August 12, 2002
"Closure" is one of those cutesy little words that becomes trendy every now and again. First gaining prominence in the 90s, its primary use is for victims of crime and other catastrophes, who, feeling aggrieved and victimized, are supposed to take comfort upon being told that at some point, usually soon, they will have closure, whatever that means.
Closure, it seems, has now become a high priority in the Canadian Armed Forces and reached new heights in the "friendly fire" incident last April when four Canadian troops died after being fired upon by the Americans. The United States and Canada held separate inquiries into the occurrence and both found that the fault lay with the trigger happy pilot who dropped the bomb. After these inquiries were concluded, information was leaked to the media that the pilots were given permission to fire upon those on the ground, albeit that the authorization came seconds after the bomb was unleashed. This leaked information, if true, confirmed what many people felt; that the American pilots were simply being used as scapegoats.
In Canada, we’ll never know if the new information is correct or not. Upon being questioned, Defense Minister John McCallum indicated that he would not re-open the inquiry. The reason — the families of the dead and wounded soldiers needed closure. How 90s; how trendy; how ridiculous.
Canada is, or was, allegedly at war in Afghanistan. It is hard for the government to remember this when they have much more important things to deal with, for example, whether or not increasing the Trans Canada Highway in Newfoundland to four lanes is a sufficient legacy for our slowly outgoing prime minister. If we are or were at war, it seems it would be a tad more important to fully investigate what happened in Afghanistan and try to prevent future occurrences. But no, political correctness is more important than trying to reduce future loss of life, especially when those lives are military.
One thing about the Defense Minister’s wimpy reason for refusing to re-open the inquiry is that it will make the boss happy, ensuring McCallum a cabinet post for life, or next February whichever comes first. One thing is clear; the Chretoonies never really took the war on terrorism seriously. Nothing in the days immediately following September 11 gave any indication that Jean Chrétien thought it was a big deal. Unlike British PM Tony Blair, Chrétien didn’t seem to take particular notice of the fact that some of the victims of the attacks were his own citizens. Only after a trip to the White House where he talked to his new found "brudder" did he seem to get it. Canada probably sent troops to Afghanistan because President Bush told him to. And we thought that’s what Kofi Annan was for.
Although closure for the families of the "victims" killed in Afghanistan is a top priority, the government shows no concern for the real Canadian heroes; the soldiers who risked their lives by engaging in actual combat with al Qaeda and Taliban forces. But then, victimization, not bravery, is one of our Canadian values that the prime minister goes on and on about.
It is unfortunate that the opposition parties can’t get it together and get rid of this arrogant and corrupt government with its twisted priorities.
Now that would be closure.
Arthur Weinreb can be reached at: aweinreb@interlog.com
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2018 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2018 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement