sharkman

Yes. The cause of the torture was faulty conduct. Irrespective of your inhuman insensitivity to the torment of your fellow man, you must understand that the incompetence demonstrated by the RCMP is cause for profound concern if you want a useful and effective police force. Well, I disagree with you assessment. The one screw up out of several thousand may be bad, but it does not warrant breaking up the RCMP. If CSIS should have been calling the shots on this, fine. Have them in charge in future cases like these. Should the RCMP be embarrassed? Yes. Should they be broken up? Knee jerk. Again, when faced with deportation, most immigrants claim fear of persecution, fear of death, fear of torture, anything to get the judge to reverse the decision. Should we then keep every single immigrant who claims this ?

So he's the dumbest president who's ever been in office, while at the same time outsmarting the Dems at every turn, eh? Whatever. If they had the evidence they would impeach him. They do not, and all the crappy accusations of Bush lying are without merit, otherwise THEY WOULD IMPEACH HIM. And this nonsense of Clarke, he's the guy who had a book to sell and an axe to grind. How come they didn't impeach Bush based on Clarke's testimony ? Because he wasn't the be all and end all on Iraq's activities. There were other organizations in play, and not just American ones.

True enough, perhaps I meandered a little bit, but I was speaking in terms of a block mentality only, and the majority of Blacks in the U.S.(not just LA) thought OJ was innocent. And I never said anything about blacks and police, I inferred they don't like the Republican party in spite of all of the pro Black efforts the party has spear-headed, like those listed by the first poster. First you bring up the police then accuse me of not understanding Blacks' mistrust of them, then call me albino. Grow up. What's the deal with your slam of Bush? How do you know if she's the first black he's ever had to dinner? An affair? I guess you don't like him, but completely unsubstantiated accusations like that are just silly. I'm sure he 's had dinner with Colin Powell a time or two. I'm surprised the media never made them out to be a couple as well. Just as silly.

No, Arar's own country should apologize to him.

Isn't this a bit of a knee jerk reaction? Every single immigrant who is sent packing plays the fear of persecution card. If one out of thousands actually gets tortured do we really have to revamp OUR policing? No we do not. I don't know why they decided this guy should be deported, but if he doesn't abide by our super relaxed laws and regulations(when compared with his own country) then should us tax payers put up every single immigrant who plays the 'persecution' card? \

Apparently you have blinders on, my friend, but first let me tone down the hysterics. Not all, but the majority of Muslims have been pretty much brainwashed to believe that Western Culture is pure evil, and the U.S. is the Great Satan (and Canada is a little satan, sort of, oh, a mini me relationship). They want the Western Culture brought to an end and they believe they are in a jihad to do so. If you haven't picked up on these dangerous facts by now, I don't believe you even have the capacity to do so. Kind of a head in the sand deal. You speak of irrational hatred towards Jews, but ignore the irrational hatred towards Jews by these very people you defend. How sad.

The Bush adminstration made the decision to invade Iraq and then told the CIA to produce the evidence to justify the invasion. This kind of incompetance and tunnel vision is unforgivable. I know what the party lines of the Dems are, but if it is all true, then they have long had enough to impeach Bush, and they would impeach him in a minute if they could. I notice that he's still on the job, therefore there is no evidence of their hatemongering. You'd think that with all of the energy they show in hating him, they could find SOMETHING to arrest him with, but no such luck. Geez, they got Clinton to an impeachment vote, can't the Dems substantiate ANY of their claims? Apparently not, so it's death of Bush by character assassination instead(and of course actual movies with Bush being assassinated, coming soon to a theatre near you!).

Bush was specifically told that hussein had no ties to 9/11. It wasn't bad intelligence, it was a lie. Okay, I'll bite: when was he told and by whom was he told and who is it that is saying so? (I'm hoping your not going to say it's Dan Rather who is saying so.)

Here's the difference: Bush made his decisions based on intel the U.S. had at the time. Clinton made his decision based on the state of his groin. Which is the proper decison making process?

What do you mean by developments? What have they been developing on our lands? Since when have they been whooping it up while traveling through our 'waters'? Do tell.

I had no idea this has been going on for a few years. Pathetic. I think it will turn into a blame game, with the federal government being the culprit.

Uh, no, I think it is viewed as more wrong to be responsible for the deaths of innocents. For instance, when the towers went down, it was good to see the outrage over those innocents who were murdered. Kind of puts things in perspective. Terrorists have been looking over their shoulders ever since. The recent plot to bring liquid explosives aboard planes in water bottles was yet another victory in the war to save innocents. But I suspect you were refering to the eleventy billion innocent Iraqis that were killed in the war, according to responsible media outlets who hate Bush and would say he's Satan if they could get away with it. Apparently, Chavez can, so they repeated his remarks ad nauseam. Hey, it was the best they could do. Which reminds me, what the hell is it with terrorists and airplanes? Why not sport stadiums or something. Always with the airplanes. Weird.

That's why I was hoping he would win the leadership. He could NEVER win Ontario and would send soft liberal support scurrying to the Tories.

Yes, this has long confused me. I didn't know of the long history of Republican support for Blacks going back to the civil war, but I knew the dems weren't doing much for them and still they vote for them again and again. It is remarkable that they would vote as a block with such a high percentage as well. One other thing, my history is a little shaky, but I believe Clarence Thomas was appointed to the Supreme court by Reagan, another Republican. The witch hunt that ensued was orchestrated by Dems. And yet time and time again, Blacks ignore this history. OJ murders his wife, and the black lawyer that tries him is automatically an Uncle Tom. Meanwhile, the black lawyer that defends him is a hero. It didn't seem to matter that he murdered his wife or that his wife was white (something I've been told black women REALLY hate) he was one of them being persecuted by the man.

I have good news for you. With an attitude like that, I'm sure Billary would love to have you work on her campaign for 2008! An administration that became the laughingstock of the world when Bill shook his finger and declared,"I never had sex with that woman!", and then the stained dress proved him a liar. Even the lawyer governing body banned him from ever practicing law again for his testimony lies in court. Not quite an unblemished record. And when he appears in the media repeatedly defending himself, it shows even he knows he has some weak spots.

Stop trolling Ricki. You won't answer my question (which is directly related to the topic, btw) so why would I bother with yours? Oh, and I think you're cross-posting now also. Do I need to quote the rules for you? Geez, how 'bout because his question was asked first, Gerry. Of course you're not interested in actual debate. Just more hate speech of Harper. A one trick poney you are, pal.

I don't think he's interested in actual debate. It makes him anxious.

Again Gerry, how can you claim you're amazed that Harper hasn't been honest and dealt with this issue when you keep whining about how terrible Harper is. You expect him to be dishonest at every turn and then loudly proclaim amazement when he acts as you expect him to. How can you be amazed at something you're expecting? And the answer is...anyone...anyone...that Gerry isn't really amazed, he just wants to manipulate simple minded readers to the evils of Harper. Except there aren't any yet, so they have to be imagined. Keep trying Gerry, you'll change someone's mind yet!

Yeah, Adscam and Peppergate to name just two incidents were of no consquence internationally. Neither was his admonition to G-8 leaders to do it his way and follow Canada in running an economy. Chretien, by the way, could speak in very articulate and clear English when he chose to do so he often did at dinner speaking engagements. The personna he projected when in front of national audiences was quite different. Wow, that is pathetic. I think even less of him now. I know he never let a chance go by to stick it to someone he didn't like, like staying in office for two more years just to stick it to Martin, but this is a new low. Harper is a different animal by far, imagine a politician who does what he says.

Perhaps they thought the Clinton administration had already taken care of Osama when they lobbed cruise missiles at him. Really, though, I'm sure they didn't need a memo to tell them that Osama was gunning for the U.S. Easy to say they did nothing, but again, they only had eight months to deal with this when Clinton had eight years. I'm going to keep on repeating that line until it sinks in.

at any rate, Foley is a sick puppy, preying on underlings at work. Just out of curiousity, would this be illegal in Canada? I mean, the boy in question is 16 I heard. Was it consentual?

I beg to differ, are you surprised!? What that president did weakened his administration and their nation. At any rate, it seems that the reublicans have actually done pretty good in every election since '98. Perhaps their mind set has actually been beneficial.

Haven't heard Bush mentioned yet. In fact, the Democrats have not made any statement on this except to accept the Republican initiated investigation since this might involve House operations. The only ones being slimed is the Democrat running against Foley. They are blaming him for the leak although there doesn't seem to be any evidence of that all. So who's playing politics now? Maybe they won't use this directly on Bush, but there is over a month to go. They want him weakened at all costs. Losing seats in the senate and house is what will get to Bush. You haven't heard the Dems use it? Yes you have. There are Dems in the media.

What's this to do with Bush other than what might have been a safe incumbent seat is now is now an open seat? The Democrats can't run against a guy who isn't there. However, the man's name will appear on the ballot and cannot be changed according to Florida law. It means that this is a seat where both parties will be on an equal footing where there is no incumbent in place. And for Bush supporters, they will have to vote on a ballot that has the name of someone who makes people ill. Incumbency is one of the leading ways to be being re-elected. The Republicans need as many safe seats as they can get and this must be a dissappointment in many ways because this man was a leader in the House. What this has to do with Bush? He, along with all Republicans will be slimed by this one story. Some in the media and all Dems running will try to use this story to swing soft votes their way. Don't you know how the game is played now?

I hope you're not trying to defend this guy. I wouldn't care if he was a Democrat or independent or what. No, but Bush haters in the media will be repeating this slime until election day in hopes of manipulating voters. It has nothing to do with voting day. Like I said, what a pathetic thing politics has become.