Are World Terrorist Groups Considered Friend Or Foe

It is possible that this a question that needs to be addressed by Dion and the loyal Opposition.

Grits chew on nutty rhetoric
By EZRA LEVANT

When Bill Graham was briefly the leader of the Liberal Party last year, he chose a former Communist Party activist, an MP named Ujjal Dosanjh, to be the Liberal defence critic.

It was an awful choice, but no one took it too seriously -- Graham was just a place-holder, and so was Dosanjh.

But now the Liberal Party has a new leader and a new defence critic, named Denis Coderre. And Coderre is starting to make Ujjal the former Communist look like a Green Beret by comparison.

Last week, the Liberals were peppering the government with questions about our military mission in Afghanistan. They weren't questions about how our Canadian troops are doing, of course.

Nothing about getting them more equipment or more moral support. The Liberals were concerned about the treatment of captured Taliban terrorists.

Apparently, they weren't getting enough visits from the Red Cross for the Liberals' taste.

According to the Geneva Conventions, the Red Cross has the right to visit prisoners of war. But Article 4 of the Third Geneva Conventions is clear: Terrorists are not considered prisoners of war, and are not entitled to the same legal courtesies as soldiers who are part of a chain of command, wear a uniform, and bear arms openly. Taliban terrorists don't meet those tests. But don't tell that to the Liberal Party of Canada, who pressed the government at length.

After a few rounds of that, Prime Minister Stephen Harper shot back. "I can understand the passion that the leader of the Opposition and members of his party feel for the Taliban prisoners. I just wish occasionally they would show the same passion for Canadian soldiers."

The Liberals exploded in a splutter of rage. Insults in Parliament are generally ignored, but this one hurt because it rang true. Nothing that

Harper could say would prove that truer than the Liberal reply, though.

Harper's words, said Coderre, risked "inflaming our enemies."

Wait a minute. Is inflaming our enemies bad? Isn't our mission in

Afghanistan not just to inflame the enemy terrorists, but to kill them?

Maybe even in flames? If the Liberal defence critic thinks "inflaming" terrorists is bad, he must think that shooting them is bad, too.

Coderre was just getting revved up. "The answer of the prime minister today is a disgrace. To ask us to make a choice between the Taliban detainees and our troops I think it's infamous."

Infamous? Really? Does Coderre find it hard to make a choice between captured terrorists and our own troops? He hates being forced to choose?

Coderre's reply shouldn't come as a surprise. Last summer, he marched in a rally in Montreal opposing Israel's war against Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon.

Coderre proudly marched along with many waving Hezbollah flags -- a group that is officially a criminal organization in Canada. More recently, he engaged in a smear campaign against Rick Hillier, the chief of Canada's defence staff. Coderre should look at his party's title more carefully -- they're supposed to be Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition.

Coderre isn't alone in the Liberal Party. Another MP, Borys Wrzesnewskyj, called for Hezbollah to be legalized. And Stephane Dion himself whipped his party into opposing the renewal of Canada's Anti-Terror Act.

This sort of nutty rhetoric usually resides with the NDP, a party that will never form government. But Stephane Dion might be prime minister and Denis Coderre could be defence minister. Terrifying.