February 28, 2006
Canadian takes command of forces in South Afghanistan
Feb. 28 - Brig. Gen. David Fraser,
Canadian, takes over in southern Afghanistan, but it's a bit more complicated than that.
Read this post at The Torch for good, well-linked information on the structure and nature of the command.
Posted by: Debbye at
04:25 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 55 words, total size 1 kb.
1
This is sooo important! Why?
Indonesia,[220 million], is watching. They are struggling with great poverty, even though cities like Jakarta look affluent.
If security and a better way of life gains ground in Afghanistan, then it will influence 220 million to side with a winner. 220 million, not all, but mostly Muslim.
If we pull out or fail with Afghanistan, then 220 million may tend to support the very tiny group of Jihadist fundamentalists who would like to spread their poison in Indonesia and other equatorial countries.
The Hindu and Christian people of Indonesia will be the first to face the harsh blade edge of fundamental Jihadists if they gain ground in Indonesia.
There can be no failure allowed in Afghanistan or Iraq, even though Iraq looks very dark at the moment. TG
Posted by: TonyGuitar at March 01, 2006 05:48 PM (rmMzv)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 26, 2006
Canadians in Afghanistan
Feb. 26 - A Canadian soldier was slightly wounded after two grenades exploded near a Canadian patrol on the Kandahar road between two Canadian camps. The attack was made at approximately 10:30 p.m. and and, as too often happens, it was a hit-and-run attack and thus no chance to return fire (
Canadian patrol under rocket-propelled grenade attack in Afghanistan):
The first round exploded on the road between vehicles. The second projectile struck a rear door.
"It was bang, bang," said Grimshaw. [Maj. Nick Grimshaw, the senior officer on the patrol.]
Capt. Jay Adair was standing through the hatch in the rear the lead LAV-3 and saw the RPG attack firsthand.
"I heard the bangs and I also saw the explosions," Adair said.
"I'm not sure whether I saw the explosions from the weapons being fired or the weapons striking the ground and the vehicle. But certainly a bright flash and two loud bangs."
[...]
The attack was on the main road from the city to Kandahar Airfield, the same road where Canadian diplomat Glyn Berry died in a bomb attack.
As the article notes, the soldiers were traveling in G-wagons, which replaced the unarmoured Iltis vehicles after
Corporal Jamie Brendan Murphy was killed in January, 2004.
Properly funding and equipping the military is going to be a major challenge for the newly installed minority Conservative government. Canadian chief of the defence staff Gen. Rick Hillier lays it out:
"We remain short about three quarters of a billion dollars just to sustain the present Canadian Forces," he said.
"That's everything from married quarters to spare parts, to ammunition, the running of simulators, to gas and oil, to rations and to everything else necessary to march or fly or sail."
Beyond these day-to-day expenses, there's an enormous backlog of repairs and maintenance that has been deferred for years.
"The bow wave of things that we have not done, that we have put off . . . is enormous," he said. "It is going to take us billions of dollars to get out of that hole and I mean billions with a capital B."
Hillier also said that the military has too many buildings, hangars and other infrastructure on its bases that cost money but add nothing to the Forces.
"My estimate is that we have anywhere up to a quarter of our infrastructure that is not operationally required."
Hillier has welcomed the Conservative government's proposals for new planes, bases and 13,000 new troops.
[...]
Hillier seemed to be taken aback by a new poll published Friday which suggested almost two-thirds of Canadians oppose Canada's involvement in Afghanistan.
[...]
Hillier also said he wants to build a stronger connection between the Forces and the rest of the country after years in which the military and the civilian community have drifted apart.
"Having been disconnected from the population for many years in my view, disowned by Canadians in this past decade and seen their confidence in us plummet, we have an obligation to ensure that we as Canada's armed forces are seen by our population . . . as exactly that; as their armed forces."
Although I can't scientifically prove it, I do believe that the impact of American Milbloggers on communications between the American public and military has been immense. As
this chart indicates, though, there is a decided lack of them in Canada.
Bloggers do have a way of filling a vacuum, though, and Damian Brooks and Chris Taylor are part of a new enterprise to fill that need: The Torch, a blog focused on the Canadian military and which already has an impressive series of posts including this one which takes on the notion that Canadians are a nation of "peacekeepers." Be sure to bookmark and visit The Torch.
(Yahoo link Neale News; CTV and Milblogs links via Newsbeat 1.)
Posted by: Debbye at
06:33 PM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 630 words, total size 5 kb.
1
The *used car lot for planes* in Arizona has a good supply of very new well made aircraft for sale at very good prices.
There have been a few airlines forced into chapter 11 due to the recent sqeeze play in the air travel market.
One fleet of planes sittiing in the Arizona sun is an efficient and very reliable late model made by Bombardiere. Priced right!
There are probably some very worthy bulk carriers to back up our CF130 Hurculese as well. TG
Posted by: TonyGuitar at February 27, 2006 02:03 AM (rmMzv)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 20, 2006
Cdn. Journalists say publish cartoons
Feb. 20 - A bit of vindication for Ezra Levant and the
Western Standard: according to a recent Compass poll, about 6 in 10 Canadian journalists say
Publish cartoons.
Interesting breakdown of options:
According to Monday's report, about 17 per cent of those polled felt all major Canadian media should have reprinted the images. Another 18 per cent said most media should have carried the cartoons and 25 per cent said at least some of Canada's biggest outlets should have used the caricatures.
By contrast, about 31 per cent of respondents said major media were correct in the decision not to use the material.
The great divide:
Of those who supported non-publication, most cited respect as the reason.
The bulk of those who said the cartoons should have been carried said fear was the primary motivator for not publishing.
Encouragingly, the poll also found that the journalists who participated understood the implications of not publishing the cartoons:
Still, the majority of Canadian journalists also said they had at least some concern that not publishing the cartoons increased the power of extremist groups at the expense of Shia Muslims who include portraits in their every day lives and pluralist Muslims who want the Islamic world to accept diversity of opinion.
Journalists were asked to score how strongly they agree with that argument on a scale of one to five, with five being the strongest point of agreement. A total of 62 per cent scored three or more on the scale.
(Via Neale News.)
Posted by: Debbye at
04:52 PM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 257 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Publishing is simply foolish in this time window.
The possible effects of publishing are known. Common sense would dictate that this one cartoon topic can be allowed to rest for the moment.
There is no risk of losing any freedom of speech. It is simply a matter of not feeding the obvious Jihadist plot for wild disruption in the streets.
The disruption that contibutes to damaging the advancment of peace and democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The same disruption that has been so effective thwarting peace around Israel and advancing the Hamas.
More troops and fewer cartoons will help with security for those who risked their lives to vote in Iraq and Afghanistan. TG
Posted by: TonyGuitar at February 21, 2006 02:44 PM (rmMzv)
2
I disagree with you, Tony. When fear and intimidation dictate what we read and discuss then we have lost our freedom to express our thoughts.
We don't always get to choose where we make our stand. If it is over some cartoons we may wish it was something more, um, noble and high-minded that we need to defend, but that doesn't take us off the hook.
Posted by: Debbye at February 21, 2006 04:58 PM (qePxg)
3
The newspapers say that publishing the cartoons will serve no useful purpose, and that those who really want to see the cartoons can do so on the Internet. Fine. I'll go to the internet to see the cartoons, and then I'll stay on the internet for the rest of my information acquisition. Newspaper readership and advertising revenue is collapsing so fast that many of the political correctors employed there will lose their jobs before they get to retirement. It couldn't happen to a nicer bunch.
Posted by: CJ at February 21, 2006 06:54 PM (fuUoQ)
4
Debbye, we shall see over time where the the gains or losses due to publishing cartoons pan out.
Cartoons at the moment are a fuel for the disruption of infant democracies beginning to take hold in Afghanistan and Iraq.
There is no threat to our freedom of speech and only a temporary restraint on the one topic of Muhammed characture.
We can afford to ease up on the one topic at least until Muslims adjust to the freedom of democracy and understand free speech better.
In the mean time, this whole exercise is a diversion. We should be supporting those who risked their lives to vote with more troops to provide more security.
It will be expensive, but to do less is unthinkable. TG
Posted by: TonyGuitar at February 22, 2006 04:04 AM (rmMzv)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 19, 2006
Canadians in Afghanistan (Updated)
Feb. 19 - It may be underfunded and underequipped, but the Canadian military in Afghanistan does this country proud and doesn't back down when
it comes under fire from insurgents:
Military officials told The Canadian Press that attackers fired three rocket-propelled grenades at a platoon from Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry taking shelter in a compound in Gumbad, about 60 kilometres northeast of Kandahar.
No Canadians were reportedly injured in the attack, which occurred at about 7:30 p.m. local time. The rockets fell into fields surrounding the camp, just south of the small village.
Military officials said a patrol was sent out to investigate the enemy firing positions, but found no sign of insurgents.
It's the first minor skirmish reported since a new rotation of Canadian soldiers began arriving in the country for Task Force Afghanistan during the past month. The number of soldiers is expected to reach 2,200 by next month.
There will probably be accusations that this attack was a direct result of the decision to publish the Danish cartoons in the
Western Standard (as though there had not been prior attacks on Canadian Forces!) Damian has a thoughtful essay (which predated this recent rocket attack) and questions
whether we can keep our soldiers safe without becoming something less than we are now.
(N.B.: The headline reads the troops "exchanged fire" with insurgents although nothing in the story indicates there was actually an exchange of fire. I can't account for the discrepancy. Nevertheless, the fact that a patrol was sent out implies the willingness to shoot back.)
Update: The CTV account has been expanded and it appears there was indeed a firefight:
The soldiers returned fire using rifles and their new 155-millimetre M777 howitzer, a towed artillery piece. Military officials said a patrol was sent out to investigate the enemy firing positions, but found no sign of insurgents.
There's a somewhat detailed account of the procedure the patrol undertook in their effort to locate the enemy:
"There were no locals, there was no enemy traces found," Lt.-Col. Ian Hope, the head of the PPCLI battle group, told CP. "But that's quite normal too because normally they shoot and they run.''
The troops did, however, find a series of trenches and tunnels which were likely used as an escape route.
"According to our American counterparts, it is a well-known area that the Taliban have used for fortifications in the past," said Hope.
"They've conducted several ambushes there. They've actually killed some (Afghan National Army soldiers) from those positions, so it was no surprise ... that that was an area that they were firing from."
I've probably quoted more than I should have, but after calling them on what they left out I wanted to fully acknowledge the additions they've made to the original story.
(Via Neale News.)
Posted by: Debbye at
02:24 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 470 words, total size 3 kb.
1
From the story I agree there's no indication the Canadians "exchanged fire", ie. actually engaged in real hardcore combat. The headline, however, is again a misleading one. Like the one about the cartoon in the post below.
The MSM thinks it's fine to either leave out facts or fabricate them or lie outright just to get attention to their stories. I do the headline thing, too, to generate interest, but I don't manipulate or lie. Why does the MSM?
Shortly after starting blogging last September I slammed an MSM outlet on their headline claiming that Stephen Harper was angry in a particular situation but the story didn't say that. Hours later, the headline was changed. It's possible they got caught that time. Don't know if my post had anything to do with it.
The post in question is here:
http://thecanadiansentinel.blogspot.com/2005/09/more-manipulative-msm-bias-against.html
The MSM always tries to get away with dishonest manipulation of those who only glance at headlines and rarely read the article under them. They obviously are doing it deliberately, and I'd like to see some legal consequences for it. Lying to the public like this, with all the power to influence public perception, is dangerous, and I suspect the Liberals had long benefited from this headline engineering working against Reform and the CA. The last election, with bloggers watching and waiting to pounce and expose them, the MSM was suddenly quite scrupulous about this sort of thing compared to in past elections. This probably had a lot to do with the Liberals' downfall. The truth hurts Liberals.
Posted by: The Canadian Sentinel at February 19, 2006 05:36 PM (y42an)
2
Excellent points all around, Sentinel.
Another possibility, though, is that there was an exchange of fire but someone decided to edit that bit out because it doesn't fit fond beliefs that Canadian troops are benevolent "peacekeepers."
Whatever the explanation, misleading headlines betray the public trust and we need to call them on it.
Posted by: Debbye at February 19, 2006 06:51 PM (xOBIX)
3
Now that the excluded critical info has been included, it certainly does nothing to make the CTV look good. They look incompetent and indecisive. Didn't even notice the discrepancy between the message of the headline and the lack of any supporting evidence thereto.
Quite amateurish. Another hit the MSM has taken, owing to its own fault.
With all their resources and supposed "professionals" on staff, it's inexcusable and only lends credence to my often reiterated declaration that in the age of citizen reporting, the MSM is rapidly rendering itself anachronistic and will continue to lose viewership and readership to non-MSM internet-based information sources.
Eventually, further, I predict that non-MSM information disemmination will move into the traditionally MSM-monopolized areas of radio, TV, print, etc. Podcasting is already catching on, for example. The rest is only a matter of funding, but that'll come. It's about the market: demand and willingness to pay, etc.
Posted by: Canadian Sentinel at February 21, 2006 06:49 AM (y42an)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 18, 2006
Raising the level of the debate
Feb. 18 - The University of Toronto's student newspaper,
The Strand, has published a cartoon depicting Mohammed and Jesus kissing.
The cartoon, "Tunnel of Tolerance," and editorial, "To print or not to print," can be viewed here (registration may be required.)
Unsurprisingly it has caused a bit of an uproard , but the U of T student newspaper refuses to apologize for publishing the Muhammad and Jesus cartoon.
I am in the usual evening rush (wake up, gulp down coffee, dash out) and don't have the time at this moment to properly formulate and present my thoughts, but my immediate reaction is that I like this response to the Cartoon Controversy. I'll try to put words to my thoughts tomorrow.
One sees what one wants to see. I don't see this as a gay statement but as a kiss of peace -- a symbol of acceptance and tolerance between two of the world's largest religions.
Bottom line: the war of terror is not a war on Muslims.
[As I noted, I'm in a horrible rush and thus reserve the right to edit this for the sake of clarity.]
Posted by: Debbye at
05:42 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 179 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Surprising that the brilliant minds who occupy expensive places in Canadian universities can not resist feeding incentive to Emirs and mullahs to stir up cahotic actions that cost lives.
Our freedom of expression is not under any risk of loss. It is simply wise to reserve cartoon expression until the Jihadist campaign is reasonably past.
Why is it not foolish to make a university and the people who pass and work there targets?
No Muhammed content cartoon is harmless in the eyes of dictators who see peace and democracy advancing on their total power.
When more of our troops enable democracy to become firm in Iraq and Afghanistan, the expression of Muhammed cartoon humour will be easily tolerated as long as it is funny and not an expression of hate.
Posted by: TonyGuitar at February 19, 2006 01:40 AM (rmMzv)
2
I just put up a post on this very cartoon issue.
See the post at "Exposed Agenda" at
http://cowtwngrl.blogspot.com/2006/02/moonbat-publishes-jesus-mohammed-gay.html
You'll see that I had opined on it firstly on the basis of what was reported in the Ottawa Sun (which was very irresponsibly misleading) and then on the basis of the cartoon I had the presence of mind to Google and found for myself. The transition of thought should be interesting to see, for it'll illuminate the difference between being manipulated into an incorrect impression by the MSM and seeing the truth for oneself and formulating an opinion based on that.
Which brings me to the post just above this one on the so-called fire-exchange in Afghanistan.
Posted by: The Canadian Sentinel at February 19, 2006 05:21 PM (y42an)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 17, 2006
And you thought the FCC exceeded its mandate!
Feb. 17 - The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunication Commission (CRTC) has ruled that overcharging customers is a Canadian value. No, that's incorrect. What I meant to write is that the CRTC ruled that customers of Bell Canada and Telus Corp. were overcharged and, rather than ordering the two companies to reimburse those customers, the money be used for 'an important social and economic goal' (
CRTC vetoes repayment).
I'm not the only one who is unhappy with this ruling:
Consumer groups and one dissenting commissioner said the money belongs to consumers and should go back to them.
CRTC chair Charles Dalfen told reporters yesterday that expanding broadband services, also known as high-speed Internet, is an important social and economic goal.
It has been a federal government priority for at least five years, although Ottawa has yet to allocate enough money to provide access in most rural and remote communities. "We think this is in the broader interests of the consumers," Mr. Dalfen said.
[...]
The CRTC said in its ruling that the companies will have until June 30 to outline how they will use the money to expand broadband. They are also ordered to use at least 5 per cent of the money to improve broadband access for the disabled.
Parliament failed to allocate money to expand broadband services so the CRTC has decided to
appropriate money for the cause - money which rightfully belongs to those who were overcharged.
This sets a very dangerous precedent.
Posted by: Debbye at
09:39 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 258 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Give me a break! The CRTC made the right set of decisions in the absence of any leadership from Parliament. Remember they are a quasi-judicial body that faces Mamdamus type conditions because they MUST decide on specific cases brought before them.
The Internet is a key factor in the future development of Canada, as important to commerce and industry as the telephone, and perhaps even more so. We most certainly should be developing it at breakneck speed, and fostering such Canadian Companies as Nortel to get on with the job. As common carriers, both Bell and Telus have a great deal ahead of them, and they should NOT be looking south of the border for any ideas or leadership because NONE exists there. The FCC has made an unholy mess of the regulation of the radio spectrum with their auction initiatives as well as the utter chaos with cellular service, and the Internet has become a security risk for them because of their confused and conflicted Republican ideas over "free dumb".
My view is that the Internet needs dramatic enhancement, particularly in matters of national Canadian security, and for the proper protection of Canadian citizens from foreign sources. We are a land of immigrants and easy prey to foreign governments bent upon perverting the freedoms Canadians enjoy.
In fact, I am prepared to go much further and place further restictions on foreign ownership of Canadian telecommunications undertakings, and to crank that up to 80% Canadian ownership. Telecommunications, Broadcasting, and the Internet are vital CANADIAN assets, and cannot be allowed to fall into the hands of Chinese Communists, or American Republicans. We simply do not need any more ENRON stories in Canada. And we do not need the Chinese Communist Government tapping into sensitive phone conversations in Canada between Governments and Business interests, to say nothing of religious organizations fiercely opposed to the "ideology" of the "communists" and their "capitalist friends" in Washington.
Posted by: Joe Green at February 18, 2006 04:14 AM (5dXW9)
Posted by: Debbye at February 18, 2006 07:39 AM (j4VfO)
3
Quick - someone run to Shoppers for the meds.
Re:
"They are also ordered to use at least 5 per cent of the money to improve broadband access for the disabled."
What does this mean?
Posted by: John B at February 20, 2006 11:18 AM (3RGzm)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Stifling political commentary, Canadian style
Feb. 17 - What on earth has prompted Warren Kinsella to sue a Canadian blogger, as Bruce reports in
Blogging is a dangerous game? The defendent is
Mark Bourrie, an Ottawa bogger, and Kinsella is demanding $600,000.
The claims of Kinsella's suit are here. As there is something of a history of bad feelings between Kinsella and Bourrie one has to wonder if this is a "gotcha" suit rooted more over an issue of English grammar than a serious claim of defamation.
Jay Currie has a great deal more here.
Mark is doing the right thing by fighting this suit, but his defense will cost a great deal.
Donations can be made at stopkinsella@hotmail.com on www.paypal.com , and I would encourage everyone to contribute what they can. Defending Mark now will be less costly than the long term harm which will be done to Canadian political bloggers should frivolous suits as this one be permitted to proceed unchallenged.
There was an ugly spate of threatened lawsuits last June which threatened the Canadian news media. Now it's the unofficial news media which is being targeted and, as was done then, it's fighting time.
Posted by: Debbye at
07:30 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 202 words, total size 2 kb.
1
Unless I've really misunderstood defamation law in Ontario, that's not true, or, more accurately, it's not applicable in this case.
Interested persons are encouraged to peruse the Libel and Slander Act (Ontario) [which can be found here:
www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Statutes/English/90112_e.htm
to see if Steve falls under one of the available privileges. I didn't make my comment to be snarky, I made it because I consider Steve a friend and I don't want him to inadvertantly be subject to the shifting whims of the plaintiff in this matter.
I don't think there's a legitimate claim here: certainly no damages
One of the charming aspects of defamation law in Ontario is that there is no requirement on the plaintiff to prove damages.
Posted by: Bob Tarantino at February 14, 2006 09:59 PM
Posting Bob*s comment just to be helpful. If he is annoyed at me for doing so, I would certainly apologize, but I can’t imagine a reason for any protest though. TG
Posted by: TonyGuitar at February 17, 2006 09:14 PM (rmMzv)
2
I just think Kinsella needs a hobby. I have heard him more since the election ended that I needed to. Attacking a fellow blogger may be a case of merit, or not, but it just shows Warren can be thin skinned. Funny, when he was one of Chretien's attack dogs, he could dish it out.....
Posted by: Mark in Bowmanville at February 18, 2006 03:03 AM (pD+Bc)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
February 10, 2006
Canadian connection to thwarted L.A. attack
Feb. 10 - Noteworthy item here, although the interesting part is not even in the story:
Malaysian recruited for attack on U.S. pulled out after seeing Sept. 11 on TV. The Malaysian in question is Zaini Zakaria. (I suspect
Australians and New Zealanders are familiar with that name, hmm?)
Duly note this:
It quoted Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the reputed mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks who was captured in 2003, as saying "three potential pilots were recruited for the alleged second wave."
It identified them as Zacarias Moussaoui, Abderraouf Jdey, and Zaini. (Bolding added.)
I immediately recognized the name of Jdey. In that this is a story on a Canada's supposed primary news site (funded by the taxpayers) and written by writers for the Canadian Press one might think they would blink (if not shoot out of their chairs) at the name "Abderraouf Jdey" but, while providing some information about Moussaoui and Zaini, they passed on Jdey.
So why am I making such a fuss? Because Abderraouf Jdey is a Canadian. He moved here in 1991 and became a Canadian citizen in 1995. His suicide tape was found in Afghanistan and the FBI issued a world-wide warrant for his arrest some years ago. He is considered armed and dangerous. (Heh. Wikipedia has an entry on Jdey including some allegations which are highly, um, speculative.)
It's absolutely incredible that they fumbled on some rather obvious Can-con (that's a phrase we give to the mandatory inclusion of Canadian content imposed on radio and television.) Journalistic malpractice or willful ignorance? I can't read their minds so can't make a determination in this matter but I do think either is pathetic.
Moussaoui, of course, was already in jail on September 11, 2001, so his participation in any plot planned for 2002 was foiled, and
fficial"target=_blank">Zaini Zakaria is currently being held for his involvement in Jemaah Islamiya, the al Qaeda-linked group which planned and carried out the 2002 Bali terror attack.
I knew Jdey's name already -- it also came up during the Sept. 11 hearings in the U.S. -- but had to google to get information about Zaini. (That's because I'm just an amateur and forgot his mention in the Sept. 11 Commission report.)
The true wonder is how they concluded the item in the best tradition of the Sob Story without blushing.
Posted by: Debbye at
04:20 PM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 399 words, total size 3 kb.
1
This news item is from Associated Press (AP), not CP.
Posted by: Robert McClelland at February 11, 2006 10:07 PM (Akj8G)
2
My Esp seems to be working.. One day late, but not bad. Good to see you again. TG
Posted by: TonyGuitar at February 11, 2006 10:19 PM (rmMzv)
3
Robert! Great to see you're still around. Sadly, in this instance you're wrong. Scroll to the bottom of the CBC story and it's there in bolded, italicized letters: "Canadian Press."
Tony, I was going to email you to thank you for your comments during my work-imposed hiatus. On second thought, I still will. Check your email (but give me a few moments.)
Posted by: Debbye at February 12, 2006 12:21 AM (QlclR)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
53kb generated in CPU 0.0237, elapsed 0.0773 seconds.
69 queries taking 0.0658 seconds, 171 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.