral Paul Maddison, president of the inquiry board, report, I will let you judge why a full and open Judicial Inquiry is so necessary because if this issue.

Lloyd MacILquham

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html