Canadian PM Stacks Deck Of New Afghan Mission Review Board

What you are failing to report or puposely omitting is the fact that the head of the committee is a former liberal politician. You blog is obviously very left-wing and therefore highly inacurate. Well, no matter, I doubt many people read it. God Bless Canada... God Bless America, God Bless Freedom!

Yeah I think it was more a political thing than a NAU thing. The Liberals must be pissed that current defence critic Denis Coderre isn't "allowed" to go to Afghanistan, but then Harper appoints a former Liberal, & colleague of Dion's, to head up this review board.

---
"George Bush has declared the war on terrorism to be the cause of his generation. The cause of Canadian sovereignty will be ours." - John Godfrey, MP for Don Va

Harper is brilliant what a way to poke the Liberals in the eye and at the same time get some good advice - absolutely canny Steve you got my vote ...

The Liberals must be mentally exhausted after all they've been through in the last week. They don't look like "Canada's natural governing party" at all. lmao

---
"George Bush has declared the war on terrorism to be the cause of his generation. The cause of Canadian sovereignty will be ours." - John Godfrey, MP for Don Va

Keep in mind that we live in a country where a "majority" means having only about 1/4 of the popular vote, give or take a few. What each of these losers are fighting over, is the random sway that tips the binary scale in their favor.

The whole Liberal vs Conservative battle is a smoke and mirrors charade.

When the next election arrives, and assuming you'll bother to show up and vote, you may as well tick off a mark for one of the little guys, preferably an independent.

Now, if only there was a "none of the above" tick box ...

I don't think you've been watching the news at all lately

---
"George Bush has declared the war on terrorism to be the cause of his generation. The cause of Canadian sovereignty will be ours." - John Godfrey, MP for Don Va

Liberal-conservative, what`s the difference, really? All corporate fascists.

---
Dave Ruston

The Conservatives have probably spent more in the last year than the Liberals did in 13, and have made a huge effort to attract business from countries/regions different from the US, those are two differences.

---
"George Bush has declared the war on terrorism to be the cause of his generation. The cause of Canadian sovereignty will be ours." - John Godfrey, MP for Don Va

What you are failing to see Brett is that certain types of Liberals are no different than certain types of Conservatives. Manley, if you follow his recent interests, is a very Harper type of 'Bush' Liberal - Security and Prosperity Partnership - all business, no people affair.

I agree Dave,

Harper expressed very different values and ideas when he was opposition,
now that he have taken over the PMO he has made every effort to look as
much like a Liberal as he can. He started out as a Liberal and the way they
switch parties on a whim is the proof that neither party has any interest in
doing what is right and best for Canadians, they are all about having power
and serving a foreign countries best interests.

That is why the first past the post voting system has become so dangerous;
its narrowed our options down to nothing.

Harper was saying yesterday that sometimes leadership requires doing what
he himself thinks best and ignoring the people is then the better thing to do
(to paraphrase it) regarding Afghanistan. Since Harper has decided to take on
the Liberal leadership as well as the Conservative he now has his dictatorship
in place.

Corporate Fascist is right.

---
"The most sustainable product is the one you never bought in the first place."
Alex Steffan

God Bless Canada... God Bless America, God Bless Freedom!

omc=tiny tim?

---
"The most sustainable product is the one you never bought in the first place."
Alex Steffan

Exactly right darth. Manley should have been a Tory.

Frank

What you are failing to see, is if we are to at least pretend to have our own foriegn policy, we shouldn't stack the deck with people who's lips are in the perfect shape of Uncle Sam's sphincter.

---
The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.

CIDA: foreign "aid" in name only?<br />
by Yves Engler<br />
<br />
October 09, 2007<br />
<br />
<br />
A Senlis Council report released in August detailed the failure of Canadian programs supposedly aimed at alleviating poverty in Kandahar province. The mainstream media criticized the Canadian International Development Agency's (CIDA) inability/unwillingness to successfully distribute aid and even questioned Canada's justification for a military presence in Afghanistan.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Six months earlier, the media was abuzz over a report that called for the abolition of CIDA because of its failure to alleviate poverty in Africa. On the surface this criticism seems reasonable. All government spending should be effective. But what if this focus on the effectiveness of aid to alleviate poverty narrows the parameters of the debate and excludes the real questions that should be asked?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
For example, exactly who is “aid” designed to aid? Or, is “aid” always aid in the sense that ordinary people use the word?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
To answer those questions perhaps we need to look at CIDA's 20-year-old policy of pushing structural adjustment programs on African governments. Rather than “aid” people this seems to have been a major contributor to the continued impoverishment of the population. Or perhaps we should discuss CIDA's role in liberalizing African mining laws – to the benefit of Canadian corporations. (Africa is home to some 600 Canadian mining concessions).<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Researching a book on Canadian foreign policy, I have come across numerous examples of Canadian “aid” that benefited the rich at the expense of the poor. READ ARTICLE@<br />
<a href="http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=102&ItemID=13989">http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=102&ItemID=13989</a>