Stockwell Day : Resign

Stockwell Day, from Hansard April 26, 2007:
" I can tell the House that for a considerable period of time now, our own Correctional Service Canada has had corrections officers working in Kandahar. As a matter of fact, I talked with one of them two days ago. Fifteen times already she has had access to the prison facility in Kandahar. She has full access. She also made a visit yesterday to the detention facility."
Stockwell Day again, April 27, 2007 :
"They are there to support the Afghan officers by training them in the work that they do in the prisons and also to ensure, to see if there are cases of torture."

Afghan Ambassador Omar Samad, in the Nat Post April 28, 2007:
"Afghanistan's ambassador to Canada says no Canadians, including corrections officers, have monitored treatment of prisoners turned over by Canadian military forces.
Samad contradicted assertions by Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day that Corrections Canada officers have been monitoring prisoner treatment - an assertion Day repeated in the Commons Friday, saying they are there "to see if there are cases of torture."
Samad said Corrections Canada officers have for many months, under their mandate to help build Afghan police capacity, had access to some prisons in Afghanistan and may have come across prisoners.
"It doesn't mean those were detention centres of people who were arrested by Canadian forces," Samad said.
"From the Afghan point of view, it's clear there was no followup or monitoring of detainees caught by Canadian forces turned over to Afghans, especially to the NDS (National Directorate of Security) that took place prior to this current time."

So. Strike three, assclown.
Not the Red Cross. Not the Afghan International Human Rights Commission. And now not the Corrections Canada people either.

The Afghan ambassador has called for "an end to this political circus".
Time to send this bunch of lying assclowns home.

Dave already explained all this last Friday but it's still good to hear it from the Afghan ambassador in NaPo.

Steve and Sandra's blackouts

As Stockwell Day put it in the House this week, who are you gonna believe about the torture of detainees - the official government of Canada or allegations made by prisoners?

And Loiuse Arbor of the UN. And the US State Dept. And the Afghan International Human Rights Commission.

And Amnesty International. Oh, and a 2006 report from the Canadian Foreign Affairs Department.

Link.

All your water are belong to us #2

Go read the post below this one first. Go on - I'll wait.
OK - Update :

Northumberland Local News April 27 2007 :
Canada has "no intentions" of entering into bulk water export negotiations, the Hon. Peter MacKay said Thursday in Ottawa Thursday. Canada's government is not participating at today's North American Future 2025 Project roundtable in Calgary, nor is Canada providing any funding for the meeting, a statement by Northumberland-Quinte West MP Rick Norlock says.

"On the issue of bulk water export, the government has no intention of entering into any negotiations behind closed doors, or otherwise, regarding the matter of bulk water exports," Mr. MacKay is quoted as saying.
"Suggesting we would even discuss bulk water exports is totally false," Mr. Norlock said. "Canada's government is committed to protecting water in its natural state and to preserving the integrity of ecosystems, and will continue to do so."

Ok, good. That's pretty unequivocable, wouldn't you say?
So then why does Page 2 of the North American Future 2025 Project read :

"Each of the roundtables will convene a combination of practitioners (from each respective administration and legislature); stakeholders (from the private sector and conceivably even labor unions); and highly specialized academics and analysts from Canada, the United States, and Mexico."
and
"The North American Future 2025 project will also examine relevant future-looking work dealing with each of the six topics on which the three governments have agreed -- namely labor mobility, energy, the environment, security, competitiveness, and border infrastructure and logistics.
The final deliverable will be a report on options and policy recommendations on the future of North American integration that will be presented in September 2007 to the executive and legislative branches of the three governments of North America."
and
"The CSIS North American Project will convene pertinent government officials from Canada, the United States, and Mexico, along with selected nongovernmental experts....."

And so on for another 20 pages.
Here's Page 16 :

"Project Timeline - July 1, 2006 - Sept 30, 2007
Planning Phase - July 2006 - January 2007
~ Meet with U.S., Canadian, and Mexican government officials to identify government participants for each of the roundtable meetings."

There are seven such roundtables listed, with #6 and #7 being yesterday and today.

So what did Mr MacKay mean when he said that no Canadian government officials were at today's meetings?
What about all the other days?
Are any Canadian government officials going to be at this one in July?

Page 17 : "Review Phase - June 12, 2007 - July 17, 2007
~ July 2 - July 8 : Review of edited report by U.S., Mexican, and Canadian governments."

Because even if Mr MacKay is adamant about not selling off and/or diverting Canadian water to the States, if Canadian government officials are participants in this, there's enough else damning information in the North American Future 2050 Program, that I'd still be worried.
Go read the damn thing for yourself.
Take special note of the C.V.s of the U.S. participants, and the Canadian too, at the end.

I'm going for a nap now but I'll be back.
And if anyone hears anything in the meantime, let me know.

UPDATE : And I got nothin' - yet.
Although it is interesting, as noted in comments, that although the Conference Board of Canada have criticized the idea of bulk water exports in the past and have stated that their participation and logo on the North American Future 2025 Project does not signify compliance with all NAF2025Project's opinions, the Conference Board was an architect and booster of that other great SPP initiative : TILMA

All your water are belong to us

"It's no secret that the U.S. is going to need water. ...

It's no secret that Canada is going to have an overabundance of water.
At the end of the day, there may have to be arrangements."

So says Armand Peschard-Sverdrup, director of the North American Future 2025 Project, which is wrapping up its closed-door two-day conference in Calgary today.

NAF2025 Project is the trilateral spawn of the US thinktank Center for Strategic and International Studies, the Conference Board of Canada, and CIDE, a Mexican policy institute.

Its mandate is implementing the Security and Prosperity Partnership, the deep integration deal signed by Bush, Fox, and Martin in 2005 and further expanded by Bush, Fox, and Harper in 2006.

From an outline of the conference :

"the overriding future goal of North America is to achieve joint optimum utilization of the available water."

Not bad.

'All your water are belong to us' would have been catchier.

Still, the message is unmistakable, isn't it?

From the World Business Council For Sustainable Development :

"North American Future 2025 Project - an effort to draft a blueprint for economic integration of the continent."

"On a world scale, Canadians enjoy an overabundance of freshwater that is out of proportion to the national population, when compared with other countries.

With the impacts of climate change a present reality as well as a future certainty, Canada will be increasingly pressured to bolster North America's freshwater supplies. The policy, business, and social responses to this issue will be vital to ensuring the prosperity and environmental integrity of the entire continent.

There are many legal and international trade issues involved, and the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the World Trade Organization's General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) could possibly be used as the basis for a challenge to Canada's right to control water exports. That challenge rests largely on the definition of water as either a ‘vital resource' or a 'commodity."

Amazingly, Canada has no enforceable water policy.

"Maude Barlow, National chair of the Council of Canadians, points out in a statement that provincial accords to prevent exports are voluntary, and that the only existing prohibition on bulk water exports contained in the 1909 International Boundary Waters Treaty Act (IBWTA) only applies to waters that are shared with the U.S., and not on water from Canada's North."

What Canada does have however is the Conference Board of Canada working away at deep integration.

Maude Barlow : “The big business community and corporate lobby groups have been granted executive level access to the integration process. No equivalent role has been granted to labour groups, civil society or even Parliament in Canada.”

NDP MP Peter Julian intends to change all that when he brings the SPP issue to committee for its very first parliamentary debate :

Julian : "Canada stands to lose millions of litres of fresh water as a result of bulk water exports if the Conservatives enact proposals being discussed later this week in a closed-door meeting in Calgary.

Today NDP MPs stood on the steps of Parliament Hill and called for a full parliamentary debate on the issue of the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) - before the government implements this deep integration with the U.S. any further." continued ...

Unlike the notorious secret Banff meeting, and the one that followed it, this time at least there is some media coverage.

Thank you, Peter Julian, for bringing this to open public debate.

It's a start.

Fixed : Link to Peter Julian's press release

Link to North American Future 2025 Project pdf

"When the Germans bombed Pearl Harbour..."

Hard to pick my favourite quote so far from the televized HoC debate on the NDP motion to quit counter-insurgency efforts in Afghanistan.

Richard Harris (Con. Cariboo-Prince George) called the NDP "a band of Taliban cheerleaders" and asked "Wouldn't the Taliban just love the NDP motion?"

So that was pretty good but it really only rates a third.

Second place so far goes to Myron Thompson (Con. Wild Rose AB), you know - the guy who once stated "Let's lower it to ten" when discussing the age at which juveniles should be tried in adult court.

Rising to his feet and doing his usual excellent impersonation of George Bush, he intoned "Don't ever forget November 11"...uh, tiny uncertain pause there... but then he ploughed ahead confidently just like he was John Belushi in Animal House..." when the Taliban....AlQaeda attacked us. They are evil!"

Oops, sorry, all out of time and he got his mike cut.

First place is a tie. Stockwell Day and Harper have given up on the story about the Red Cross looking out for Afghan detainees and they have even given up on the one about the Afghan International Human Rights Commission looking after detainees. Know who is the newest group who has always been looking out for detainees now? Canadian Corrections. That's right.
Stockboy stated how proud he was the day he sent both of them off to Afghanistan "some time ago" and how he had talked to one of them just today and she had confirmed that she had been into the detention centers 15 times already!
Duceppe, Goodale, Dion, Ignatieff and Layton all called bullshit and demanded to see paper on it, so Secretary of State Helena Guergis promised to try to get some kind of formal agreement thingy from Foreign Affairs.

TOGA! TOGA! TOGA!

Libs : You're soaking in it now

Now that we've dispensed with the Liberal motion for business as usual in Afghanistan till 2009 with options for extending our US-proxy role into other parts of Afghanistan :

See : The Galloping Beaver : The Afghanistan Motion - Putting the NDP between a rock and a hard place

today we'll see something in the way of actual opposition to staying the course:

The wrong mission in 2009 is the wrong mission in 2007: NDP
NDP tables opposition motion for safe and immediate withdrawal from Afghan combat role
OTTAWA – The NDP tabled a motion today to put an end to the counter-insurgency Afghanistan mission that the Liberals, Conservatives and Bloc Québécois want to last until 2009.
“The NDP motion, to be debated Thursday and voted on Monday, calls for an immediate safe and secure withdrawal of our troops from the counter-insurgency mission and to focus our assistance, not through counter-insurgency but through development and aid,” said NDP leader Jack Layton.
“Both Liberals and Conservatives admit that the conflict in Afghanistan won’t be won militarily. We believe that two more years of participating in the wrong mission for Canada is two years too long.”

Something along the lines of a debate would be nice if all of you can fit it in in between shouting slogans at each other.

Email from Jack Layton

to Rambling Socialist

Thank for your previous email about Canada's involvement in Afghanistan.

First, I want to say that I share the deep sadness of all Canadians on theloss of our Canadian soldiers who bravely answered the call of duty. It is agrim reminder of the courage of our nation's fine soldiers and the dangers they face on a daily basis.

This week the Liberal Party proposed a motion that would effectively keep Canadian troops in combat until February 2009.
The NDP opposes this motion.Why? Because it prolongs a George Bush style combat mission in Afghanistan.
Under Stephane Dion`s leadership, the Liberals continue to flip-flop and fail to understand fully the critical issues facing the war-torn country of Afghanistan. A year ago the Liberals were divided on a vote to extend the mission. Liberal deputy leader Michael Ignatieff voted for the Harper government's decision to extend the mission to 2009 while their Defence critic Denis Coderre voted against it.
Now, with their own motion, the Liberals are - endorsing the two year extension - of the mission and the Conservative's game plan for Afghanistan.

In contrast, the NDP position on the combat mission in Afghanistan is crystal clear. We have consistently called for the withdrawal of troops from the combat mission. It is a Bush style counter-insurgency mission not leading to lasting peace and better living conditions. It is unbalanced and overwhelmingly focused on aggressive counter-insurgency. The humanitarian situation is simply not improving and the effort cannot be won militarily.

In an effort to try to find common ground, I proposed an amendment to the Liberal motion. The amendment called on the government to immediately begin to withdraw Canadian Forces in a safe and secure manner from the counter-insurgency mission in Afghanistan and call upon the government to notify NATO of this decision. Sadly, the Liberals rejected my amendment and instead choose to continue to support the Harper Conservative strategy to stay in southern Afghanistan for two more years.
New Democrats feel that Canada must demonstrate leadership and try to find practical solutions. For more information on how Canada can provide leadership, please read the full text of a recent speech I gave on this very issue at: http://www.ndp.ca/page/5023.
Once again, I thank you for the opportunity to present the New Democratic Party's position on the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan.

Sincerely,
Jack Layton, MP (Toronto-Danforth)

Stockwell Day : Contracting out counterterrorism

NaPo : Private sector could help boost security at home, abroad : Day

"Canada is considering greater use of public-private partnerships to help bolster security both in Afghanistan and here at home, Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day told a counterterrorism conference Tuesday.
Already Canadian troops in Afghanistan are housed at the Kandahar Airfield base run by Kellogg, Brown and Root, a subsidiary of Halliburton, the company U.S. Vice-President Dick Cheney used to run.
Halliburton has been awarded close to US$10-billion in contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq."

Jesus Christ, NaPo.

First - Kellogg, Brown, and Root is no longer a subsidiary of Halliburton.
Houston Chronicle April 5, 2007 : KBR is officially out on its own
"Oil-field-services giant Halliburton Co. said Thursday it had finally broken ties with KBR, its contracting, engineering and construction unit, which had been a part of the company for 44 years."

But what matters is why :
"The company announced its plans in January 2005 to cut ties with KBR, the largest U.S. contractor in Iraq. The unit had been a drag on Halliburton's earnings and image."

Repeat - The largest US contractor in Iraq, a drag on Halliburton's earnings.
Yeah, let's give them a contract with our government then.

Second - Halliburton's contracts in Iraq are now way over US$10-billion.
Possibly you are thinking of the $8.8 billion that went missing altogether for the reconstruction of Iraq, $1.5 billion of which went to Halliburton.
Or maybe the $110 million that KBR were awarded to build that huge US embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan.
Or the up to $500 million they were awarded as part of their contract with the US Navy to clean up after Hurricane Katrina.
Or however much they saved for serving tainted food and contaminated water to US troops in Iraq.

Third - How dare you blithely toss a little boost for these incompetant war profiteers into an article in which not even Day has the gall to mention them.
Unless of course you just neglected to mention that part.
.

Resign now : Hillier and O'Connor

G&M : From Canadian custody into cruel hands
"Afghans detained by Canadian soldiers and sent to Kandahar's notorious jails say they were beaten, whipped, starved, frozen, choked and subjected to electric shocks during interrogation.
In 30 face-to-face interviews with men recently captured in Kandahar province, a Globe and Mail investigation has uncovered a litany of gruesome stories and a clear pattern of abuse by the Afghan authorities who work closely with Canadian troops, despite Canada's assurances that the rights of detainees are protected."

G&M : Calls for Defence Minister ouster over Afghani detainees
"Canada's opposition parties were demanding changes to the Afghanistan detainee transfer agreement and calling for the Defence Minister's resignation following accounts of gruesome torture of prisoners in Kandahar.
NDP Leader Jack Layton said the transfer of prisoners to Afghan authorities should stop immediately, a public inquiry be launched and Mr. O'Connor be sacked. He was backed up by all opposition parties."

UBC Int. Law Prof. Michael Byers : “If this report is accurate, Canadians have engaged in war crimes, not only individually but also as a matter of policy.”

OK, we've been playing at being the "good Germans" for well over a year now, in the face of all and any evidence from groups like the Afghan International Human Rights Commission, to whom we have entrusted the safety of detainees captured by our troops, and the Revolutionary Afghan Womens Association.
Is there any meaningful difference between U.S. and Canadian foreign policy as regards the rights of brown peoples?
Anybody feel up to doing a little "standing on guard for thee" today?

Make your voice heard - CBC, the Globe and Mail, your MP, your favourite Afghan war apologist.
Just do it right now. Because this absolutely will not stop until we make it stop.

Then go read Dana.
.

Clean up your Act

Clean Internet Act?
So gun control is bad but internet control is good?

Dear Joy: One word - Proxies
Now I realize you don't use one, because the Ministry of Trade's IP address is right there on my stats page yesterday, but I'm pretty sure the bad guys do.
For a clue about what a completely dumbass bill this is, please see all your own gnugov's reasons for not supporting gun control.
Here, I'll start you off :
~It won't prevent the crimes nor catch the perps it is aimed at.
~Unnecessary government meddling in citizens' lives with option for government abuse.
~Legally dubious, difficult to enforce and too expensive to implement.
~The criminal code already covers this.
~Casts so large a net it will penalize/annoy the innocent.

Really looking forward to your Clean Movies Act though, Joy.
And may I also suggest a Clean Libraries Act?

H/T Michael Geist