Angry in the Great White North

By the way, listen to a podcast of my interview with Rob Breakenridge on this story, courtesy of AM770 CHQR in Calgary.

And now read about what the real quote was, and how an apology is offered.

Liberal MP Garth Turner seems incapable of apologizing.  Most other people would have immediately said that they misspoke, that the words said did not capture their intent, that any insult was unintended and undeserved, and most importantly, that they take full responsibility for the consequences of their words.

Maybe that's the problem.  The issue of responsibility.  Maybe that's the thing that Garth Turner really wants to avoid.  But this is armchair analysis.  Let's deal with the facts.

Fact #1: Garth Turner was quoted in the Milton Chamption saying that the Canadian military buys weapons that are designed solely to wipe out villages:

"These are contradictory times," said Turner at the conclusion of the meeting. "We don't have funding for youth centres but we do have $150,000 for every shell bought for the sole purpose of destroying a village in Afghanistan. We could buy each Afghan a condominium with that money," he added.

Fact #2: After writing about this shocking allegation of war crimes being committed (or at least planned), Garth Turner said that he was misquoted ... somewhat ... a bit ... maybe:

Two weeks ago I held a Roundtable on Moral Issues in Halton with twenty-four faith leaders – Christian, Muslim and others – to get their opinion on challenges facing me as a Parliamentarian. One of those, of course, was the war in Afghanistan, which they opposed with conviction. I invited the local paper to sit in, and the young reporter covering the event wrote this:

“These are contradictory times,” said Turner at the conclusion of the meeting. “We don’t have funding for youth centres but we do have $150,000 for every shell bought for the sole purpose of destroying a village in Afghanistan. We could buy each Afghan a condominium with that money.”

Actually, my words were a little different, and the village part was suspect, but the reporter was close enough in his coverage that I didn’t bother correcting him.

Fact #3: The reporter who allegedly misquoted him (sort of), whom Garth Turner described as "young" and male, was in fact a woman, which raises some doubts about whether Garth Turner really knew the media was present.

Fact #4: The editor of the Milton Champion has unambiguously stated confidence in the story, and in the accuracy of the direct quote as reported with no reservations whatsoever:

The comment is in the reporter's notes as being made at the end of the meeting and I stand behind the accuracy of her reporting.

Thanks for writing, and reading.

Fact #5: The story has been reported on National Post, and on CHQR radio as their lead-in story on The World Tonight with Rob Breakenridge (listen to the podcast).  Garth Turner was invited to join in the discussion on CHQR to explain his statements, but declined.

Fact #6: Garth Turner is no longer denying that he spoke those words, it seems.  Here is his (latest) explanation:

To recap: I held a session for 24 local faith leaders on moral issues confronting me as an MP and we as a people. In my concluding remarks I questioned our public allotment of resources when our forces fire artillery shells worth $150,000 in Afghanistan (pictured above), and yet we lack the funding for a troubled youth drop-in centre in Milton. In saying the shells were used solely to demolish targets, including ‘Afghan villages’, I assumed my audience would understand those would be Taliban locations. After all, why else blow them up?

Interesting.  Garth Turner now says the shells were used, each of which he said was "bought for the sole purpose of destroying a village in Afghanistan".  Have we crossed the line into accusing Canadian troops of war crimes by stating they have used village-destroying ordinance?

Garth Turner asks why else would we "blow them up", "them" being "Taliban locations", which I can only assume is a specific sort of Afghan village.  The question is why would you not blow them up.  An Afghan village that is in Taliban-controlled territory is still an Afghan village, filled with Afghan men, women, and children who are not Taliban fighters, and who Canadian troops are trying to free from Taliban control.  You don't blow up a village because it is now a "Taliban location".  You blow up military targets.  You don't drop a bomb whose "sole purpose" is to destroy a village on such a target unless you expect a nearby or surrounding village to be destroyed in the process.  The XM892 Excalibur precision-guided extended-range artillery shell is one of a wide range of precision weapons acquired by the Conservative government with which to arm Canadian soldiers in the field so that they can complete their mission of ejecting the Taliban presence in Afghanistan without "destroying a village" in the process.

Destroying an Afghan village, Taliban-controlled or otherwise, is wrong.  It is wrong morally, almost certainly a war crime depending on the exact circumstance.  It is wrong militarily, since the mission as defined means taking every measure possible to not blow up Afghans and their property while bringing the fight to the Taliban.

Fact #7: Garth Turner is still slyly suggesting that he was missquoted:

Since the letter writer, the bloggers, the radio guys, the newspaper columnist, the prime minister or anyone else offering a comment were not in the actual meeting, and since my words were not recorded (only reported), I thought you might be interested in this.

Fact #8: Garth Turner prints a letter from an attendee in order to help us understand what really happened:

I have to disagree with the May 13th letter to the editor criticizing MP Garth Turner for his so called slur against the character of Canadian men and women serving in Afghanistan.

I believe Mr. Turner was taken out of context.

I don’t doubt for a minute that Mr. Turner supports our troops as they serve our country for the principles of freedom and democracy. All our prayers are with our military personnel including their families at home

I along with my colleague were grateful that our MP would hold a Halton Faith Leaders Roundtable gathering for the purpose of listening to leaders from various communities of faith. The gathering was a time of open and honest conversation about the social and moral concerns within the Halton region.

Near the conclusion of the meeting, Mr. Turner attempted to name the many “contradictions” in our society. I think he was deepening the conversation by pointing out how extremely challenging it is to address the many needs within our society with limited funding.

Some may judge his comparison of a military “shell” and “youth centers” as poor, but in my mind he never intended to criticize our Canadian forces. Instead, I think our MP was being honest by clearly naming the incredible challenges our leaders and communities face when trying to work for improving the quality of life for all people.

Rev. John Benham

In 232 words, Reverend Benham never says that Garth Turner didn't say that the Canadian military is arming itself in order to destroy Afghan villages.  Indeed, he confirms that Garth Turner did make the comparison between spending on youth centres and spending on artillery.  The opportunity to state unambiguously that Garth Turner did not characterize those shells as designed exclusively for the purpose of destroying Afghan villages simply passes by.

Conclusion: Did Garth Turner state that the artillery bought by the Canadian military is "bought for the sole purpose of destroying a village in Afghanistan"?  Sadly, I think the answer is almost certainly yes, with all that implies with regards to the tactics being used by Canadian troops in Afghanistan.  Garth Turner has had several opportunities to publicly state that the quote was incorrect, and to provide an accurate quote.  He has not taken those opportunities.  Other people present have not taken that opportunity.  Instead, without admitting that he said those words, he attempts to add layers to his statement after the fact, suggesting that a Taliban presence is what justifies the destruction of an entire village with these artillery shells.

Or something like that.  Honestly, it's not clear what Garth Turner thinks ought to be blown up.

At this point, there is little left to say.  It is possible that Garth Turner will continue to feel the heat, and that the Liberal Party leadership will compel him to do something that he would never do on his own, and that is own up to his poor choice of words, apologize to the Canadian military for the insult his words conveyed, and take responsibility for the pain he has caused them and for the embarrassment he has brought down on himself.  But that will only happen if the media was to carry the story forward, and I don't see that happening. 

Garth Turner is perceived by many to be a buffoon.  I don't necessarily share that opinion, but as long as Garth Turner is not taken seriously, he is essentially immunized against the sort of intense pressure that comes to bear on other politicians when they make the same sort of mistake.

When Michael Ignatieff accuses Israel of a war crime when people in a village are killed, it is front page news, and Michael Ignatieff is quickly trying to contain the damage.  When Garth Turner accuses the Canadian military of arming itself with weapons designed to destroy villages, the reaction of many is Aw shucks, it's just Garth!

And now read about what the real quote was, and how an apology is offered.