It’s easy to sit behind a keyboard in the security of my Saskatoon office and clack out opinion on the Afghan conflict. My chances of being killed by a Taliban barbarian are zero. I imagine that Jack Layton’s chances of being killed by a Taliban thug are pretty slim too, even slimmer than mine likely, given that he’s now made himself the Taliban’s greatest Canadian asset. There are those, however, who do have opinions on the conflict, but who don’t have the luxury of opining from a safe distance. They are the men and women doing the dirty work of nation building in Kandahar. It is, therefore, their own words and views that carry a lot, if not the most, weight. Anyone with family “over there”, or with access to friends in the Canadian forces, knows that the support for the mission among the troops is incredibly high and virtually unanimous. Canadian forces believe in what they are doing.
Here’s a tip I learned a long time ago about smoking out liars and fakes who feign concern for others:
You can’t claim to support anyone, if you don’t consider that person’s viewpoints, perspectives, and opinions.
Now ask yourself; how much consideration does Jack Layton or any one of his thousands of likeminded socialist utopians ever give the troops. The same can be asked of American socialists, who are clamoring that they “support” the troops. The answer, without hardly having to think, is that socialists give no credence to the viewpoints expressed by soldiers. In fact, beneath the smug “support” they claim to give, is an almost palpable loathing of all things military.
The long and short of it is; no matter who you are dealing with and no matter their opinion on Afghanistan and Iraq, if they claim that they support the troops, test them. If they do not consider and include the feelings and opinions of the troops, then you are dealing with a phony… a liar… and you might as well call them as much. Note, they don’t have to support the mission, but in their rationalizing, they must consider the views of those doing the fighting and dieing if they claim to "support the troops." Do not stand for anyone telling you they support the troops if they do not give a damn about the thoughts of those very same troops. As far as I’m concerned, why even bother having a “debate” with pretenders.
At MediaRight.ca (Sept. 20th) we’ve got a vicious opinion piece by one of Canada’s greatest troop supporters, Christie Blatchford. Check us out for daily news and opinion on Afghanistan… including a lot of contrary opinion. We try to fit in news and opinion from our NATO allies, because the view in Europe is definitely not like the view in Canada. It’s good to know how strong or weak your friends are.
Softwood: ""I think this is a file that Harper and Emerson have been able to turn into a winner," said Reid." [the pollster]
This "file" is a winner for Canada. ...-
An exellent read: Canadians should be outraged by the recent remarks that have come out of the NDP & their leader(Taliban Jack), calling our Men & Women of the Armed Forces Terrorist.
When you join up you know that Canada is a NATO member & that you will most likely will be posted to a zone where there has been or is in strife.
These men & women wear the uniform with pride & even more when they are in a strange country & the locals reconize the red maple leaf on it.
Take for example the Dutch, They will never forget what Canadians did to free them from oppression. To this day they open there homes to Canadian's, the school children maintain Canadian war graves by keeping flowers on them. The respect that is given around the world to our forces current & past makes me proud to say Iam a Canadian & i will always show respect to our greatest ambasadors.
More then i can say for the NDP!!
EXCELLENT, but marred by this obviously unsupportable claim which any hard leftie would hone in on like a heat-seeking missile to discredit you.
"Considering that the Canadian HQ in Kandahar has a higher average IQ than your standard college faculty, … or any political caucus for that matter, wouldn’t the opinion of the men and women serving count for something. Not considering what the troops “think”, shows contempt, arrogance, and an elitism that should sicken every true social democrat."
And in typical fashion, prove the point in the process.
Find the term: "apply lethal force".
Translation: As to what this means in Afghanistan, it becomes, Kill the Taliban. ...-
Prime Minister questioned over comments | September 20th, 2006
Ottawa – Opposition members are demanding that Prime Minister Stephen Harper explain what he meant when he said during a television interview that the lives lost in Afghanistan may have strengthened the Canadian military.
“This is the first time in some time that Canada’s moved to the front lines of a peace-and-security operation, and I think it’s really sinking into us all how difficult that is and what that really means,” Mr. Harper said during an interview with CBC televised Monday night.
“At the same time, I can tell you it’s certainly engaged our military. It’s, I think, making them a better military, notwithstanding, or maybe in some way because of, the casualties.”
Liberal defence critic Ujjal Dosanjh and NDP defence critic Dawn Black rose in Question Period yesterday to ask the Prime Minister to clarify his statements.
“These remarks are disturbing and I really cannot believe that is what the Prime Minister intended,” Ms. Black told the House.
Mr. Harper chose not to explain himself in the House. But Carolyn Stewart-Olsen, a spokeswoman for the Prime Minister, said she thought the remarks were clear. The military gets stronger when casualties occur, she said, because it means more money is put into equipment and recruiting.
[Jack's Newswatch says:] Note: The “cut and run crowd” are up to their usual tricks. I’ll add something because I’ve worn my countries uniform through the “bad times” and experienced first hand the damage done to our military as this bunch did everything in their power to take away our pride in what we stood for. I was there when Paul Hellyer integrated the Armed Forces. I was “there” for many years afterward as one government after another whittled away our equipment and our moral. It was a disgusting experience for me personally and I finally got the message that I wasn’t wanted and left.
That no longer is true and it has happened in the past 8 months or so. Soldiers are now proud to be soldiers again because they are doing what they have been trained to do, which (for the uninformed) is to apply lethal force on behalf of their government wherever it may be needed.
That includes here — in Canada — now, if need be and that gives Al Qada reason to “think twice”.
Finally, our soldiers are getting the recognition they deserve and the morons like Jack Layton and Ujjal Dosanjh look more and more like the creeps they really are.
I applaud the change and I look for it to continue.
I also note that these people who oppose the idea of our soldiers being anything more than boyscouts with pea shooters call themselves the “Official Opposition”.
“Some opposition!”
A very poor joke on the Canadian public would be a much better description. ...-
Jack's Newswatch
Anyone familiar, at all, with the aptitude standards required by the Canadian Armed forces for entry, least of all graduation, from Military college and NCO standards, would know immediately that HQ's are staffed with incredibly bright people. Your HQ, in any NATO force, is a who's who of university grads of the highest order... most people simply can't cut the intellectual, least of all, the physical demands.
Anyone familiar with the gender equality practiced by the Canadian Armed forces, and the inviting attitude to Canadians of all races, would know that Canada's CO staff are an incredibly mixed group, especially in gender.
As far as NCO's, especially in the combat arms, the standards for progress become increasingly more rigid with each stage... it is basically a merit system based on competance both intellectually and physically. Most people, average people, just couldn't cut it.
The point is, the people whose opinion you'd be asking are not stupid... so for Pete's Sake... give their opinion a consideration. Canada's military personnel are not generally dead enders and bar-room brawlers; those days are gone.
It is too bad more journalists worthy of the name do not take the idiotic to task in this country more often.
Hats off to Christie. A well deserved thwap to Jack...that bit about Jack and Olivia arriving on Parliament Hill on their bikes was priceless.
I really doubt that Jack bin Layton would apologize to the families of those soldiers killed this past Monday. Apparently Jack's soon to be friends the Taliban were well aware of Canadian politics and timing. The death of these 4 great Canadians seem to have been orchestrated to influence Canadian opinion
at the opening of parliament. All because Jack wanted to make sure that he got a few extra votes from Canadian moslems. Canadians should be outraged and demand his resignation from parliament. He may not have held the gun but he certainly helped aim it.
If anyone still has it, watch the tape of the "take note debate" in parliament on the Afghanistan mission.Watch the reaction by Olivia chow ,heard in the background as a retort or guffah in response to the female MP's assertion that the Taliban are watching.Chow mocks her.."the Taliban are watching.."
It is quite audible...the perfect response from the duplicitous NDP who practise the soft racism of the left.Too brown and too simple,victims of the war mongering imperial west.
In fact,as shown recently,the Taliban do listen and do watch. They timed the death of the soldiers to coincide with the opening of parliament.They may be third world in dress, but their outlook is certainly 21st century insofar as their propaganda and media savvy.
I consider the NDP and Jack! Layton (et al) to be morally responsible for the deaths of our troops overseas.They have now crossed the threshold of dissent to aiding and abetting the enemy.The enemy sees that this man has a greater voice in our politics than his position should allow,and they use him like the usefull idiot that he truly is.
I noticed in C.Blatchfords column that the Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan have taken to calling Mr. Layton "Taliban Jack".How proud he must be to wear that moniker around his neck.
One would think that millstone will be the weight that cows his head in the forum of public opinion.
You,Mr. Layton, are a traitor to your country and deserve every ounce of scorn heaped upon you by the fine soldiers of our Canada.
"Afstan: Christie Blatchford wins a prize"
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/007605.html
See the "more extensive commentary is here."
Mark
Ottawa
I sent Christie a note to express my thanks for telling it like it is.
Got a reply in less than a half-hour.
Socialists support troops only when they are used to oppress the people of their own countries. The NDP probably have great respect for North Korean troops, Castro's troops, and they're probably hoping Chavez has enough troops to entrench himself in power too. Ignorant pricks.
An invaluable resource: Iraq and Afghanistan Vetereans of America (formerly Operation Truth)
www.iava.org/index.php
More:
(BTW, does Taliban Jack Layton have an emissary/mole in the Taliban? Does the Taliban have a mole in Taliban Jack Layton/NDP's HQ?) Comments at Newswatch are worthy/excellent. ...-
The FLQ found out what happens when they upset our government and the dogs are turned loose. I saw that too and was part of it. Within a week most of them were looking through bars as Military Police accompanied by civil police (and backed by heavily armed infantry) knocked down doors without warrants and dragged the jerks away. We knew (when the RCMP did not) where they all were because we did our homework. I strongly suspect that we still do because military intelligence is the one security organization we still have which nobody pays any attention too.
Thank goodness for that.
People may not like the idea of people being rounded up and locked up without ‘just cause” but it happened and the FLQ has not been heard of since. The “social wimps” have been complaining about it ever since, “never mind” that at the time they did not utter a word and it was their hero Trudeau who screamed “enough”.
Point: They never spoke up until they knew they were safe and I would add that our soldiers created that environment for them. In the incident related I recall that we lost one of our members from Gagetown and I haven’t forgotten him. He died jumping off the back of a “deuce and a half” with his SMG off “safe”. Unfortunate but casulties are to be expected when push comes to shove.
Another “Point”: A “mass roundup” can happen again and I love the idea!
I personally think our soldiers are finally getting the recognition they deserve and the morons like Jack Layton and Ujjal Dosanjh look more and more like the creeps they really are. All cheap talk and no action. I applaud the change and I look for it to continue.
I also note that these people who oppose the idea of our soldiers being anything more than boyscouts with pea shooters call themselves the “Official Opposition”.
“Some opposition!”
A very poor joke on the Canadian public would be a much better description. If I were Harper I wouldn’t explain myself either.
You can’t talk to a wall of self-serving sycophants and expect to be understood.
I’m going to leave it here because I’m doing a slow burn over the way cheap politicians are trying to make points with a very small minority of Canadians while our troops come home in bodybags. They do not understand this country or our soldiers and I hope to see most of them gone in the next election.
...-
http://www.jacksnewswatch.com/
Your chances of being killed by someone trained in Afghanistan, more or less by the Taliban, are anything BUT zero. Your chances of being killed by someone trained in Afghanistan, if the Canadian troops and those from other NATO countries are pulled out, are FAR from zero. That's why we have troops in Afghanistan!
Forget this stuff about Canada being nice and safe. We're 36 hours by plane from any hell hole you care to mention. And that's without considering the home grown terrorists.
Stellar piece. Thanks.
Terrorists support Taliban Jack
tinyurl.com/hj4xf
Further to the comments by "Debris Trail," what really annoys me about the "progressives" is their thinly veiled contempt for the military as an institution and the men and women who serve in it.
For them, the stereotype image of the soldier is some poor low-intellect Maritimer or "p'tit gars de la Beauce" who couldn't finish high school or find a job and so was duped into joining the army.
They share this patronizing outlook with their ideological pals south of the border: the Sheehanites who consider young American servicemen as "children" bamboozled by sly recruiters into signing up.
I made the same point as The Celestial One in a letter in reply to this piece of nonsense in the Red Star:
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1158405191769&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home
My letter, which they didn't print (apologies for this blatant idee-hooring):
It is a mark of the shallowest thinker that he asks a question that answers itself and imagines he's being profound. In that manner, Leslie Scrivener ("True patriot love", 17 September) wants to know whether it is possible to "support the troops" without supporting their mission in Afghanistan. The answer: only by ignoring what the troops themselves think.
She concedes at the end of the article that "soldiers long to be there. It's what they are trained to do. It's their definition of patriotism." Well, yes: these are people that actually think about the world, which differentiates them from commentators wringing their hands, politicians playing ostrich, moralizers playing with absolutes, or academics making believe that others can do the close work while we hand out blankets.
To "support" the troops by demanding they be withdrawn from Afghanistan -- that they cut and run, in the most precise formulation -- is to treat them not as professionals with minds of their own, but as tin soldiers to be moved around on childish whim. That is what the Jack Laytons, Doug Pritchards, and Cheshmak Farhoumand-Simses have in mind. They and Ms. Scrivener waste your readers' time.
LIARS,FRUADS, AND CHARLATANS are you refering to that wacky AL GORE and his rediclous junk science A INCONVENIANT THRUTH? gore is certianly out of his mind