Liberal Fundraising letter. Circa 1951

Uncovered from deep within the special archives:

Friend– Please donate now.

Help us uncover the truth. Canada’s reputation as a human rights champion is on the line. Let’s stop this travesty before Canada becomes a place we can’t recognize.

The Korean detainee scandal has the government’s spin machine on overdrive. First they said that the reports of prisoner abuse made last week had no credibility, and now we’ve learned that we have handed over prisoners to the Americans in spite of the fact that their commander, General Douglas MacArthur, was recently relieved of his command for reasons that are still unclear. Could they be related to prisoner abuse? We don't know but we need your help to find out.

With China now in the picture we are into an an entirely new war. Our detainee policy is in shambles and it is undermining Canada’s mission to bring democracy and respect for the rule of law to Korea. We owe it to our troops, our diplomats, and to Canada’s international reputation to find the truth about what happened. In times like these, no one can afford to sit on the political sidelines.

Your contribution of $5, $10 or $40 today will help the Liberal Party uncover the truth. Please give as generously as you are able.

Thank you,

(redacted)
National Director, Liberal Party of Canada

PS. Your donation right now is timely for the Christmas Season. What better gift than to make a donation on behalf of a loved one so we can smear the good reputation of our Canadian Armed Forces.

Some things never change.

From: “Rocco Rossi”
Subject: Help us uncover the truth / Aidez-nous à découvrir la vérité

Le français suit

Friend–

Donate now. Help us uncover the truth. Canada’s reputation as a human rights champion is on the line. Let’s stop Stephen Harper before he makes Canada a place we can’t recognize.

The Afghan detainee scandal has the government’s spin machine on overdrive. First the Conservatives called Richard Colvin, the courageous public servant who testified about prisoner abuse at a parliamentary committee last week, a Taliban “dupe.” Now, we’ve learned that Mr. Colvin copied the Office of the Minister of Foreign Affairs on his warnings, suggesting that those at the highest levels of government were aware of the situation.

It’s textbook US Republican-style attack politics, except this time it’s undermining Canada’s mission to bring democracy and respect for the rule of law to Afghanistan. We owe it to our troops, our diplomats, and to Canada’s international reputation to find the truth about what happened. In times like these, no one can afford to sit on the political sidelines.

Your contribution of $25, $50 or $100 today will help the Liberal Party uncover the truth. Please give as generously as you are able.

Thank you,

Rocco Rossi
National Director, Liberal Party of Canada

PS. Your donation right now is timely for tax reasons, too. Political donations entitle you to a tax credit of up to 75 per cent. That means that the after-tax net cost of your $100 donation will be as little as $25. So please make a donation now and help the Liberal Party uncover the truth.

Thank you Al Gore

Now I don't have to worry about putting money away for my retirement.

From the T-Star

"I know that doesn't make me popular in Alberta, but it's simply a fact. A lot of money is at stake, but a lot of lives and the future of human civilization are also at stake."



Yes Al, a lot of money is at stake here. Yours.

Where is Ignatieff?

Where is Michael Ignatieff? I have not seen a press interview with him for awhile and he was absent from oral questions all of last week where the subject of discussion has been mostly about something that he is very familiar with; torture.


Odd that a guy who said this:



and this:





and wrote stuff like this:

"…torture is not served by collapsing the distinction between coercive interrogation and torture. Both may be repugnant, but repugnance does not make them into the same thing."

"…necessity may require the commission of bad acts…"

"An outright ban on torture and coercive interrogation leave a conscientious security officer with little choice but to disobey the ban."

"…it must be the case that other acts of torture occur because interrogators believe, in good faith, that torture is the only way to extract information in a timely fashion…"

"The argument that torture and coercion do not work is contradicted by the dire frequency with which both practices occur."

And, finally, the epitaph:

"I am willing to get my hands dirty."

"I am willing to get my hands dirty." That much, it seems, is true."

would be absent the very same week where the subject of his expertise comes up. What are the odds of that.



BTW: Ignatieff is also an expert in war crimes ("I was a professor of human rights, and I am also a professor of the laws of war, and what happened in Qana was a war crime, and I should have said that. That's clear.") too, or at least he was ("As I said earlier this week, whether war crimes were or were not committed on the attack on Qana is for international bodies to determine,") before being called on his words.

(To all of those that claim that Ignatieff was sorry for his war crime comments I hope you note that what he said above was not an apology from Ignatieff. Not even close.)

More'Apologizing' from Ignatieff: "I do believe that in this conflict, war crimes were visited on Israeli citizens and were visited on Lebanese civilians," he said. "Whether war crimes were committed in the attack on Qana is for international bodies to determine. That doesn't change the fact that Qana was a terrible tragedy."

Turnabout is fair play. Stephane Dion's wife has some thoughts

Considering how Ignatieff was working behind the scenes long before he seized power from Dion; this could have been much worse.

Janine Krieber from her Facebook Page.

It's been a year and one week since I last wrote on my blog. Ah! "la présidente" is lazy. But we have to take action now.

The Liberal Party is falling apart, and will not recover. Like all liberal parties in Europe, it will become a weakling at the mercy of ephemeral coalitions. By refusing the historic coalition that would have placed it at the helm of the left, it will be punished by history.

Anyway, I became convinced of it the moment that Paul Martin treated Jean Chrétien so cavalierly. The party died at that moment. If the Toronto elites had been more in tune, humble and realist, Stéphane would have been willing to take all the time and absord all the hits needed to rebuild the party. But they couldn't swallow the 26%, and now we are at 23%.

The time for choices is now. I don't want to see the Conservatives continue to change my country. They are, slowly, like any dictatorship, changing the world. Torture doesn't exist, corruption is a fabrication. Do we really have the right leader to discuss these questions? Can someone really write these insanities and lead us to believe that he simply changed his mind? In order to justify violence, he must have engaged in serious thought. Otherwise, it's very dangerous. How can we be sure that he won't change his mind one more time?

The party grassroots had understood all of that, and the average citizen is starting to understand it too. Ignatieff's supporters have not done their homework. They did not read his books, consult his colleagues. They were satisfied that he could be charming at cocktails. Some of them are outraged now. I am hearing: Why did no one say it? We told you loud and clear, you didn't listen.

I am starting a serious reflection. I will not give my voice to a party that will end up in the trashcan of history. I am looking around me, and certain things are attractive. Like a dedicated party that doesn't challenge its leader at every hiccup in the polls. A party where the rule would be the principle of pleasure, and not assassination. A party where work ethic and competence would be respected and where smiles would be real.

Maybe I'm not dreaming.

"La présidente."

A trip down memory lane on torture and Liberal spin.

(Reproduced from the original post April 26, 2007.)



I find the Liberals to be full of nostalgia as of late for a time when they were still in power. For them everything was rosy and much better than it is today, take the Afghan prisoner ruckus that the Liberals and their close friends are trying to milk for all it is worth as an example.

Care to join me in a trip down memory lane......

Does anyone remember this picture?

For those that do not, this picture is of Canada's own JTF 2 in Afghanistan with prisoners that they had taken and was published Jan 2002 (AP / DarioLopez-Mills) .

Please note the date of the photo January 2002. A time where the Liberal led Government of Canada was not even admitting to Canadians that we had troops in Afghanistan; never mind that they were already involved in active combat and were taking prisoners.

When asked in QP about how Canadian Forces would deal with prisoners, PM JeanChrétien said "You are asking me a purely hypothetical question at this time." totally unaware that the event(s) had even happened and having no idea what was going on with prisoners. CBC NEWS SOURCE

The Prime Minister of Canada, Jean Chrétien, the man that sent our troops into war, did not know what our forces were doing on the other side of the world in the name of Canada!

Good times, good times.

A more positive note for the Liberals was that after a few years in Afghanistan, and after numerous prisoners were handed over to the Afghan authorities, the Paul Martin government negotiated a prisoner transfer agreement. Does anyone want to guess why the Liberals negotiated that deal? Could it be that allegations of coercion and torture just did not start in March of last year when the CPC took over, and that this has been an issue from the time Chrétien first showed all that "Liberal compassion" for the Canadian Armed Forces in question period?

That same transfer agreement, which was good enough for the Liberals, remained intact right up until yesterday when the Conservative Government negotiated the right for Canadian authorities to visit all detention facilities to check on prisoners. Why this was not in the agreement in the first place is beyond me, but maybe while those Liberals are going back down memory lane they could ask themselves why they didn't add this clause when they negotiated the deal!

Thanks for the memories, Liberals.

----------------------

On another related point; I am getting tired of Liberals deliberately misleading Canadians on the role of the International Red Cross with Afghan prisoners.

From a Liberal Press release: "...Minister O’Connor told Canadians the Red Cross was responsible for monitoring the treatment of detainees, until the Red Cross came forward to confirm that was not its mandate."

This from the ICRC: "According to its international mandate, the ICRC visits detainees held as a result of armed conflict and other situations of violence being held by the Afghan authorities and forces such as the United States and NATO. Delegates regularly assess the conditions of detention, the treatment of detainees and respect of their fundamental judicial guarantees."

I don't think the truth could be any clearer. The Liberals again are lying for their own political gain and while lying may bring back memories of the good old days for many Liberals, it just goes to show the rest of us that the Liberal good old days should be remembered for what they really were.

---------------------------

Mr.Colvin was in Afghanistan from April 2006 until September 2007*. Compare those dates to what you have read above and ask yourself under whose watch did most of the problems occur and who was it that tried to make the situation better once they found problems.

Then ask why the time line seems to be completely ignored by most of the media in their quest for smear.


*Does anyone have the exact dates?

Update:A must read Interview with an Afghan Warden. ( ht Wilson from the comments)

A Picture says a 1000 words.

Don Newman missed us.

I guess Don Newman misses taking shots at the conservatives on the Braaaaaawdcast.

Take your BP meds and have a read: Stephen Harper and the politics of suspicion.


Your tax dollars at work ladies and gentlemen.

"I agree with this. Big time."

Things were not always so happy in Liberal land.

Warren Kinsella wrote on his blog October 11, 2006. "I agree with this. Big time." (Note: Link is now dead)


And what is "this"?

October 11, 2006

Mr. Michael Ignatieff, M.P.
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6
Dear Mr. Ignatieff:
On behalf of the Canada-Israel Committee, I am writing to express profound concern about your comments over the weekend regarding the recent conflict in Lebanon. In what appears to be very straightforward language, you accused Israel of having committed war crimes in Qa’na – an assertion you explicitly anchored in your expertise in the area of international law and the conduct of war. Notwithstanding attempts by your campaign team to provide a different context for the remarks, we remain troubled by them and what it may suggest about your overall orientation to the Middle East, Israel’s values as a vibrant democracy and the challenges Israel faces from those determined to destroy the Jewish state.
If your intentions were not to accuse Israel of having committed war crimes in Qa’na, we would ask that you issue an immediate clarification – in both official languages – that clearly sets out your view of the issue and unambiguously rejects the suggestion that Israel is guilty of any such conduct. Should you choose to offer such a clarification, we will undertake to circulate it widely within the pro-Israel community. Should you choose not to issue a statement, we would feel obliged to convey that message to our constituency as well.
Sincerely,
Marc Gold, National Chair

-------------

Related: More blasts from the Liberal Past:

Thomas Hubert, Vice President of Communications for the Young Liberal of Canada (B.C.), wrote the following on his blog:

“One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter ... History will remember Hezbollah as an organization that stood up to the most vile ‘nation’ in human history.”

And this from the comment section on another Liberal Blog



BigCityLib had some thoughts on the "monster" within here.


A run down of Liberal MP Borys Wrzesnewskyj quotes can be found here. (Worth reading)

And finally back to Warren again who wrote the following: August 20, 2006 – Why is the author of this blog (deadlink to thelongwalk.ca) a putative supporter of Gerard Kennedy, and claiming to be a member of the Liberal Party of Canada’s executive in BC, writing things like this on Cherniak’s blog?(see photo above) Is anything going to be done about this? If Bill Graham and Denis Coderre have any say in the matter, I doubt it. And people still ask me why I don’t feel comfortable in the Liberal Party of Canada anymore. It’s rather self-evident, I’d say.


and for an added bonus this on

August 22, 2006 - By the by, some folks are asking why Jason and I are now paying attention to the likes of the (for now) anonymous "Big City Lib" and, in Jason's case, Martha's anti-Israel communications guy. It's a fair question.

My grandmother, God rest her eternal soul, had the best view on situations like this one. "Once you've decided to clean out one toilet," said she, "you may as well clean out all the toilets."

Well, she didn't actually say that, but I can see her saying that. And it makes sense, don't it?

Pass the Brillo pads.

August 21, 2006 - Just received this, late, from the Kennedy campaign. Good statement, albeit late. It should have mentioned Hubert, however.

Now - does anyone know who is behind "Big City Lib"? Say this much for Thomas: he at least used his real name when spewing hate. Big City Lib lacks the courage of his convictions, it seems.

***

Those Liberals. One big happy bunch.

Kady O'Malley and flawed logic.

You may already be familiar with the story of Michelle Simson, Liberal MP for Scarborough Southwest, having to apologize for a Twitter she made yesterday regarding Dean Del Mastro. Simson apologized to Mr. Del Mastro before the House, and even though the apology may have been half hearted, it was done and the story should have ended there.

But it didn't.

The CBC's Kady O'Malley wrote a little piece suggesting that perhaps Del Mastro may not be deserving of an apology because of something that he had said in Committee earlier in the day.

Here is some of what O'Malley wrote:

"Okay, so I have to admit that I was momentarily struck speechless when Dean del Mastro got up in the House after Question Period to demand an apology from Liberal MP Michelle Simson over "an entry she posted on twitter" -- a tweet, in other words -- in which, he sorrowfully informed the speaker, she had made hurtful remarks about his weight that, as far as he was concerned, went beyond the bounds of decent parliamentary conduct. With the air of a grievously wounded martyr, del Mastro read the text of the tweet from his BlackBerry, accusing Simson of "discrimination" -- not just against him, but every Canadian whose body shape falls outside the approved Liberal standard, and even suggested that it was this kind of elitism that will keep the party from ever returning to its previous strength." It was a masterful performance, really -- del Masterful, even -- given the fact that it was coming from a member who, just a few hours earlier, had repeatedly refused to withdraw the potentially unparliamentary comments that he made at the very committee meeting to which Simson's tweeting referred; a meeting that, as luck would have it, I was able to witness firsthand, what with liveblogging it and all.

A few points.

It is not up to Kady to judge what is and what is not ''unparliamentary" behavior. That is for the Speaker to decide.

Comparing Del Mastro to "a grievously wounded martyr" does not help your case. Come on Kady, you are better than that.

It is not wise or classy to make fun of the persons name (del Masterful, even) in a story calling out the bad behavior of others.

It is not a good idea to enter into some kind of bizarre relativism exercise in an attempt to equate 2 totally separate statements as if somehow one could possibly cancel out the other, and more so when O'Malley uses the following bit of very flawed logic for the basis of her argument:

"Szabo points out that actually, no Liberal members (or does he mean Members?) were charged with, or convicted of a crime, and invites del Mastro to withdraw; he refuses to do so, repeating, somewhat sulkily, that *he* thinks it was a crime. Does del Mastro understand the meaning of the word "crime"? Because it does technically involve charges, and courts, and convictions."

Really. A crime does not become a crime unless you are caught and charged. Wow! This of course is total bunk and unless you are a attorney for the Province of Ontario in Caledonia would anyone think that a crime is not a crime unless arrests and charges are made.

I think perhaps Kady may have accidentally stumbled upon the main plank of the Liberals election platform.

Fire the police and we can reduce Canada's crime rate to zero!

Do I really need to go on?



FYI you can hear Del Mastro's words here if you are interested. ( he starts at approx 34:25, the crime comment comes at approx 38:30)

Del Mastro was referring of course to Adscam and the FACT that some of the STOLEN money somehow made its way into the hands of some Liberal riding associations in Quebec. There were arrests, there were charges, and there were convictions with Adscam and although I am not a lawyer, the use of stolen money for anything sure appears to be a crime to me as well.


Did Del Mastro cross the line of proper behavior in Committee? I do not know if he did but whether he did or did not should have no bearing at all in justifying the classless Tweet from Michelle Simson, and Kady should know better than to even attempt to do so.