# General Hillier needs a lesson in democracy a la Pike



## Pike (13 Mar 2006)

In recent days he has become an increasingly outspoken advocate of Canada's involvement in Afghanistan. Whether the Forces are or should be as important as multiculturalism or medicare may be -- to understate the matter -- a question of some debate. But that debate is a debate for, by, and among citizens and politicians. The general should butt out

Why? What are new recruits told when they first join. "You do not have a political opinion. It is part of being a professional in this profession"

Why is General Hiller appearing on daytime talk shows and nightly newscasts telling the Canadian people WHY we should support the mission?  regardless if we should or not, HE should not be involved in the debate

THe reason we abide by this rule (the army has no business in politics) in democratic Western societies is because there are countries in the world where military commanders take over the government and form dictatorships. As a General he should lead by example....am I right?


----------



## George Wallace (13 Mar 2006)

Pike

Are you going to stay around and defend these statements?

First we hear from your ilk that the People don't know enough of what our military is doing and why, and now when the Chief of Defence Staff comes out and tells you, you accuse him of being "Political".  Of course he is "Political".  Every person of "Power", be it in the Government, the Military or Business, is 'political'.  That is the nature of Leadership.  Every aspect of Life is "Political".  Man is a very political animal.


----------



## Hunter (13 Mar 2006)

She's baaaaaaaack!!!!

edit - Darn it George you beat me.  Pike please stay around in this discussion.  I would love to read your response to what you've just invited upon yourslf.   Then again I like lots of stupid stuff.   



			
				Pike said:
			
		

> As a General he should lead by example....am I right?
> Heres a great  pish poor article on this topic:
> http://www.breakthesilence.ca/politics/March%2006/HILLER.htm



Yes you are right, and he's doing a fine job.


----------



## medicineman (13 Mar 2006)

If his (and ergo mine and all other service members') political masters had actually told the Canadian public what we are in fact doing in Afghanistan earlier, he wouldn't have to be explaining it himself.  Incidentally, as the military subject matter expert within the DND and adviser to the Privy Council, who better to tell the public what it is we are doing?  He isn't getting into the debate as it were, just informing the public what it is that is being done and why they should support the PEOPLE involved in the mission.

BTW, the sixth Prinicple of Leadership - Know your troops and promote their welfare.  I'd have to say that is what he is doing, and therefore leading by example.

MM


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (13 Mar 2006)

I am glad the CDS is finally getting involved and not staying in the corner and barks at the MNDs command. Pike please spare us you seem to relish in confrontation.


----------



## SweetNavyJustice (13 Mar 2006)

I don’t know if I necessarily agree with you Pike.  I think that the CDS has a large role to play in promoting the activities of the Canadian Forces to the public.  After all the Gen. Hillier a public figure that has been appointed by the government into his position.  

Think of it in this regard.  The CDS is the head of our organization, and as such he has to compete for government resources from other departments.  By promoting the values and activities of the Canadian Forces he is showing the people just what their tax dollars go towards.  We are no longer faceless soldiers, sailors, and aircrew going about our business in service to our country.  

As for the separation between politics and military functions, I agree that this is an important divide that needs to be maintained.  We don’t want our military running our country as that is the job of the elected officials.  This is why military member are forbidden from running for any public office while still serving.  That having been said, it doesn’t mean that members of the Canadian Forces and in particular our leader should remain silent or try and stifle the importance or the work that we are doing or its need to continue.  

This is ever important today when the media and different individuals take it upon themselves to distort information such as your site “break the silence”.  This weekend there is a peace rally happening in Victoria in support of stopping the “occupations” of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Haiti.  I wonder how many people at this rally will be holding placards supporting the Taliban, Saddam or the other leaders who repressed and killed their own people before there was foreign military intervention?  

As far as I’m concerned, if you don’t support the fact that our troops are supporting the democratic governments of these nations in freeing these people, then you are supporting the actions of the previous regimes who oppressed them.


----------



## Edward Campbell (13 Mar 2006)

Constitutionally, Pike, the CDS is required to be _*apolitical*_ – that is to say (s)he must not express any preference for the policies of one party over another.  That does not mean the CDS cannot hold and propagate opinions, within the CDS’ acknowledged areas of responsibility and expertise: the structure and management of the armed forces and the conduct of military operations.

The CDS spoke out *after* the government of the day ordered the CF to Afghanistan.  As soon as that order was given he had a *duty* to explain to the members of the Canadians Forces and to their families what is going to happen and why.  That’s a job for the CDS – not the cheap, ward-heeling politicians and not the weak-kneed, spineless _cheerleaders_ for the political parties.  That’s what Gen. Hillier did: he used the press, like a good 21st century military leader should, he explained what, when, how and why to the soldier and their families.  He used colourful, quotable, soldiers’ language.  That ensured his message got spread by a _media_ whose one and only job is to fill the white spaces between the adverts.  He also expressed his professional _opinion_ on areas well within his areas of expertise and responsibility – again he made good use of a lazy _media_ which always laps up whatever is spoon-fed to it.

One would have to be – and I acknowledge that many, many Canadians are – terminally stupid to confuse Gen. Hillier’s public comments with unconstitutional conduct.


----------



## Brad Sallows (13 Mar 2006)

>But that debate is a debate for, by, and among citizens and politicians. The general should butt out

Debate, then.  Don't seek to muzzle sources of information - engage them.  An intelligent person of common sense needs about three seconds to realize that a public servant who has been permitted to speak out for any length of time without being fired must have the support of his political masters, and indeed may have been explicitly encouraged to do so.

>Why is General Hiller appearing on daytime talk shows and nightly newscasts telling the Canadian people WHY we should support the mission?  regardless if we should or not, HE should not be involved in the debate

Why not?  From where do you like to obtain information - tarot cards?

>THe reason we abide by this rule (the army has no business in politics) in democratic Western societies is because there are countries in the world where military commanders take over the government and form dictatorships.

I can see where allowing the senior uniformed member of the CF places us in imminent danger of a coup.  Grip your hysteria.


----------



## medicineman (13 Mar 2006)

Edward Campbell said:
			
		

> One would have to be – and I acknowledge that many, many Canadians are – terminally stupid to confuse Gen. Hillier’s public comments with unconstitutional conduct.



Eloquently put.

MM


----------



## George Wallace (13 Mar 2006)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> ............  Grip your hysteria.




 ;D     I am sure you had another word in mind, than "hysteria".




Very well stated Edward.  Shall we let Pike contribute some of her views?


Oh!   I am sorry.  She performed another "Hit N Run".


----------



## Patrolman (13 Mar 2006)

General Hillier is one of,if not the most popular Chief Of Defence Staff in recent times! If you expect anyone on this site to criticize his leadership abilities or his personal character you are sadly mistaken. 
 Who are you anyways? Fill out your Profile so we can see where you have learned what it takes to be a leader.
Of course he is a politician in as much as any other person appointed by the Canadian government. If you haven't noticed the military is a very political organization. We represent Canada by carrying out the wishes of the Prime Minister. Quite political wouldn't you say!
 Who better to explain to the Canadian people why there soldiers are serving in Afghanistan than someone who commanded the mission in that country prior to being appointed CDS.
 WAKE UP! and consider the nonsense you are writing. I think you have probably offended a lot of people with your post!


----------



## SweetNavyJustice (13 Mar 2006)

Just a thought, but why don't some of us go over to Pike's "Break the Silence" forum and continue, or make some posts.  After all, Pike fired the first salvo.....


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (13 Mar 2006)

Pike unless you start to back up your points,your posts will be removed, We do not take kindly to trolling. 24 hours to engage in a meaningful debate or you will be introduced to the warning system


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (13 Mar 2006)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> Pike unless you start to back up your points,your posts will be removed, We do not take kindly to trolling. 24 hours to engage in a meaningful debate or you will be introduced to the warning system



This seems to be the same troll who is stirring up crap over in the Politics Canada Forum...do it ex and put us all out of our misery. You have my blessing (for one)


----------



## Hunter (13 Mar 2006)

The best way to deal with someone like that is to dissect their arguments in discussion.  I think everyone here should join breakthesilence.ca and inundate her site with posts.  You know, all the stuff we get flamed for here.  Cross-post, repetitive topics, lots of msn speak, stuff like that.   ;D


----------



## George Wallace (13 Mar 2006)

Yes!  In fact it seems that she is indeed Spamming Sites with her rhetoric.  From the Politics Canada Forum site this contribution:


> General Hiller needs a lesson in Democracy
> Pike
> 
> 
> ...



Looks like a canned post.    Very familiar.                                               Even has the identical Typos.   :


----------



## old medic (13 Mar 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Looks like a canned post.    Very familiar.                                               Even has the identical Typos.   :



They are just bulk mail postings to bring traffic to her own website.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (13 Mar 2006)

Ban!


----------



## scm77 (13 Mar 2006)

old medic said:
			
		

> They are just bulk mail postings to bring traffic to her own website.



Doesn't that violate the Conduct Guidlines?



> Professional Authors, Journalists, Retailers and Public Personalities
> 
> While authors, journalists, retailers, etc are encouraged to participate in the Forums, *posts with the express purpose of self-promotion will be removed unless prior permission from the site owner has been granted.* Interested parties should review the advertising options offered by Army.ca.q



I'm with CFL.


----------



## Strike (13 Mar 2006)

This is from another of her posts...



			
				Pike said:
			
		

> 1) I am a woman
> 2) I am a busy person. Im part owner of a business, Im a Univeristy student, I work two jobs and I run a webpage. I simply dont have time to come here every hour and tend to you all.
> 3) Thanks Chimo, I will take your advice and post differently
> 4) Im not nessesarily trying to inflate hits on my website, BUT the articles I do post on my website I believe are very informative and need to be read. Im not trying to sell advertising space, i dont care about that.
> Anyway back to the TOPIC...



Seems like she's trying to get hits to me.  I think we should oblige...


----------



## Gouki (13 Mar 2006)

Or just completely IP ban her, quit playing into her BS, live happily ever and let her kind frolic in the imaginary lands of rainbows and pixie dusts while we get on with our lives.


----------



## The Gues-|- (13 Mar 2006)

Drop the Hammer! :gunner:


----------



## MPIKE (13 Mar 2006)

Yes... good bye "sister".... there can be only one.....


----------



## geo (13 Mar 2006)

Funny thing that..... if you go by what Pike has said, the military is expected to remain silent and do as it's told...... click it's heels and obey unquestionably.

It is about time that we have a CDS that contributes to the national discussion on what the Forces are doing and what we should be doing in the future. Our previous CDS' have been silent too long and have allowed us to dissapear into the landscape.


----------



## Armymedic (13 Mar 2006)

geo said:
			
		

> Funny thing that..... if you go by what Pike has said, the military is expected to remain silent and do as it's told...... click it's heels and obey unquestionably.



There was an Armed Forces in the 20th century just like that. They were told by their Country's Fuhrer err, leader what to do and how to think, and they followed his commands to the letter.

Surely, Pike does not want it to be like that?


----------



## zipperhead_cop (13 Mar 2006)

People scream for decisive leadership, then when they get it, they scream that they had no input.  Typical.  
Pike is blatantly trying to ramp up interest in her web site.  I bit and was trolling with what appeared to be, literally, the only other active member.  The site is going stagnant and is obviously going under.  Most of the posts are over a month old or worse, and most of the posters are hammer heads.  She can't stick around here, because a) she doesn't want to, it's all about spitting out that link again and b) she will be destroyed.  After her initial inflammatory post, she contributes nothing useful.  I will bear some responsibility for her being back, as I challenged her to come back and engage in a meaningful discussion through her PM system.  
Feel free to log on as zipperhead_cop if you feel the need to check it out.  My password is gotoarmyca.

Here is a snapshot from the site stats from about five minutes ago:

*Our users have posted a total of 381 articles
We have 42 registered users
The newest registered user is runwithscissors

In total there is 1 user online :: 1 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests   [ Administrator ]   [ Moderator ]
Most users ever online was 5 on Fri Dec 09, 2005 12:49 am
Registered Users: zipperhead_cop
This data is based on users active over the past five minutes*
Seriously amature night.


----------



## Trinity (13 Mar 2006)

PIKER said:
			
		

> Yes... good bye "sister".... there can be only one.....



Hey Piker..  just pray they don't mistaken you for her.. 
and remove you by accident


----------



## TCBF (13 Mar 2006)

"Feel free to log on as zipperhead_cop if you feel the need to check it out.  My password is gotoarmyca."

- I tried it - no go.

Tom


----------



## zipperhead_cop (13 Mar 2006)

TCBF said:
			
		

> "Feel free to log on as zipperhead_cop if you feel the need to check it out.  My password is gotoarmyca."
> 
> - I tried it - no go.
> 
> Tom



HMMM, still working for me.  Maybe someone else was already logged on.  the password is all lowercase with no spaces or punctuation.  I have logged onto that site from work and down south, so it shouldn't be IP sensitive.  Maybe try again.  
Make me sound good, baby! ;D


----------



## Pike (14 Mar 2006)

Somehow this always turns out to be an attack on my character. So childish.

I took all your advice and "backed up" my claims with why I believed that. I think I did it pretty well. You keep using that excuse against me but its so shallow.

Why do so many of you just freak out at my posts?!  I wonder what you all would  be like in relationships..... ???   Just relax. Seriously. First off, if I go to other forums and post similar posts who cares?  Really, Im starting discussions everywhere, thats the point, I want people to think about these issues. Second, I welcome you to my forums. pLease come, post opposite opinions. Dont you all get it, thats what Im trying to do!!  Why would I spit back at you all the same stuff you hear everyday. I want to see a discussion. I want people to substantiate their beliefs.

If you want to kick me off these boards thats fine, Ill leave. But you cant be scared to hear the other side of your beliefs. Some of you challenge them, I respect that. Some of you are just childish, that doesnt help. And others just hate me for whatever reason, I obviously dont care. You think I read these posts and cry?  I argue politics with people everyday, Im not going to be offended.

ANYWAY, as always after I explain myself, lets get back to the topic.....

I dont mind Gen Hiller putting a "face" or giving a "voice" to soldiers. Thats great. But if you listen to what he is saying he is being partesian. He is advocating for this government. As a professional he should not be doing this. It is influencing public debate, and thats wrong. You all talk about "arificially inflated numbers" with my webpage. Well if Canadians start supporting this mission for the wrong reasons, is that ok?

See I DO support this mission. And I think it was well put on the army.ca front page editorial. But none of you would ever think that I would support it right? Of course not. You all think Im just some idiot student. Thats fine, but recognize that its ok to learn about the other side, to acknowledge it. And I know you all feel a loyalty to your commander, but personally thats no reason to stick up for him 100% of the time.


----------



## couchcommander (14 Mar 2006)

Hey Pike,

This board, from my experience, is very open to discussion, even with dissenting opinions. Though some may be rough about it, they will indeed engage you. Their, and my issue with the post, was that it appeared as though you were using this forum simply to advertise your page, rather than actually attempt to engage the members in a meaningful debate. I am sure they will be more than willing to debate this issue with you now that you appear committed to the idea!... 

....and on topic....  Chief of Defence Staff General Hillier is RESPONSIBLE to the Canadian public as their principle advisor in the military domain (albeit through the MND and the Government in Council). As principle advisor it is his DUTY to inform us of what he believes to be in the nations best interest. Personally, I would rather he do this publically, than just solely to the MND. Further, I would consider it a far more serious occurrence if he failed to fight for what he thought was best. As Chief of Defence Staff, however, I am sure that General Hillier is well aware of where he gets his orders from... and this is in fact shown by his feverish attempts to influence those who he KNOWS in the end decide, the Citizens of Canada.  I, personally, really don't like the Conservatives for many many reasons. I also am about as far from a member of the CF as one can get, far up in my ivory tower. I, however, am happy that the CDS and the Government are on the same page.


----------



## Edward Campbell (14 Mar 2006)

Your logic is all back-asswards, Pike: you fail.

I repeat, slowly if necessary: the CDS, like all senior _public servants_, must be *apolitical*; (s)he must not advocate (or publicly oppose) the partisan positions of any party.  You have complained that: _” He is advocating for this government.”_  He is, as senior officials are encouraged (not obliged) to do, supporting the policies of this Government of Canada just as he, publicly, loudly and clearly, supported the policies of the last Government of Canada.  If you cannot make and keep that distinction then you are blissfully ignorant of the Canadian Constitution and the nature and operations of our government – may I suggest you repeat PoliSci 101 again, and again and again until it sinks in.

You are in with the grown-ups, young lady, and you are in over your head.


----------



## dynaglide (14 Mar 2006)

All I can say is this: In 15 yrs and counting of serving this country, we finally have a CDS who I dare say is respected by all the troops.  I can remember periods where alot of guys didn't even know the CDS's name because they were that irrelevant.  This military is finally starting to take a turn for the better after decades of systematic decimation.  It's good to see a government and CDS (at least so far) actually doing something instead of talking.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (14 Mar 2006)

Pike,

Although the voracity of the response to you makes me slightly uncomfortable, I must confess that I see no signs of partisanship in Gen Hillier's messaging.  

What I do see is a CDS who is doing his job - and is savvy enough to be able to use the media to get his messages out to multiple audiences: the Canadian people who he serves, the soldiers who he leads (and their families), the Allies who depend upon us, and the decision makers and influencers in Ottawa and elsewhere.  That is a good thing.

The recent rebuke from Mr Harper (last week I believe, when he indicated that military policy should and shall be decided by the government of the day), was seen as great news by some very senior military personnel, for it was the sound of ownership.

As a military professional, all I want is clear direction as to what must be achieved, and why.  It sounds to me like we are getting that in spades - indeed we have been for the last 12-18 months.

It is about time.

Dave


----------



## tomahawk6 (14 Mar 2006)

Pike your intial post would be correct IF the politicians were debating whether to do the mission. But PM Martin and now Harper made that decision and troops are deployed, so the CDS has every right, even a duty to discuss the mission both to support the government's decision and to help educate the public. It is not uncommon for the Chairman JCS to discuss Iraq and Afghanistan for the same reasons I have already outlined.


----------



## Torlyn (14 Mar 2006)

As well, are you privvy to the orders that the CDS gets from the government?  In case you hadn't noticed, our PM is out trying to educate the Canadian Public on what we're doing in Afghanistan, and why it's so vital.  Do you think, somewhere in that closed little mind, that perhaps, the PM said "CDS, can you make a few public statements telling the CDN people what we're doing?  Show the canadians that we support our troops".  And the response? "Sir, yes Sir."  

It's good to hear you posting about that which you know nothing.  

T


----------



## gun plumber (14 Mar 2006)

This is just a quick question for Pike,
Would you rather the Government and the CDS lie or hide information about our role in Afghanistan?
IIRC,the last country that was in Afghanistan spun tales and lies about humanitarian missions,how much good they were doing and how Afghanistan wanted to be welcomed into the union.Once the truth came out after the fact,well I'm sure you know what happened.
Now if they can only hurry up and dissolve the long gun registry.....


----------



## Hunter (14 Mar 2006)

Dear Pike,

 I think you will find that you are quite welcome here as long as you (a) follow the site's code of conduct, (b) ensure that your postings have at least SOME basis in fact, and (c) desist with the 'post-and-run' tactics - stick around and defend your statements.

Personally I would encourage you to visit this site more often and read the posts.  I think you will learn a lot about the military that you did not know.  

I thought your comment about wondering how we all are in relationships was pretty lame.  Besides being completely unrelated to the topic, it is suggestive that the users here are abusive towards their partners or something.  That's kind of like trundling out the 'nazi' argument, and when you make statements like that, whatever point you are trying to make loses pretty much all credibility.  Stick to the facts.  

"Have a nice day!"

edit - BTW I was never told, not have I heard of anyone else being told that they don't have a political opinion.  Has anyone else been told this?  in fact I seem to remember being told the opposite, that the military expects it's soldiers to think for be thinking soldiers and not mindless robots.


----------



## Trinity (14 Mar 2006)

I've noticed that some of the pro Hillier posts are from 
a) civilians and
b) american military 

so this sites support is not 100% blind loyalty from the troops
or Canadian soldiers supporting Hillier simply because as you 
stated Pike.


edit.. clarify a statment


----------



## dynaglide (14 Mar 2006)

Trinity,
I see you've been in the reserves for 13 yrs.  You are an officer, correct?  Do they not teach loyalty to the senior leadership anymore?  It's not a matter of pro-Hillier or against Hillier or whatever.  The bottom line is he's the man in charge so he deserves a certain amount of respect.  If not for the position he holds, then at least for the fact that he is doing an outstanding job.  I think the very least we can do as serving members is give the man his due, especially on a public forum.  Correct me if I'm wrong...


----------



## Bobbyoreo (14 Mar 2006)

I hope you dont ban her. As all the other websites that go against the Forces do that...and I'd like to think this one is way better. Plus it makes see the other side.....and how far off to left field they are. Dont get me wrong I dont agree with her points at all, I just dont think we should ban her.


----------



## DG-41 (14 Mar 2006)

Me too. I'd prefer to keep those from "the other side" around, as long as they can behave like adults.

I'd also like to see a lot less _ad hominum_ attacks on such people from "our" side - and I use the word "our" very lightly, as "we" are far from a homogeneous body ourselves.

Reasoned debate is Sweet Crunchy Goodness. Both sides have an opportunity to learn from the other.

 So Pike, here's your opportunity to rise to the occasion and show that you can be a reasonable adult:



> In recent days he has become an increasingly outspoken advocate of Canada's involvement in Afghanistan. Whether the Forces are or should be as important as multiculturalism or medicare may be -- to understate the matter -- a question of some debate. But that debate is a debate for, by, and among citizens and politicians. The general should butt out.



As the man in charge of the operation, he has the greatest amount of familiarity with what is really going on. If things are going well, things are going poorly - he is the man in the know. I would expect the man in charge to provide Canadians with his well-informed opinion of the nature and quality of the ongoing operation in Afghanistan, so that they can make a better informed opinion as to the value of the mission.

His job is to get the truth out. Would you rather not hear the truth?



> Why? What are new recruits told when they first join. "You do not have a political opinion. It is part of being a professional in this profession"



That is true; soldiers are expected to remain apolitical, lest the opinion of one soldier appear to be the policy of the Canadian Armed Forces as a whole. Soldiers are expected to remain apart from party politics.

But that is not what the CDS is doing here. He is not campaining for one political party or another. Instead, he is making the effort to educate ordinary Canadians as to what their armed forces is doing in Afghanistan, why they are there, and what kind of success rate they are having. That would seem to me to be a laudable goal - especially when it appears that there is a great deal of confusion on this very issue. Many Canadians seem to feel that Afghanistan is tied to Iraq, when that is NOT the case at all, and the CDS is taking steps to eliminate the confusion.



> Why is General Hiller appearing on daytime talk shows and nightly newscasts telling the Canadian people WHY we should support the mission? regardless if we should or not, HE should not be involved in the debate



Of course he should. He is the man in the best position to tell if we (the Armed Forces) are in a position to actually carry out the mission or not. I would expect the CDS to tell the Government (and the public) if the mission was beyond our capabilities, and I would expect him to do the same if it was within our capabilities. He's the military expert in the government - who else would you have discuss operational readiness?



> The reason we abide by this rule (the army has no business in politics) in democratic Western societies is because there are countries in the world where military commanders take over the government and form dictatorships. As a General he should lead by example....am I right?



Absolutely right - in both cases. But what the CDS is doing is completely apolitical, in so far that he is not throwing his weight behind any particular party, nor is he doing anything that threatens Canadian democracy in any way. He is staying well within his Constitutionally-defined lanes.

You might want to read up on the law concerning the National Defense Act, and the roles of the CDS and the Minister of National Defense, and see exactly how the law defines the rights, duties, and responsibilities of the players defined therein. It looks like you may be surprised to see what the law actually states.

DG


----------



## Michael Dorosh (14 Mar 2006)

Good post DG.

Further to the question on opinions - all soldiers are "allowed" to have personal opinions on politics or anything else.  They are not permitted to voice those opinions in any official way lest they be misconstrued as spokespeople for the government.  It's a government job, right?

Even the Wehrmacht struggled to be apolitical - non political armies are a long tradition in western culture.  It has to be that way, because we've seen what happens when you mix military and civilian political systems.  Idi Amin (or as he liked to put it, Field Marshall Idi Amin, VC, DSO, MC) and that ilk.  The government sets policy according to the will of the people (in a perfect world) and the military follows policy.  It is one of the burdens of being a soldier (another is the knowledge that you might die carrying out your duties) but one we accept gladly in exchange for the honour of serving others.


----------



## karl28 (14 Mar 2006)

/ Rant on   /     You know the one thing that drives me up the wall are these  TREE HUGERS LIKE PIKE  they want us to have these grand discusions but if your opinions are not on the same level as them your automatically wrong .*God for bid if some Canadians should support this effort to Afghanistan I know I do and that is my right PIKE * . Here's  a news flash PIKE try voicing your opinion in Afghanistan in the old days of the talaban rule .... Oh But wait your a WOEMAN you wouldn't have been able to and if you did you would of been executed.....See while people like you have the rights to discuss to death weather or not we should be there blah blah blah  what you don't see is that there are others who don't have those same rights thats what our soldiers are trying to make sure doesn't happen again and thats why there over there so that way the people of Afghanistan can at least try to have a chance at having a democratically elected government so that way they can one day enjoy a lifestyle that you take for granted . /Rant off /   Sorry every one I don't mean to offend any one but people like PIKE get under my skin


----------



## Fishbone Jones (14 Mar 2006)

Michael Dorosh said:
			
		

> Idi Amin (or as he liked to put it, Field Marshall Idi Amin, VC, DSO, MC) .


 

Michael,

You forgot Conquerer of the British Empire. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 The one he awarded himself when the Queen wouldn't invite him to Britain for a Commonwealth conference.


----------



## Brad Sallows (14 Mar 2006)

DG wrote: "He is not campaining for one political party or another."

To add to that, what Hillier is "campaigning for", is Afghanistan - explaining the situation and reasons to stay there.

Hillier is CDS - Chief of Defence *Staff*.  It is the role of staff to advise, to provide options, and to make recommendations - and then ultimately to follow orders and execute decisions.

Afghanistan is a test of our attention span with regard to the principles of human security.  Are we going to figure out how to make a lasting difference and stay there long enough to do so, or are we going to muddle through a few years of helping out some locals and then move on to some lower-hanging feel-good peacekeeping fruit?


----------



## The_Falcon (14 Mar 2006)

dynaglide said:
			
		

> Trinity,
> I see you've been in the reserves for 13 yrs.  You are an officer, correct?  Do they not teach loyalty to the senior leadership anymore?  It's not a matter of pro-Hillier or against Hillier or whatever.  The bottom line is he's the man in charge so he deserves a certain amount of respect.  If not for the position he holds, then at least for the fact that he is doing an outstanding job.  I think the very least we can do as serving members is give the man his due, especially on a public forum.  Correct me if I'm wrong...



I believe what Trinity was trying to get at was that support for the CDS is coming from people other than the troops under him as well.  That why its not 100% from the troops.  Thats what I got out of it.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (14 Mar 2006)

I would not presume to speak for the CDS, but I would guess that even when the Lieberals were still in he would have come out and still made the same comments.  We are his military.  He is the all-father of the largest of regimental families, the whole CF.  
I thought the hippies were always screaming for transparency and crap like that?  What more could you hope for?  
The real agenda here is the fact that the huggers know that if Canadians get some real, common sense, unrestricted truth, they will support the efforts in A'stan (as seen in recent CREDIBLE polls).  And that is a bitter pill for the Kum-bi-ya singing, patchoolie oil rubbing, hemp weaving, tree worshiping, capitalism vilifying, commune planning, body hair ignoring, dope smoking, Vancouver living, GTA loving, blue bike riding, economy protesting, seal protecting, B.O. smelling, stupid ass website running types.


----------



## RangerRay (14 Mar 2006)

There is a big difference between a military or civil servant publicly endorsing *government policy* and said servant publicly endorsing a *political party*.

The first is apolitical.

The second is political.

Not once have I seen General Hillier promote the Conservative Party.  He has been promoting the policies of the Government of Canada, as is his job.



Editted to fix puncuation.


----------



## couchcommander (14 Mar 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> I would not presume to speak for the CDS, but I would guess that even when the Lieberals were still in he would have come out and still made the same comments.  We are his military.  He is the all-father of the largest of regimental families, the whole CF.
> I thought the hippies were always screaming for transparency and crap like that?  What more could you hope for?
> The real agenda here is the fact that the huggers know that if Canadians get some real, common sense, unrestricted truth, they will support the efforts in A'stan (as seen in recent CREDIBLE polls).  And that is a bitter pill for the Kum-bi-ya singing, patchoolie oil rubbing, hemp weaving, tree worshiping, capitalism vilifying, commune planning, body hair ignoring, dope smoking, Vancouver living, GTA loving, blue bike riding, economy protesting, seal protecting, B.O. smelling, stupid *** website running types.



Hey!

Not all of us "huggers" are capitalism hating, commune planning, website running types who smell like BO, like long hair, patchoolie oil, kum-bi-ya, or seals.... some are just capitalism hating, commune planning, website running tree huggers who still know how to take a bath, and happen to support well thought out, not completely and utterly flagrant abuse of power type military actions...

...of course we'd prefer it if it was to deliver TRUE democracy to the people (ie socialism), but superficial is an improvement over tyrannical oligarchy, whether or not you think your bread should be measured in dollars or labour value.

So watch the pinkophobic comments!


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (14 Mar 2006)

Well I am a man of my word, Pike was given 24 hours and she failed to engage in a meaniful debate. In light of her posting the same message as well on other forums, she was banned for trolling.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (14 Mar 2006)

couchcommander said:
			
		

> So watch the pinkophobic comments!



I don't appreciate you generalizing. 

 :dontpanic:


----------



## Glorified Ape (14 Mar 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> GTA loving



Cranium ex anus.


----------



## medicineman (14 Mar 2006)

Funny, I am (a) from BC and (b) an ex university student that was stuying to be a proffesional tree hugger/granola muncher while in uniform and (c) strangely enough, I have never voted left of right center in my life.  Not all munchers/huggers are commie bastards - just alot (I didn't make many friends in my dept  ;D) - so please be careful with your paintbrush.

MM


----------



## Cloud Cover (14 Mar 2006)

> Constitutionally, Pike, the CDS is required to be _*apolitical*_ –



LOL - _apolitical _ or not, who's the jackass that logged onto her site with the user name of General Hillier? LMAO. he voted in one of her polls. Hows that for democratic.

Zipperhead- the swearing, the swearing over there ... tsk tsk ... sounds like downtown Tecumseh.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (15 Mar 2006)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> LOL - _apolitical _ or not, who's the jackass that logged onto her site with the user name of General Hillier? LMAO. he voted in one of her polls. Hows that for democratic.
> 
> Zipperhead- the swearing, the swearing over there ... tsk tsk ... sounds like downtown Tecumseh.



Just a bit of anarchy for fun.  If you think I'm conducting myself poorly....take a peek back.  Plus, they started it.  I was trying to play nice, and only wanted a profile to PM Pike to come back to defend her foolishness.  Now I'm just curious how bad you have to act over there to get banned, but I think I've had my fun and am packing it in.  

As for the posts here, the ones I care about...
All I can say about the tree hugger mini rant is I re-iterate the need for a [sarcasm] smiley.  All non-toxic and completely facetious.   ;D  I love you all!


----------



## couchcommander (15 Mar 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> ;D  I love you all!



... *sniffle*... I love you too man.... Now excuse me, there is cute tree that needs my love and affection.... (the sarcasm was understood, on my part at least...)


----------



## Trinity (15 Mar 2006)

Hatchet Man said:
			
		

> I believe what Trinity was trying to get at was that support for the CDS is coming from people other than the troops under him as well.  That why its not 100% from the troops.  Thats what I got out of it.



Thank you... I wrote the post in haste while doing something else at work.

I still hurt from the lobotomy.


----------



## dynaglide (15 Mar 2006)

Trinity said:
			
		

> Thank you... I wrote the post in haste while doing something else at work.
> 
> I still hurt from the lobotomy.



I stand corrected...


----------



## Thompson_JM (15 Mar 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Just a bit of anarchy for fun...   ...but I think I've had my fun and am packing it in.



Nah, Just change the username, and let the hilarity ensure..... I havent laughed that hard in awhile...


----------



## monika (15 Mar 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> As for the posts here, the ones I care about...
> All I can say about the tree hugger mini rant is I re-iterate the need for a [sarcasm] smiley.  All non-toxic and completely facetious.   ;D  I love you all!



Aww shucks ;D You know some of us tree-hugging, GTA living types are not averse to hugging the squaddies when the need arises and would gladly buy a round of  :cheers: for you!

I loved the rant!


----------



## Bobbyoreo (15 Mar 2006)

AHHHH You guys kicked pike....was looking forward to hearing something new today from her little book!!  :'(


----------



## PPCLI Guy (15 Mar 2006)

TMM said:
			
		

> Aww shucks ;D You know some of us tree-hugging, GTA living types are not averse to hugging the squaddies when the need arises and would gladly buy a round of  :cheers: for you!
> I loved the rant!



Hi, my name is Dave, I am a "squaddie", and live in The Beaches - where I frequent Murphy's Law and drink Smithwicks...

Worth a shot... ;D


----------



## medicineman (15 Mar 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> ;D  I love you all!



Hopefully not for target practice  ;D.

MM


----------



## zipperhead_cop (15 Mar 2006)

medicineman said:
			
		

> Hopefully not for target practice  ;D.
> 
> MM



Heavens, no!  Don't get me wrong, hippies serve a vital role in Canada:  as an example of what not to end up as ;D

Hey, I'm into charity too, ya know.  The other day I arrested a 51 year old crack wh_re and when she was being searched I found a drivers licence in her purse belonging to a 25 year old man.  She told me that it was the only picture of her son that she still had.  I ran him and he was a suspended driver.  Not only did I let her keep the d/l, I passed on charging her with being in possession of a cancelled/revoked drivers licence.  I'm all about the compassion.   :-*


----------



## Bobbyoreo (15 Mar 2006)

OHh now I want to be a cop even more......man..look at all the compassion!!!!


----------



## TCBF (15 Mar 2006)

"The Humanity!  The Humanity!"  (burning Zeppelin falls to the ground).

 ;D

Tom


----------



## medicineman (15 Mar 2006)

I got kicked out of the commune - my hair is way too short for them and they hate the green clothes I have to wear and such...oh yeah, the gun thing and working for instead of sticking it to the man bugs them as well.

MM


----------



## zipperhead_cop (15 Mar 2006)

Bobbyoreo said:
			
		

> OHh now I want to be a cop even more......man..look at all the compassion!!!!



Can't put a price on a feel-good moment like that.


----------



## Five-to-One (15 Mar 2006)

Lol because this hasent diverted from the topic at all


----------



## Zach15 (16 Mar 2006)

I thought this was a good thread on either Pike's oppinion or an idea she had that she felt like sharing to provoke discussion. It's a shame she was banned.

On that note:



			
				Pike said:
			
		

> ....am I right?



  No, you aren't.


----------



## Remius (16 Mar 2006)

So I actually went over to Pike's little site and added my two cents worth.  Believe it or not I actually gave my honest opinion on the subject of canadian support for the troops.  You know, how canadians have this misguided vision we are peacekeepers and when shit really hits the fan they get all nervous (even though shit as hit the fan before) etc etc.  Well to make a long story short I posted my thoughts with no intention of provoking a fight (several fights have broken out all over that site by the way  ;D  ) and didn't flame or insult anyone.  I actually took up her challenge.   At any rate my post was removed.  No explanation, no reason, just gone.  Taken out.  Now, I wasn't banned or anything, just that my post was gone.  Maybe getting a reasonable thoughtout idea that contradicts what Pike has been saying was too much to handle. Whatever.  It just proved a point I was trying to make to see if she was being legit about starting discussions on various topics.  Obviously she was not.  For someone who touts freedom of speech and getting the "real" story out she messed up good.   Way to go Pike.  Way to-"BREAK THE SILENCE".  Sometimes you have to break it, sometimes you just have to shut up.  So end ex and I'm happy to report that there is nothing worth anyone's time over there.

Crantor out.


----------



## Danjanou (16 Mar 2006)

Hey I was banned after one post over there, and it was removed. Gotta love that open debate she's asking for eh :


----------



## TCBF (16 Mar 2006)

"Crantor out."

- e-mail her back, and ask for an explanation as to why your post was removed.  The cow at least owes you that.


----------



## Remius (16 Mar 2006)

Bah, it's really not worth it really. Maybe late I'll send her something, if I've got nothing better to do.  people like that just can't be reasoned with.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (16 Mar 2006)

"The cow at least owes you that."   :rofl:
very PC of you. ;D


----------



## monika (16 Mar 2006)

Why milk the cow when you know it'll be sour and curdled? ;D


----------



## Gouki (16 Mar 2006)

I think by now its common knowledge that her and her commissars only want debate and opinions that tows the party line.

I was already sickened by her opinions (no Pike, your views are not the truth, they are YOUR views, get over yourself) and sickened by just about everything else on the site (did you see the allegations of the US using white phosphorus? They consist of "SUGGEST they are using" and "experts say that the wounds MAY have been caused by WP - never anything concrete, all hearsay) this seems to take the cake. This little student flaps her gums about freedom of speech and debate, then deletes any dissidence.

Go work for Google China, Pike, you'd fit right in as a "Big Mama" over there.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Mar 2006)

The only Free Speech Pike and her cronies allow over in Break the Silence are their own. Pike was not banned for having a differing view she was banned to trolling this and other sites and not staying around to discuss her views. 

Pike I know you come by this site so remember to thank the men and women in uniform that have died to allow you to post your drivel and to silence your critics opposing views. Heil Pike!!


----------



## Jarnhamar (16 Mar 2006)

If I was smarter I'd come up with some kinda joke about a pike being a simple sort of weapon only dangerous in mass numbers near useless on it's own, but i'd be talking out of my ass  ;D

I took a look over at yee old break the silence. Can't say I'm too impressed. Seems like a run of the mil left wing web site where the author starts over half of the threads/debates. Too many topics thrown out all at once.  Then again I guess i'd rather see pike and friends posting there than here.


----------



## Trinity (16 Mar 2006)

Hrm.....  lets see


her site


> Our users have posted a total of 381 articles
> We have 42 registered users
> The newest registered user is runwithscissors
> 
> ...



Army.ca


> Online Users
> 155 Guests, 86 Users (1 Buddy, 1 Hidden)
> 
> Total Members: 9152
> ...



Wouldn't Freud call this penis envy?


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (16 Mar 2006)

Danjanou said:
			
		

> Hey I was banned after one post over there, and it was removed. Gotta love that open debate she's asking for eh :



The problem with lefties is that most of them are fascists. If you don't agree with them then you are unworthy of being listened to. that is why political correctness is so insidious and has such a odious effect in our country. they can stop debate simply by labeling you "non-progressive."


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Mar 2006)

Just got banned from the forums over there for suggesting they NOT ban people with opposing views.

Yet the forum was full of some asshole swearing his face off making threats and personal attacks. Guess that's acceptable  :

I guess their way of breaking the silence is to make sure they are the only ones talking. Pathetic.


----------



## Gouki (17 Mar 2006)

We should be happy, she has single handedly destroyed her credibility.


----------



## a_majoor (17 Mar 2006)

IF you thought Pike's site was bad, try http://rabble.ca/

You can smell the popcorn from their jiffy pop hats from here


----------



## zipperhead_cop (22 Mar 2006)

a_majoor said:
			
		

> IF you thought Pike's site was bad, try http://rabble.ca/
> 
> You can smell the popcorn from their jiffy pop hats from here



I went to that site and I found this POS:

http://rabble.ca/images/cartoons/constable/canadahar.html

I swear if I could find a way to launch an electronic missile through my computer I would barbecue them for that.   :rage: :threat:


----------



## COBRA-6 (22 Mar 2006)

a_majoor said:
			
		

> IF you thought Pike's site was bad, try http://rabble.ca/
> 
> You can smell the popcorn from their jiffy pop hats from here



Oh God! I post there sometimes but it's an exercise in futility... RTFO... but sometimes entertaining!


----------



## PPCLI Guy (10 Apr 2006)

I post there as well as Grizzled Wolf - it is not at all easy to turn a blind eye to some of the stuff there...


----------

