A Protesters Response To "The Ex Charging Bison" Thread

[Korus]

Ok, I went through "The Night Faries". It has an interesting perspective, but there are a couple of things Miss Chayes writes that are a stretch of the truth, to put it nicely.
First;

Parliamentary elections last fall, hailed as free and fair--or at least as free and fair as anyone could expect in a place like Afghanistan--have allowed many Western observers to regard the nation-building process here as a success. In Kandahar, those elections were considered a joke--even by the people who won. Less than a quarter of the population voted, and, as most locals predicted, the counting process functioned like a bazaar with plenty of extra zeros for sale.

The turnout for the 2005 parliamentary elections, according to the JEMB, was about 51.5 percent(1) of all voters, which compared to Canada's 64.9% voter turnout in the 2006 Federal Elections(2) may seem like a dismal turnout. Considering it's a country where women's rights have been squandered for years under the Taliban, a deeper look provides interesting results. In Kandahar alone, the male voter turnout was 76.3%, while the female voter turnout was 23.7%(3). Now, I don't have the stats to prove this, but I'm assuming that the voter turnout between males and females in Canada is very close... So, it stands to reason that although many women did not vote for whatever reason, be it from fear, threats, or simply choosing not to vote, the voter turnout from the male side of things was pretty good. Imagine what kind of voter turn out it would be had women not been oppressed for so many years under the Taliban? (As well, the JEMB Report in reference 1 is a good read if you want some factual information on the elections, as opposed to pure heresay)

Now, no doubt you've heard about all the warlords elected into parliament. But, believe it or not, lots of good people were voted into power as well, people who are struggling to better their country. There was a CBC special a while back, shortly after I returned from Kandahar in February, where they had a very good example of one woman elected into parliament fighting to expose the warlords within the system, amongst other things, trying to improve her country. She was allowed to do this because of the US, other countries, Northern Alliance, and various NGOs who went into Afghanistan in 2001, deposed the Taliban, and helped set up an environment where elections COULD be held.. So just because the bad people gather a lot of attention in the parliament, doesn't mean that there aren't many good people trying to make things better for the country.

Even the "suicide bombings" in Afghanistan that have garnered mentions in the Western press of late are often something else. In one case I investigated carefully--the target, an Afghan official, was a friend of mine--much evidence contradicted the notion that the attack was a suicide bombing, as it was immediately labeled: the condition of my friend's body, the type and location of the survivors' wounds, and eyewitness descriptions. Everything pointed to a remote-controlled mine planted ahead of time. But no Afghan or U.S. official bothered to collect this evidence or to examine it seriously when it was presented to them.

Now, the only firsthand experience I have on this is seeing a suicide bomber's ear that landed in a very unlikely place....  But I'm sure there are members of this forum who were actually at these events. Try telling them that they weren't suicide bombings... Even if that once specific case was an RCIED as Miss Chayes alleges, that does not discount all the other suicide bombings that occured.

And yes the "Night Faries" do exist, and are a problem.. But, the question I must pose is that if Afghanistan is so much worse off now than before with the Americans and other foreigners around, what will happen if we all just pull out and leave? I have my theory on what will happen, and based on my experience and knowledge about the country, it does not paint a pretty picture.

Finally, I want to address the protesting of the training.. It's your right as a Canadian citizen, and indeed as a human to protest. That's why we chose to take up arms to defend that right. You can protest the mission all you want. But please try to understand that, as mentioned earlier, the training that the troops will undergo on this exercise will save both Canadian and Afghan lives when the soldiers get over there and are put in the dangerous positions. If you want to stop the mission, protest to the government and policy makers, please don't put people's lives in danger by trying make the troops go overseas unprepared.

(1) http://www.jemb.org/pdf/JEMBS%20MGT%20Final%20Report%202005-12-12.pdf
(2) http://www.nodice.ca/elections/canada/voterturnout.php
(3) http://www.results.jemb.org/province.asp?ProvinceID=28

 

[Bruce Monkhouse]

I just read the article and then "googled" the lady.......quite the woman!!

However after reading a few of her interviews it sounds like she would like more security/soldiers to properly train the local Police forces that they are supposed to be the "good guys".

That and a little military jaunt into Pakistan might not hurt either.....I don't see where she supports your arguement at all.

Who is behind these attacks?
Quote from Sarah Chayes,

This is not an indigenous, spontaneous uprising. All of these attacks originate in Pakistan; top Taliban leaders live and organize their activities openly in the Pakistani city of Quetta; the border is for all intents and purposes open. The problem of terrorism in Afghanistan is intimately linked to the regional strategy of Pakistan. The U.S. military fights Taliban members when they can be found in concentrated groups inside Afghanistan. But once they cross the border, they are beyond reach. The U.S. government, by not holding Pakistan accountable for its open support of the Taliban, is in fact contributing to the problem.

 

[A O G 101]

This is a link to their Events in winnipeg.


http://stopthebison.friendsofgrassynarrows.com/

 

[Kirkhill]

I think, guys, not to put too fine a point on this, the concern kgerrard and friends seem to have is not so much that you are assisting governments overseas to secure the terrain within their borders, but that you will become better able to handle situations such as Oka, Gustafsen Lake and the WTO riots in Quebec.

Monday, May 1
Winnipeg Walkout
Memorial Park
1:00PM

Protest the military exercise that trains soldiers to kill Afghanistani civilians by walking out of classes and work!

Why are we opposing this? Or, "But Canadian missions are only for peacekeeping. What's the problem?"

The problem is that Canada's peacekeeping reputation is already in tatters around the world. We don't need to look that hard to see why. Here are the kinds of operations the military is training for.


A Canadian soldier stands guard at the Toussaint Louverture Airport in Port-au-Prince.In Haiti, Canadian soldiers and RCMP are currently giving logistical assistance to the brutal Haitian National Police and participating in MINUSTAH, an international force which has been carrying out massacres in urban slums. All this to "stabilize" a government Canada helped put into place.

Two years ago, Canadian troops helped carry out a coup of Haiti's elected leader and oversee the installation of a government of business elites and sweatshop owners. The year before that, at the Ottawa Initiative on Haiti, Pierre Pettigrew and other members of the Canadian government decided alongside France, the U.S., and Latin American countries that the Haitian government must be overthrown.

For more on occupied Haiti visit this national information site or the local Winnipeg-CHAN site.



In Quebec City in 2001, 1000 soldiers were deployed against protestors of the Summit of the Americas, to stifle dissent against the governments' push for corporate control of the hemisphere.



In Ts'peten, also known as Gustafsen Lake, British Columbia, in 1995, native demonstrators trying to protect their land from further encroachment were met with armoured peronnel carriers, .50 calibre machine guns, and land mines. The federal and provincial governments rejected any involvement by an impartial, independent, international adjudication process to settle the conflict, and even the presence of neutral peacekeepers, with the famous declaration "There shall be no alien intervention into the affairs of this state."



In Afghanistan, top Canadian soldier Rick Hillier clarified the Canadian military's role, "We're not the public sevice of Canada. We're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces and our job is to be able to kill people."

Canadian forces joined the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. The military occupation continues today.



In Kanehsatake in 1990, Canadian forces attempted to put down Mohawk resistance to the town of Oka's attempted expansion of a golf course on to territory including a Mohawk burial ground.



In Iraq, we find Canadian troops again, despite the government's official position that they're staying out of the invasion. One Canadian Major General has thousands of U.S. troops under his command.


This is not a history of peacekeeping and good will, and the training operations in Winnipeg are an attempt to hone the Canadian military's tactics of repression.

It appears we have a problem.

The above was taken from the Agenda posted by A O G 101.

 

[paracowboy]

tinfoil hat wearers. Same sort of lunatic who equates a parking ticket with repression. People who confuse Liberty with licence, and a Right with a privilige. And, conveniently, never seem to grasp the concept of Responsibility, or Duty.

Clowns.
But, we'll continue to guarantee their rights to be morons, whether they appreciate it, or not.

 

[aesop081]

tinfoil hat wearers. Same sort of lunatic who equates a parking ticket with repression. People who confuse Liberty with licence, and a Right with a privilige. And, conveniently, never seem to grasp the concept of Responsibility, or Duty.

Clowns.
But, we'll continue to guarantee their rights to be morons, whether they appreciate it, or not.

+1

 

[Screw]

So whats the answer protester? Lets pull out of everywhere- and cut ALL aid off to these countires since their governments are corrupt and just let the chips fall where they will. The stronger will enslave the weaker but thats fine because we wont DIRECTLY have the blood on our hands.

 

[SprCForr]

For a short take try:

"Taliban - Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia" by Ahmed Rashid
Published by Yale University Press
274 pgs
ISBN: 0300089023

This book details the origins and rise of the Taliban up to Sept 2001.

I'm still tracking down a copy of his "Jihad - The Rise of Militant Islam in Central Asia"

 

[sober_ruski]

Been watching a lot of Michael Moore, have you?  FYI, even if true (a huge if), the bin Ladens are a massive industrial concern in the Middle East - to the point where on 9/11 there were bin Ladens living in the US itself.  Having commercial relations with a relatively innocent group of companies does not equate to supporting OBL.  Again, if there's evidence - anywhere - to suggest an American link to OBL the terrorist, I have yet to see it.

I do not watch the ranting of fat useless hypocritical pieces of crap. I HAD to watch Bowling in my academic writing class, i've had enough of that crap.

 

[paracowboy]

ruskie,

there is no link between Osama bin Layin'around, and the CIA, the Bush family, or the Mickey Mouse Club. You see, Osama hates America, and has almost his entire life. During the Soviet-Aghan struggle, he literally threw himself onto his cot and had a hissy fit because nobody in the camp would kill and American reporter. But, he wouldn't grab his ever-present AK and do the job himself, either. He's a coward, as are all terrorists. Because terrs are nothing more than bullies.

Osama binlazin' funded his fighters (for lack of a better word - the Afghan Mujehedeen despised the Arabs as cowards, and dilettentes) with his own money, and by fund-raising in the Middle East, principally the Kingdom of Saud. The Americans funnelled their financial support through the ISI. This is all open source material, and anyone who has half an interest can find it easily.

Not as easily as just believing the belt-fed, fully-automatic, large-caliber, gas-operated bullcrap spewed out by any number of liars with an agenda, mind you.

 

[Wookilar]

kg, my friend, you really have to talk to the people writing some of that tripe. And get them to take off their hats, our mind altering lazers we borrowed from the Russians obviously are being amplified by all the tinfoil.

Case in point, Gustafsen Lake. No landmines, no .50 cal's. Know what we did? Drove the Mounties around in armoured wheeled vehicles (Bison's, 2 of them). That's it. That's all. The RCMP was in charge of the entire operation and only requested a vehicle to protect them while they were doing patrols.

Like I said earlier (and echoed by many others), most of your compadres cannot put two coherent sentences together. All you have to do is ASK THE PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE!!!!! We might even answer politely.

 

[Armymatters]

kg, my friend, you really have to talk to the people writing some of that tripe. And get them to take off their hats, our mind altering lazers we borrowed from the Russians obviously are being amplified by all the tinfoil.

Case in point, Gustafsen Lake. No landmines, no .50 cal's. Know what we did? Drove the Mounties around in armoured wheeled vehicles (Bison's, 2 of them). That's it. That's all. The RCMP was in charge of the entire operation and only requested a vehicle to protect them while they were doing patrols.

Like I said earlier (and echoed by many others), most of your compadres cannot put two coherent sentences together. All you have to do is ASK THE PEOPLE THAT WERE THERE!!!!! We might even answer politely.

And to add a quick note, it is well within the RCMP's legal rights to request that the military make resources avaiable to them. This legal ability (written into Canada's laws) is called Military Aid to the Civil Power (MACP), which is found in the National Defence Act. This right is used by the Solicitor General of the affected province (who wields the power), which makes the request for military aid to the request to Chief of the Defence Staff at DND, which is legally bound by law to execute the request. However, the Chief of the Defence Staff alone can determine the nature and level of forces to be committed. The requesting province is then billed to pay the cost of the military aid, although the Federal government, which does not want to appear "cheap" after a major crisis affecting a province, most often waives it.  These procedures are very formal, to prevent an abuse of such powers, as the military is given a police role.

A related power is Military Aid to the Civil Community (MACC), which unlike MACP, the military does not operate in a police role, and instead, operates in other roles, such as assisting firefighters to deal with a forest fire, rescuing people trapped by storms, floods, etc. The procedures for making a request under this is less formal, and decision-making is decentralized, and the province will have to foot the bill for making the request.

 

[zipperhead_cop]

"In Ts'peten, also known as Gustafsen Lake, British Columbia, in 1995, native demonstrators trying to protect their land from further encroachment were met with armoured peronnel carriers, .50 calibre machine guns, and land mines. The federal and provincial governments rejected any involvement by an impartial, independent, international adjudication process to settle the conflict, and even the presence of neutral peacekeepers, with the famous declaration "There shall be no alien intervention into the affairs of this state."

:rofl:

Yah!  And I, like, totally heard about the sarin gas that the RCMP had hidden in the trees to protect the sonic pain field generators, and my roomate knows this guy who saw ten protesters get taken in a black helicopter and they were, like, never heard from again!  Soldiers are so, like, totally militant!  Gawd, like, take it easy, shuh!

 

[kgerrard]

I'm going to respond to one message at a time when I have a chance. Clearly I'm outnumbered, who knows how long I can last. While I'm reasonably confident in my position, I don't always have the necessary facts at my fingertips, and it can be wearying to have to repeat oneself.

I can't address Haiti, as I wasn't there and haven't been involved.  However, I suspect it's been taken on as a cause celebre by the left because it appears to them to be a black and white example of "capitalist" meddling in a democratically elected President's affairs.  I also suspect that the situation in Haiti is much, much more complex than the left would have us believe.  Canada's initial involvement, for instance, was under UN auspices, something that is typically conveniently forgotten.

Of course it's complex, and I would never pretend otherwise. An appeal to the authority of the UN holds little weight with me. Were the documents of the Ottawa Initiative not secret, we would know more.

You won't get any argument from me there - see some of my other recent posts regarding the Afghan National Police to see why.  However, as SeaKingTacco pointed out, I worked extensively on the security plan for the Afghan Presidential Election, hand in glove with the UN agency responsible for its conduct.  In a country as complex as Afghanistan, they ran surprisingly smoothly, with a surprising (given the typical level of Afghan corruption) lack of interference and fraud.  You have to start somewhere, and the Presidential election and the subsequent parliamentary elections were a good beginning - a lot smoother and more effective than in (say) Iraq.

There won't be much progress on this front with me, because I don't believe parliamentary governments are optimal. Moving the direction in that discussion seems less than worthwhile to me.

You're confusing Iraq and Afghanistan, a common flaw.  In Afghanistan, there was little "rebuilding" to be done (partially because the country is desparately poor and didn't have much in the way of infrastructure to "rebuild") and no gravy train for Haliburton and the like to jump on.  The US Government is hardly pouring billions of dollars into contracting in Afghanistan - much (I can't say most) of the aid money comes from international agencies and NGOs.

Hmm, thanks for pointing that out. But a quick search showed a significant list of contracts, including over $300 million for everyone's favourite Halliburton.

Who knows?  Part of the Army's job is to be ready for deployment - anywhere the government of the day decides.  For all we know, this could be a UN-sanctioned mission in  the Congo or Sudan:  anything can happen between now and 2008.  In this particular exercise's case (it isn't an operation) you're dealing with reservists who MAY be called upon to volunteer for deployment sometime.  If I recall correctly, many of these Reservists are actually from Winnipeg itself.

The Free Press article referred to it as "Operation Charging Bison", which caught on. I realise there's no guarantee that they'll be deployed to Afghanistan, but doesn't it seem likely? Regardless, these exercises are an opportunity for us to voice our disagreement with the direction Canada's military and foreign policies are moving.

"Many" is probably dramatically overstating the case.  "A few" would be more accurate, given our current deployment pattern.  You also need to check your facts.  JTF 2 is not operating in Iraq (the Christian Peacekeepers hostage rescue aside).

That contradicts what I've read but I can't back that up, especially since JTF2's deployment is secret.

 

[Taylor187]

kgerrard, have you ever thought that maybe everything you read on Fox News, CNN and the favorite for your type of people, guerrillanews might be fictitious, and or spiced up with the personal views of a writer?

I dont mean to take a stab at you in general, but it has to be said. Everything read on news websites, or you see on your T.V. is not accurate information. The news that you see is the real story wraped in a sellable package with ficitious information added in to make it exciting.

Like I said, I dont mean to make a stab at you, but it seems every person I know who is anti-U.S., anti-war, anti-military quotes people that they dont know, never met, and have no clue if the information is true. It just looks pretty, sounds good and is an easy argument to stand behind when you cant think of one yourself.

 

[kgerrard]

Secondly, on Haiti. I have a bit of an issue with the current views held by some about what we were doing there. Some people need to put down their Mother Jones and pick up an actual history book (not that there is anything wrong with Mother Jones, it's writing is quite good, just not a good source for history).

I've never read it. My sources are films, the book Canada in Haiti, and talks, including one by someone from Haiti.

The key point is, these people need our help. We, as in Canada, are very good at this type of help. We have been doing it for decades. While I acknowledge that there are many problems inside industry (Haliburton), the media (Fox, et all) and the international organizations (corruption in the UN), I do not agree that just dropping everything, pulling out and leaving these people is the answer. The alternative, as I see it, is to continue working inside these countries, not only despite some of the international problems, but mainly because of some of the problems. We will not be able to fix anything from the outside, we must be engaged in a meaningful way in order to have any influence.

I agree that they need our help, as do many across the world. I don't believe the military is an effective support. Some of the acts in which soldiers engage are surely beneficial, but I think we need to radically rethink our tactics. There's no public debate about this: it's "Either we're in or we're out", not "How should we be conducting ourselves on humanitarian missions?"

It is up to our elected representatives where we go (you have contacted your MP, MLA and the Prime Minister's office on these issues also, I would hope?) I'm being serious, by the way. Someone that can put their views together, is able to bring something to the table to have an intelligent discussion, should really ensure they reach a wide audience.

I don't believe the parliamentary system is responsive to the needs and desires of the populace. Pat Martin, my NDP MP, is dreadfully far from caring about most things that are important to me.

 

[Fusaki]

I agree that they need our help, as do many across the world. I don't believe the military is an effective support. Some of the acts in which soldiers engage are surely beneficial, but I think we need to radically rethink our tactics. There's no public debate about this: it's "Either we're in or we're out", not "How should we be conducting ourselves on humanitarian missions?"

So what would you suggest? How - in your opinion - should we better conduct our involvement in Afghanistan? You stamp your feet and pout over the way things are currently being done, but havn't offered any sort of alternative.

 

[Michael OLeary]

I don't believe the parliamentary system is responsive to the needs and desires of the populace. Pat Martin, my NDP MP, is dreadfully far from caring about most things that are important to me.

I guess the majority of the electorate that decided to vote disagreed with you.  So, how does your personal dissatisfaction with your MP create the case that the problem lies with the parliamentary system?  Did you plan to be a personal advisor to the candidate you voted for, to ensure your personal opinion was catered to?

 

[Ahkenaten]

Hello. Long time reader. First time poster.

Kgerrard first I would like to congratulate you on your conduct here in spite of being outnumbered. But I have questions I would like to put in your head. First I would like to talk about your brain....and my brain and the way everyone's brain works. In a nutshell the way the brain navigates a universe is NOT by asking questions, but by confirming or excluding preconceived answers. When we do not know the answer to something we create a 'best guess' answer and then endeavour to confirm this guess or exclude it. This is because the human brain CANNOT function without answers. Consider the old "if a tree falls in the forest does anyone hear it?". Now the point of this question is to put a person in a state where their brain accepts that they cannot answer a question. This, supposedly will lead to an almost trance-like operation of the brain known as 'meditation' and is meant as an escape from the tiring and frustrating existence of a mind (all of us) that is, as Morrison put it, "squirming like a toad"....always looking for answers and often never liking them as they may not correspond to the preconceived answer the mind already provided itself with.

What does this have to do with Afghanistan? Well, for starters, we're not in Afghanistan and we have questions. We do have preconceived answers but as thinking adults we understand these answers are only estimates and guesses so we look for sources of information to either confirm or deny these guesses. Where do we look? The media. Where else?

How does the media work? Well an international reporter is more, often than not, paid by the story. The story does not print they do not get paid. Subsequently a reporter finds the stories they believe have a high chance of being printed.

"IF IT BLEEDS IT LEADS."

There is also the issue of how a reporter wants to be viewed. They know that a pro-military operation story will be perceived, as propaganda and butt-kissing, but a negative story seems to imply that the reporter is covering the "hard stories" and finding the "hard answers". Baloney. Because they decide what is newsworthy, they also decide and manipulate (intentionally or not) our perception of Iraq OR Afghanistan.

Why is this important? Let me ask you: When was the last time you read in the paper or saw on the news a story about the Red Cross and all the good work they are doing in Iraq? (Notice that? I asked a question when I am already fairly certain of the answer.) I'm thinking that most people had no idea beyond peripheral assumption that the Red Cross was working in Iraq....until one of them gets kidnapped. Then and only then we learn of the Red Cross and not of all the fine work that they do but rather about how dangerous Iraq is and look here, Red Cross workers were kidnapped....must be a strange violent and uncontrolled place, right?

What about reconstruction? When was the last time you read about a reconstruction story? Personally I can't remember the last time I read about one. Does that mean they aren't going on? No, of course not, right? But since we never read about all the Iraqi's helping the Red Cross and all that the Red Cross is doing to help them, or about reconstruction or about the Iraqis or Afghans who are working for democracy or change, but instead only what happens when things go bad. We don’t read about the IEDs that were found and disarmed, we only read about the ones that take life.

Then there is the classic "liberal media" or "underground media" like Alternative Radio etc. I listen to them all the time. They are not always 'wrong', but there is no doubt that these people have chosen their "side" and will not tell any stories that do not conform with it (no different than the Bush admin.'s mouthpiece Fox news) They lie. They lie easily as much as any other media source lies or manipulates or makes it up as they go along. They lie for the same reason Fox will: Because they believe they are fighting the "good fight" and that justifies anything. They are the "I told you so" crowd and for most of them reality or the shaping of reality is more about fashion than actual reality. Who would they be to their peers if one day they woke up and didn’t tow the line? They would be excommunicated and their "Rage-Against-The-Machines" girlfriends would leave them. Yes: it is that simple.

You will not read about Afghan fathers who want their children (girls as well) to attend school. You will find it hard to read about the people who believe and live for and fight for things like 'freedom', which let's face it, has become a cliché word without meaning. We do not understand because we live with about as much freedom as one can experience in this life or world. We will not read about the kids who are NOT being stoned to death or beaten for playing or singing. You will only read bad news because bad news is all that sells papers. Honestly, if you past a newspaper box with the front page heralding a new construction or government initiative would you bother to read the by-line? But if the headline read, "1000 Afghans killed, 20 Canadian soldiers killed" you'd stop, right?

Whether it's 90% good news and 10% bad news or the other way around all you will ever read is the bad news. This shapes our perception to a point that most of us are too proud to admit or realize.



facta, non verba.

 

[S McKee]

While I believe it is everyone’s right to protest I find that many in the anti-military camp really haven't the foggiest idea about they are talking about. The "land mines" at Gustafsen Lake is a prime example; if the writer actually knew about the CF he/she would have known that Canada has banned the use of landmines. Rather than protesting an organization that protects your right to free speech and pays for that right with the lives of your fellow citizens, maybe you should be protesting China's policy of harvesting organs from executed political prisoners (read Ezra Levant's column featured in today's Calgary Sun). I'm a firm believer that all Canadian males should have to fulfill a period of obligatory military service, that way they would realize the cost of maintaining the freedom in this country. But I guess any protest no matter how misguided is a good reason to cut class.