shoop

Ahhh, so it got picked up outside Canada? Or are the kidnappers really paying that much attention to Canadian news. still not proving anything....

Uhhh, the values of urban Canada aren't necessarily the values of MTV (Montreal - Toronto - Vancouver). The CBC has shown itself to be completely out of tune with the values of people residing in urban centres like Quebec City, Calgary, Winnipeg, Edmonton.... You are showing appalling ignorance *AND* that you have no clue what you are talking about. Margin of error applies to polling. The results I pointed to were not an opinion poll. Margin of error doesn't come into play here. That the CBC skewed to the left on all three of the parties in Parliament that ran candidates throughout the country is telling. Margin of error...

Pretty sad attempt at distracting from the truth of wellandboy's argument. Nice move ignoring the comments about betrayal of trust. The CBC, as a public broadcaster, should give some airtime to the views that the top management disagrees with. That the CBC commissioned a study to prove it was fair in its coverage of the election was telling enough. That it ignored a finding that it was more favourable to the Liberals and the NDP than the CTV and more critical of the CPC than CTV. Is also quite telling. (Page 3 of the same link - bottom right of the page.) The majority of Canadians live in urban centers.

Let's look at your use of the term *media buzz*. Not really well defined, so here is my take on it. wtf does it mean? Sure it got media coverage in Canada. We do not know how the hostage-takers will react because the Minister of Foreign Affairs spoke to the media. This is still no reason for Minister MacKay not to speak to the media. It is also *undeniable* that we don't know how the hostage takers would have reacted if Minister MacKay remained silent on the issue. Either way, you still haven't provided any substantiation for your claim that it is"generally accepted that authorities do not draw uneccessary attention to these situations." If it is truly "generally accepted" than it would be pretty easy for you to provide a credible source or two to support this, wouldn't it?

Good advice to Harper. Also good to remember that this strategy must be adhered to strictly. i.e. no whining about bad media coverage when it inevitably comes...

It's simply lies spread by the Liberals to further their cause. If the Liberals were to be honest then their *scary, scary, scary* rhetoric would become even less effective than it was in the last election. The CPC is open to the concerns of Canadians of colour. The Liberals don't want you to hear that because it interferes with their *right* to again become the Natural Governing Party of Canada...

Concurrent with the mean-spirited attacks is the attempt to make Harper "look bad" by constantly comparing him to Bush...

Uhhh, I think gerryhatrick's pointing to *undeniable* logic when he can't support his argument is more of an admission of error. I commend you BM for continuing to show you have no ability to debate. You simply prefer to whine and snipe when the logical holes in your argument are exposed. Thanks for staying true to form.

That's where the problem is. It is only *undeniable logic* in your wee little mind. Take heart though. Looks like you probably have at least six years of whining about the Harper government. Don't tire yourself out in the first couple months.

more than a third of the Liberals MPs come from the GTA and environs (South Duram & York, Brampton, Mississauga, Oakvlille). Barely 1/5th of the CPC MPs are from Alberta. Yet you are far more likely to hear the CPC referred to as having Alberta roots, than you are of anything *officially* connecting the Liberal party to Toronto. The CBC is the most egregious of the offenders.

Kerry actually fought in Vietnam. GW got into the Guard and didn't even perform that service. Swiftboat Veterans for Truth was a pathetic attempt at covering up this fact. Kerry deserved to lose the election for not fighting their attacks more strongly and persistently. He should have committed to fighting that issue to the exclusion of all others. He didn't and it cost him the presidency. Using your logic GW definitely isn't in Iraq to win. A winning strategy there would take another mebbe 50,000 troops. Which would probably require re-instituting the draft. Will he do what it takes to win in Iraq? It's Evan Bayh, not Bayedh. Really do remember that you are in Canada. Take a time to do the research into the platforms on which Clinton, Gore or Kerry actually ran. You would find them much more in tune with the CPC than anything GHW, Dole or GW ran on....

Am I the strawman? Thank you for succinctly saying what I have been trying to get across to these Harper-haters...

Completely agreed on the first point. Geoff was right at the start of his little rant. The correct term is now STI. I guess *disease* is a little too traumatizing.

That is just ignorant and playing to unfair stereotypes. Let's look at the newly elected Parliament. Anybody want to guess which party has the lowest percentage of visible minorities in its caucus???? You guessed it. The NDP. Olivia is the only vizmin in the entire caucus. The CPC has more vizmins (6) than anybody but the Liberals. More than the Bloc and NDP combined. Hmmm, enough with the hating. Seems like your veiled accusations of racism falls by the side in the face of truth.

Crying bully? I have said repeatedly that MacKay made an error in getting the family's hopes up. He admitted the error and dealt with it. Nobody has provided anything but wild conjecture as to how MacKay endangered the hostages. Without some sort of support, it is just chalked up to CPC-hating. Because that is what it comes across as. Does CBC really lead the Reuter's news reports that often?

BM if you mean that gerry was displaying gerry's lack of common sense .... I completely agree. Geoff's point was that it is egotistical of Canadians to think any non-Canadians ever watch the CBC. As much as Canadians whine about American's self-focus, we really need to take a look at ourselves. When it comes down to it nobody has pointed out anybody who actually said that what MacKay did was a bad thing. Other than certain certified Harper-haters on this board.

Well, I guess this at least proves that your arrogance, dickishness and total rudeness isn't just directed at me. First you jumped on me to admit *some* fault by MacKay, which I had already done. Then you try and get me to come up with a lame answer to some stupid general rule, which wasn't really related to the situation at hand. Then you jump on geoff for questioning your *common sense*. You clearly, clearly have some anger issues gerry...

Have any hostage-takers ever killed their hostages under the scenarios you have outlined? That is a fair and honest question. Are there experts on hostage-taking who have echoed those concerns? I honestly haven't seen any. I appreciate you are trying to paint Peter MacKay in the worst possible light. But creating a bunch of *what ifs* without historical or academic support is pretty sad. Let's try these common sense scenarios. 1. The hostage-takers see that the new Candian Government is serious about winning the freedom of the hostages and begin negotiations. 2. The families of the hostage-takers feel thankfully that the Minister of Foreign Affairs took the time to talk to them personally about the confusion caused by the Minister's original statement. Their spirits are buoyed by this personal conversation. 3. The NGOs in Iraq working to free the hostages realize this situation is at the top of the new Minister's list of things to accomplish and re-double their efforts to free the hostages. Oh yeah, wouldn't your second scenario actually be considered a good thing to arise out of the Minister's statement. Given that it provides the *most opportune* time to free the hostages, in your words.

Quotes like this just go to prove the sadness of the left. Clark and Stanfield are both outdated models. Mulroney ran a fairly socially progressive Government. Neo-con is just a hateful term and a continuing attempt by the left to promote "scary, scary, scary" without any support. Mulroney and MacKay would both be red tories on a fair scale and I would definitely support them. There is no reason to go any further left than those two.

Actually I did address the point about endangering the hostages lives. He didn't and nobody has provided any proof to say that he was. Oh there was one article posted with the CBC saying that *other people* said he endangered the hostages lives. That was histrionics and unfair. McKay did the right thing by apologizing to the hostages families for raising false hopes. The other point was just sad histrionics wihout support. Any counterpoint other than screaming *partisanship* gerry?

That is quite the stretch. You provided a link to a story saying that McKay was criticized for making comments that might further endanger the hostages. Who was saying this? If I get you correctly it breaks down like this. Hostage-takers were not leaning towards harming the hostages. The Minister of Foreign Affairs offer encouragement to the families about hopes for that the hostages will be return safely. The hostage-takers hear this, so decide to harm the hostages? Did anybody actually say this, or is your *proof* that the CBC reported that somebody said it?

I admitted that he made a mistake by raising false hopes in the families. Which he apologized for. I haven't seen anything pointing to him endangering the lives of the hostages. Not one MSM source I have seen has made that case. Where are you getting this from?

Uhhh, didn't I say that MacKay made a mistake in giving the families false hope? And said it was good that he apologized so quickly? What exactly is your point about blind partisanship?

Uhhh actually her family doc, presumably bilingual, works at the clinic part-time. He recommended she visit him there. But thanks for the conspiracy theory.

Well I am guessing most hostages would want the Minister of Foreign Affairs to be involved in the attempts to rescue them. But I guess for you blind partisanship is more important than your personal safety.