betsy

If you don't mind smears and lies..guilt by association and bullshit...the CPC ads were fine. The liberal ads were amatuerish and yes, over the top. The Conservative ads that referred to corruption was only stating a fact. And yes, tit for tat. But the Liberal ad using our troops in scare-mongering was not only way over the top. It was one of the all-time low. And they kept on using them in Quebec.

That last election? What "particularly sleazy" affair?

I understand that trust is shattered. My friend says he saw the priest who molested him once on the street. The priest is quite an old man now. He said on that occasion he wanted so much to come up to him and tell him how much he hurt him. At the same time my friend said a part of him just don't want to be bothered. My friend, after all what's been done to him...had not turned his back on God. It was a man who had wronged him. Not God. In fact, he is not a Catholic....and yet, he is supporting and admiring the Church for its continuous steadfast stance on a lot of issues.

If there is any apology that should be made at all....I think this should be it. Being the head of the church, I would like to see him issue an apology to all those atrocities done in the name of the church. I would also like to see him publicly castigate those evil men who use and hide behind the cloth just to indulge in their sick perversities. And publicly urge those who have not been caught yet to voluntarily leave the church. That if they have any fear and respect for God at all...they should leave if they cannot be sure to contain themselves from carrying out their perversities. Falling into sin is one thing....but falling into sin AND committing a crime and hurting someone else at the same time is another. I would also like to see and hear every priest issue forth the same apologies in their own parishes...apologise for the sins of their brothers who had done the deeds...and for those who had failed their parishioners by either being accomplices or wilfully turning a blind eye. It is time to fix the damage that had been done to the church.

You just pegged yourself as an American since you clearly don't understand the use of that word. Eh? Use in what way, Gerry? How? Is there an exclusive claim to this expression? You mean I cannot use it freely as a personal expression without being pegged down as "American"...or "Canadian"...or whatever it is that suits you to label someone? One thing showing clearly: you're obsessed with branding and labelling. Some may mis-interpret that as a sign of bigotry.

And where did that "translation" come from? That's my translation betsy. I am able to translate what people are saying in most cases, especially when it's as obvious as this is. It's not a gift or anything, most people have the talent. Well Gerry, no matter how I read it, Harper was using plain and clear English in that statement. If a plain and simple English statement such as this: "We want to be sure that our troops have the support of this Parliament going forward." can be translated by some talented people like yourself to mean like this: "If this mission extension doesn't get a passing vote the troops might not be supported." Then what more with just about any other English statements? You are using your own translation as a valid form to accuse and crucify a person. And urging others to do the same! As someone who speaks English as a SECOND language....you are making me very, very nervous.

But like they say on tv.....how come the Liberals are continuously dogged by corruptions? And we're talking real sleaze-type corruptions like disappearing funds, the living dead and kindergarten shake-downs. Even when they're at their darndest trying to do their best....they can't seem to shake it off.

Well, I for one do not disagree with you on that. I, too find it questionable why some priests are being transferred or seemed to have been "coddled" and "protected by some higher-ups. And based on an investigative finding done during the height of the scandal (and the experience of my friend which supports the investigative report), excerpts and link of which I had posted in old topic, somewhere in NAMBLA thread I think, it had been acknowledged that there are cliques within the church who protect and shield one another. As I had stated in my post above, I would like to see the law come down on these perpetrators.....to come down even HARDER...for it is grievously wrong to use the church and the symbol of the frock...manipulating, corrupting, molesting victims in the name of God. The church is greatly damaged. Trust is broken and in turn, Faith is greatly eroded. When faced with these atrocities and all the emotions it brings, it is easy to forget that the pope...for all the divine things he represents is only but human too. Who could easily falll into temptation...or make grievous error in judgement, like you and I. Who knows, he may have done something wrong....or not. Whatever his motives are, he may have done a grave error in judgement. My stance is that I do not wish to be prodded into heaping condemnation on him unless he is proven guilty. ESPECIALLY when the motives of those who prods are highly questionable too. At the very least, I would've like to read the letter...in its full context. I do not wish to rush in screaming "OFF WITH HIS HEAD!" based on a media report....which only made a reference to such letter. The letter was not even published...therefore, although its existence may have been established, the full contents of this letter and its full meaning is all speculations at this point for all of us in this forum. I have no wish to brand him "guilty" based merely on speculations. Your posts had given me the impression that you are a sensible person.....therefore I think you'll see what I mean.

And where did that "translation" come from? By the way you're carrying on, that "translation" is official! Provide your source. I hate to think that, now, we judge and condemn people by the way their statements are ....TRANSLATED!

I must assume you reserve your condemnation SOLELY for the man who had not done the actual sodomizing and molestations. You conveniently overlook the homosexuals and pedophiles who actually did the crime....placing more zeal in your wild attempt to make us all brand a man "guilty", based on hearsay and media reports. According to you, there is even NO NEED to read the letter! You seem to try to find a convenient scapegoat to put the finger of blame on somebody. A persistent buzzing in my inner ear suggests this could be an attempt on your part to take the heat away from the actual perpetrators. I suspect this thread which was created by you solely for the bashing of the Pope, did not really stem from your deep abiding concern for the diddled kids and coerced minors......but rather due to one simple reason: this Pope dared to stand fast against acceptance of homosexuality as a normal lifestyle. He also had the audacity to speak out about it. There is no condemnation from you regarding the actual perverts who did the crime. Actually, your only reactions (and it was not just a mild reaction mind you), are words of indignations that I dare imply the existence of homosexual conspiracies within the church. Then you also put the finger of possible blame...on the nature of the job! That it could be the job of being a priest that made them do it! You even went far to suggest homosexuality is not solely biological, contradicting the popular assertions that it is. Now you suggest it can actually be an acquired lifestyle. One can develop a liking for it. Perhaps that's why 14 year olds are preferable age for initiation? I can't help but think....gee Gerry, you seem to have a soft spot for these homosexuals and diddlers of little kids and minors, don't you?

In other words, you're more than willing and quick to pass judgement....condemn...and give a guilty verdict on anyone based on hearsay. Your opinions are formed mostly that way, by your own words. So....you just admitted to your own lack of credibility.

Eh? Just because it is reported in the media does not make it so. Didn't you just see how the Pope's quotations were taken out of context....and used as a springboard to have another violent protest? You are not an extremist Muslim masquerading as a gay on this forum, are you?

Ray Heard, a former director for John Turner says he is not backing up anyone from the Liberal leadership candidates....that he'll just sit back with his wine and watch the parade go by. He says the division among Liberals got a whole lot worse now. (from MDuffy Live)

According to MDuffy Live today, Environmental Report is scheduled to come out sometime within this week and it is being said that it will contain reports quite devastating to the Liberals. They're talking "HRDC-type boondagle!"

Condemnations are for those already proven guilty. The fact that he signed the letter described in the topic link is not in question. You are demonstrating your willingness to turn a blind eye when you choose. Your credibility is damaged as a result. Here's an excerpt from your link: Pope 'obstructed' sex abuse inquiry Confidential letter reveals Ratzinger ordered bishops to keep allegations secret Jamie Doward, religious affairs correspondent Sunday April 24, 2005 The Observer Pope Benedict XVI faced claims last night he had 'obstructed justice' after it emerged he issued an order ensuring the church's investigations into child sex abuse claims be carried out in secret. ----------------- The fact that your very own link quoted the word "OBSTRUCTED" means it is not a proven fact. Furthermore, it says that he is facing CLAIMS. Claims and allegations does not necessarily mean a guilty verdict. You are deliberately turning a blind eye on the quoted word "obstructed" and the use of the word, claims....which suggests a zealousness on your part to see this man branded "guilty." So let's not speak of credibility. Anyway, I have acknowledged and I do believe that abuses are happening in the church....just because the power that comes with the job-title of being a priest is like a powerful magnet that attracts perverts. I would like to see a better screening process...and offenders should be de-frocked immediately. I like to see criminal charges being laid on the culprits. In fact, I'd like to see the law come down harder on anyone using authority and power over children and minors. These perverts not only hurt their victims and families....but also do grievous damage to the church. But, I gather, you have no problem at all with a letter from Ratzinger instructing Bishops to keep allegations and evidence of child molestation secret? I've yet to see and read the letter in its whole context. As the link says, there is a lawsuit. I'm sure you'll agree with me that it will be irresponsible and unfair to jump in swinging without knowing the full details. Do you have any more follow-up to this incident? That link is dated 2005. I've tried searching for recent news related to it...can't find anything on the net.

Just saw Volpe doing his press con, insinuating he's been hinted to drop out of the race. Somebody sez on Question Period there's bad blood between Ignatieff and Volpe. In fact, Volpe is allegedly accusing Ignatieff camp of "setting him up" in this Quebec fiasco. Then...another scandal in the making! Someone's also looking into the Ignatieff's campaign in the Toronto area! I guess it's time to get the popcorn. The Liberals are bringing in an interesting show for the fall. It may even chase the doldrums of winter.

Condemnations are for those already proven guilty. The fact that he signed the letter described in the topic link is not in question. You are demonstrating your willingness to turn a blind eye when you choose. Your credibility is damaged as a result. Here's an excerpt from your link: Pope 'obstructed' sex abuse inquiry Confidential letter reveals Ratzinger ordered bishops to keep allegations secret Jamie Doward, religious affairs correspondent Sunday April 24, 2005 The Observer Pope Benedict XVI faced claims last night he had 'obstructed justice' after it emerged he issued an order ensuring the church's investigations into child sex abuse claims be carried out in secret. ----------------- The fact that your very own link quoted the word "OBSTRUCTED" means it is not a proven fact. Furthermore, it says that he is facing CLAIMS. Claims and allegations does not necessarily mean a guilty verdict. You are deliberately turning a blind eye on the quoted word "obstructed" and the use of the word, claims....which suggests a zealousness on your part to see this man branded "guilty." So let's not speak of credibility. Anyway, I have acknowledged and I do believe that abuses are happening in the church....just because the power that comes with the job-title of being a priest is like a powerful magnet that attracts perverts. I would like to see a better screening process...and offenders should be de-frocked immediately. I like to see criminal charges being laid on the culprits. In fact, I'd like to see the law come down harder on anyone using authority and power over children and minors. These perverts not only hurt their victims and families....but also do grievous damage to the church.

If I follow that rationale.... You mean a straight guy can be turned to sodomize 14 year olds, thereby turning him into a homosexual? Homosexuality, like pedophilia, can actually be an acquired lifestyle? You don't know if it was that, or if the job (absolute power, opportunity over little kids, celibacy, ect.) TURNS them that way. Exactly. That's why I'm saying that what you're suggesting is the POSSIBILITY that homosexuality and pedophilia is practiced....just because of what comes with certain jobs? That it's possible, a straight guy can suddenly just become a homosexual or pedophile simply because of the nature of the job? If it can become an acquired lifestyle .....then that means someone can easily be introduced...or initiated... into that kind of lifestyle as well? So, you are questioning the oft-repeated premise that homosexuality is definitely biological. You are now suggesting the possibility that it can be an acquired lifestyle after all?

Some girls from the girls' team are not happy with these two sisters. Apparently they referred to the girls' team as being a joke...or something to that effect. Hockey can be violent. So what happens if one of the girls get bashed while playing. Will they cite violence towards women?

The Liberals had likened our troops alongside scary militarymen who backs up dictators in sleazy banana republics. And the NDP had likened our troops to terrorists! Gee I'm so deeply touched seeing how these two parties think so highly of our men and women dying in Afghanistan.

Well, if you think that there's nothing wrong with the shady sleazy tactics of the Liberals during the past election when they insisted on playing that military ad in Quebec...that portrayed our troops like the rotten troops you hear about in coup happening in some banana countries just showed how the Liberals will think nothing of sullying our troops just to gain votes...well, you're entitled to your own personal opinion. My views however found that wrong. And my opinion supports that talking about the deaths...counting body bags....using the grief and loss of families who'd lost a son/daughter fighting the war....using them as TALKING POINTS to WIN VOTES in Quebec, whom everyone knows is anti-war.....incessantly linking Bush with this war, even though it had been explained that this is with NATO (because we all know Quebec is not too fond of Bush).... in my view (especially when I see it coming from the very same party who used our troops in a very insulting way only 10 months ago), there is definitely something gravely wrong with that!

And going back to media reporting: did you guys see how they grilled the surgeon of the hospital where the victims were taken? Did you hear the kind of questions they were asking? Practically the same questions asked in various ways....trying to get the doctor to reveal more about the nature of injuries. The doctor had repeatedly declined due to patient confidentiality. The way they were carrying on...they were like vultures hovering on the injured....avidly awaiting if there will be more deaths! That is sick! And here we are thinking what a sick f*** the shooter was.

I did not respond to this topic right away simply because I just got sick and tired of it.....after what seemed like an endless coverage! CTV and CBC are the worse! Talk about dragging it...even the going-back-to-school ordeal! The last tidbit detail (after almost a full week) was that the victim and the perpetrator were having a funeral on the same day! Whoopie! Then, just when you thought enough is enough....life was breathed into this going-stale news by reporting about a "copy-cat!" You ask: is school shooting becoming the norm? By the looks of it, I'd say YES! NOT BECAUSE of any gun registry....or lack of supervision....or influence of a cult. But more so perhaps because of the publicity and attention the media...and society is devoting to this "phenomenon." True, the perps of such killing spree are unstable.....but we also have to consider what they seem to all have in common: their ages and their desire for attention....the wish to go down in blazing glory! The more heinous the better! Because the more shocking it is...the more coverage they get. If the media could just treat this like any ordinary crime...no fanfare...no excited, hyperventilating interviewees scared out of their wits....maybe, there will be no more copy-cats wishing to equal, or surpass the notoriety of Columbine.

It's 72? I wasn't sure how many...hope they don't run out of them! Anyway back to the Pope...he only QUOTED a historical event...........a quote which now seems to be supported by the article I just linked above. The Pope's quote referred to being "inhuman"...... and the Yemen article said: "The origin of this barbarism, which may well be called the “Third World Fanaticism”, is the benighted initiatives of people who are devoid of love for humans."

Just only last week, our troops and Afghanistan had been USED (again), as the focus of debate among the Liberal leadership contenders in Quebec.....simply because of wanting to gain grounds and votes in Quebec. Once again, our troops had been reduced to nothing more than "political props" by the very party that sent them to Afghanistan in the first place. Gerry, with your excessive pre-occupation with our boy, it's beginning to look like you made an understandable faux pas....and misprinted the title of your post. To be more credible and appropriate, shouldn't it say, "LIBERALS using troops again?"