Derek 2.0

I disagree, your CCLA author simply offered his uncited opinion…….with regards to Freedom of Speech he refrained from even citing where in the C-51 (or quoting the actual wording) this would occur……. The SCC? The same court with 7 of 9 Judges appointed by the current Government? (The other two appointed by the previous Liberals, which now also support the legislation) So you oppose legislation from the current Government, but consider yourself lucky with their selection of judges?

So you’re not sure which Rights are threatened because the legislation tabled is unspecific, likewise your opinion is further compounded by an additional unspecific opinion piece by the CCLA…..which does not explain/highlight C-51 in such a way to demonstrate how it will remove/curtail Canadians Freedom of Speech...........

So you're fearful the CRA will share your information with CSIS and/or the RCMP?

And that means what to you? The wording as current Likewise: Looks like lots of rights being taken away there!!!! Do you even understand what you're quoting?

Neither of your links though refer to any specific wording within the legislation to support their opinions.......

I do, and that is why I have no concerns..........so please explain the significance and how, in your words, the: By all means point it out.

No, not even close.........so, which parts of C-51 weakens the threshold for warrants?

Which one(s)? All the changes are outlined here........which specific changes take away or weaken your rights? I'm curious that you oppose the legislation, but can't point out why......

Indeed.......19 pages and people fearful/opposed to the C-51, can't point out why they are.

Within C-51, where are the "thresholds for getting warrants lowered"? Of course, police can already arrest and detain people, sans a warrant, if said person is suspected of committing or about to commit a serious crime.......what changes with C-51?

Here's the legislation, if rights are not being taken away, which ones are being weakened by C-51?

18 pages and yet nobody opposed to Bill C-51 has pointed out the "rights" that it will take away.........

Trouble in yet another Liberal riding......say it ain't so.

I suppose you don't put much stock in polls.......I don't, but then again, they're the only means to gauge a subjective argument.....Interesting notion: A Blue wave in Quebec....

Of course that's subjective. What makes you fear for this country with Kenny at DND? People also thought Harper wasn't electable, with pockets full of hidden agendas....

Without a doubt and as I've been "predicting" for several years (even when polls last Summer showed a likely Liberal Majority)........As I've said, an increase in seats, but a smaller majority by percentage in the 175-180 seat range. With the new seats, the math now for the Tories would see a requirement for 35-36% to win a slim majority. If you put stock in polls, the Liberals and Tories are trending in differing directions, with the Tories currently around 33-34% support. Its really a mater of opinion and we shall see this Fall......I fully expect a year from now, we'll all be talking about the Harper Governments next budget

The party has moved to the center under Harper, and is why they currently have a majority Government and will win another majority this fall……..as much as I like Mackay, he doesn’t have enough support within the Party to ever win the nomination……Jim Prentice is older than the Prime Minister, so is far from the Parties future………In my opinion, as a member of the Party, the probable potential future leaders, in order of probability: Kenny, Raitt (dependent upon her health), Chris Alexander, James Moore and Erin O’Toole…….

I don’t think it’s underestimating him, but recognizing where he actually stands…….He was indeed the former director of communications for the PM (Who hasn’t been though..) for a year and a half, then left, and retuned as Executive director of the party before being forced to resign, a tenure marked by the Tories sinking in the polls, well failing to “control the message”, a suppose area that he excelled. You’re assuming he has “interesting information”…………One would think, if he did, he wouldn’t have been forced out of the Party and Adams would have “won” the local nomination……….

Not too surprised, I had heard Ambrose to Foreign Affairs and Kenny replacing her at Health……..none the less, glad to see Kenny got a deserved promotion and I don’t doubt, based on his past portfolios, that he’ll continue to excel at his new position. Likewise, his rising prominence and influence within both the Party and Cabinet will translate into much needed reforms at DND via his ability (with his positive relationship with the Prime Minister) to shape and direct Government legislation……. I think this, long term, will further cement his positioning as the eventual leader of the Tories.

And will now parachute her back into her own riding…….because Trudeau hasn’t had any problems selecting candidates in the LPC’s “fair and open nomination process”….

I don’t see why the Liberals would accept Adams, she’s politically damaged goods, likewise Soudas……I suppose from her perspective though, since she wasn’t to run again as a Conservative anyways, this allows her to attempt to stay in the House…….. Next up, Rob Anders………..

Agreed…….the legislation, in full, is available online………what changes exactly are people so apparently fearful of?

And without a doubt, the Liberals support of the Bill is also politics.......and I assume the the adults within the LPC attempting to avert disaster in October.

Exactly. Well yeah, you did......we can revisit your claim that bigger bombs translates into greater destruction. No, he's speaking to fire bombing and the ability of ones own fire fighters to respond......as clearly the chained damage caused by an incendiary attack versus that of the use of high explosives (like a GP bomb or HE artillery round) is quite different. Certainly, if we so look at the effects of area bombing on concrete industrial targets….. Ahhh no, it doesn't work like that, you're the one that stated WW II Allied high level bombing was more accurate then North Korean artillery....so, prove it. Ahhh no, mine are based in science.......... So what you are saying is that the North Koreans would be unable to effectively bombard Seoul (a fixed location) from their own prepared (fixed) positions because they lack a modern & advanced precision industrial base? How ever did Victoria era navies ever expect to hit moving targets, miles away, from their own moving platforms? Your claim is both baseless and laughable .......... And you cite, from a blogger using unnamed sources to counter the own assessments of both the South Koreans and the Americans is doubly laughable, and even if one is to assume its true, doesn’t support your point, nor even come close to proving your claim that North Korean artillery is less accurate than World War II high level area bombing………

Right, and goes on to define the various types of bombs, including light cased blast bombs and medium cased general purpose bombs, as being demolition bombs……… The intent hasn’t changed one iota, but the acknowledgement that the definition of what constitutes a demolition bomb……a revised statement would be Allied bombers didn’t utilize massive general purpose bombs when area bombing concrete industrial targets, which would be akin to a modern city like Seoul. Harris is speaking to the effectiveness of aerial firebombing of cities in higher concentrations versus more cyclic and continuous attack by smaller formations…………of course his conclusions don’t represent bombing of concrete industrial targets, nor artillery bombardment. By all means expand/cite that claim.......... That’s a very subjective claim……..ballistic trajectory from one fixed point to another fixed point is a math calculation of several variables……though I don’t disagree Western artillery would be far more accurate, comparing North Korean artillery to that of the accuracy of Harris’s Bomber Command is outlandish……. The RAF’s litmus for accuracy was the percentage of bombs dropped within a 3 mile radius from the target and only by the waning months of the war, in good to moderate weather (and with radar), was the RAF able to drop upwards of 90% of its bombs within a 3 mile circle…….As I said, indirect artillery accuracy is measured in square yards/meters, of which the Soviets were able to achieve over 70 years ago, I’d assume the North Koreans today could equal the Soviets in the Second World War…….