---- Original Message -----
From: "Philip Bladen" <flierphil@sasktel.net>
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2007 12:00 PM
Subject: Murphy and Hillier - Afghanistan.
For Information.
I have had a reply by return from the Ombudsman saying he is having discussions with the Murphy Producer, who will get in touch with me. I intend to inform the Ombudsman that I will publish this in any national paper which wants it.
FROM: Phil Bladen, Box 235, Preeceville, SK. S0A 3B0 Ph: 306-547-4639
Dear Sir,
I wish to make the strongest possible complaint concerning the content of the National Radio Cross Country Check-up Programme broadcast on Sunday, December 17, 2007.
The subject was Afghanistan, with General Hillier as the guest. The stated purpose of the programme was to give Canadians an opportunity to comment on their viewpoints on the "mission" undertaken by Canadian armed forces.
The vast majority of callers chosen to go to air by the receptionists and the producer congratulated General Hillier on his "outstanding leadership" in his conduct of the conflict, spoke in favour of the stated purpose of the mission of bringing "democracy to Afghanistan", and were in favour of returning the Armed Forces to a new high in morale by changing the military role to active warfare instead of peacekeeping. Indeed, this statement was emphasised by Rex Murphy in his introduction to the programme, placing an immediate bias on the show in favour of combat operations.
As far as I recall, and I made no actual count, only four callers spoke against the mission, although the majority of Canadians , acording to polls, are opposed to the invasion of Afghanistan.
I cannot believe that a legitimate cross section of callers produced an 80+% of people in favour of the invasion. For myself, I obtained a calling tone in attempting to gain access, but after several seconds, the tone changed to the busy signal, which continued for the two hours.
A friend of mine did get through to the interviewers, to speak against the mission, but he was not called to air. May I ask you to investigate the slips sent to the producer for selection to ascertain how many of those callers opposed to the mission were not allowed on air.
Further, both Gen. Hillier and Mr. Murphy were guilty of emphasising that the Afghanistan invasion was, and is, a United Nations Mandated Mission, that Canadian Forces were operating in Afghanistan on behalf of the nations of the world.
The facts are otherwise. The United States did not even ask for a Mandate from the U.N. before illegally invading in Oct., 2001. Operation Enduring Freedom was, and remains, a totally illegal invasion of a sovereign state, and murdering its citizens. This was the major charge brought at the Nuremburg War Crimes Trials in 1946 / 7 against the Nazi Regime leaders.
Gen. Hillier emphasised that the "mission" took place for the legitimate reason of capturing or killing the al Qaeda organisation responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Centre in 2001.
This is also untrue.
In the case of Nicaragua v. the U.S., the U.N. denied the right of the U.S. to invade that nation to remove Sandonista "rebels", who constituted a danger to the U.S. In addition, F.B.I. Special Agent Rex Tomb, giving evidence to the Congressional Hearings on June 5, 2006, stated in reponse to a question. "The F.B.I. has no hard evidence of the involvement of al Qaeda in the World Trade Centre attacks."
The U.N. approved the International Security Assistance Force in Dec. 2001 tro protect the Medical and Refugee Agencies, and N.G.O.'s, in attempting to assist the many thousands of civilians who had been killed, crippled, wounded, orphaned, or made homeless by the indiscriminate carpet bombing carried out by the U.S. Air Force of villages deemed to be "strongholds of the Taliban".
Those Agencies were also attempting to investigate the thousands of executions of prisoners and opponents carried out by the Northern Front Group, with which the U.S. had become allied to defeat the Taliban government, at Mazir e Sharif and Kabul.
The I.S.A.F. Mandate was purely as a force to protect the Agencies sent into Afghanistan, and had no mandate for offensive combat operations. Gen. Hillier stated that I.S.A.F. was mandated legitimately to go to the South, Kandahar in particular, to engage in combat operations.
I have found that Prof. Michael Mandel, of Osgoode Hall Law School has published a study of the invasion of Afghanistan in the area of U.N. and International Law, and has come to the conclusion that the whole operation is illegal, which makes those participating outside the I.S.A.F. mandate guilty of War Crimes. Can it be possible that Mr. Murphy and Gen. Hillier are not aware of this? I have on several occasions sent e-mails to Cross Country Check-up giving this information.
These are the main strands I wish to emphasise in a programme which overtly supported the illegal invasion of Afghanistan, despite the U.N. Security Council Resolution 1378, of Nov. 2001, which, in part, requested all Members to "Respect the Sovereignty, Independence, Territorial integrity, and National Unity of Afghanistan," and solve the dispute by diplomatic means. This resolution was, and is, totally ignored by the U.S., and the N.A.T.O. responsibility for I.S.A.F. has been totally abused. and misrepresented by Mr. Murphy and Gen. Hillier.
I submit that opponents of the "mission" were unfairly excluded from airing their views on this programme.
I respectfully request that your Office investigates my complaints as a prelude to a complaint on this to the C.R.T.C. I have addressed this also to Cross Country Check-up.
Yours truly,
Phil Bladen,
Box 235, Preeceville, SK. S0A 3B0
Ph: 306-547-4639