Nocrap

Why should everything be spelled out for everyone to know??? Especially when it comes to war?? What "guarantees" that there won't be any tortures do you need to hear? A promise? A swear on boyscout's honor? If given, will you then go back peacefully to pretend that this kind of reality does not exist anymore? Enough of this fluff about pseudo-humanitarian posturing! This attitude is more damaging to our soldiers' morale. Let our soldiers be as real soldiers in a REAL WAR! Show your concern for our own before others! Stand 100% behind our own soldiers rather than mollycuddling the enemy! Get real! Now is definitely NOT the time to have a debate in Parliament. That time has passed, the cavalry have left the Depot, and the troops have jumped from the plane. At least for this initial commitment, any that wanted such a debate should have made a great big racket about it last year....when the Liberals made the original decision, and not now. As far as Harper restricting information, his instructions reflect the extreme caution his new government has to take, considering he has a number of rookies; that along with need and a desire to be focused on campaign issues. We all know how things can get taken out of context and misconstrued by the press, and by groups such as this. Better not to give out too much which can be spun and twisted. I agree to a certain extent, but by not justifying your position, you leave it up to speculation, and that can be more damaging than a few twisted words.

Paul Martin was PM for just over 2 years.I have made a point of visiting the gravestones of Canadian PMs so I know the names of even obscure ones. John Thompson (PM for exactly two years) is buried in Halifax and John Abbott (PM for about a year and a half) is buried in Montreal. I would be extremely surprised if one Canadian in a thousand could say anything about either man. Sic transit gloria mundi. My guess is, he won't

Very humorous sarcasm, but what was the point? The implications here have been clearly laid out. Have you read through the thread yet? Our local newspaper (part of the Osprey Group) ran a full page story on Mike and Joan Curtin, parents of the first American soldier killed in Iraq since the war began three years ago. Though the family at first supported the invasion, they now feel that it's time to bring the soldiers home. The newspaper goes on to say that a recent gallup poll shows that only 22% of Americans feel that they can win the war, and 60% feel the same as the Curtins. The article is not yet up on Osprey's website but this is a good link to the poll 2 out of 3 Americans want to pull out of Iraq

I think he meant trustworthy compared to the other liberals ... Ralph Goodale! You've got to be kidding me! He is the poster boy for corruption and what can happen when government officials are given too much power. Stephen Harper could and would wipe the floor with him. At least with Paul Martin there was always some reasonable doubt as to whether or not he was involved in the sponsorship scandal, but with Goodale; he took scandal to a whole new level. Egads! Has anyone got any gum?

Wrong!Let us stand up for ourselves and say who we are. I agree with Geoffrey. The British royal family has outlived their usefulness. Their scandals over the last few decades have revealed that they are no better than any other dysfunctional familyand Canada no longer owes them anything, least of all, our respect.

So if Jean Chretien operated a closed door government and Stephen Harper is operating a closed door government; perhaps they are more alike than people realize. (As per previous thread) I think the "cut and run" is going to come back to bite Mr. Harper on the butt. This Hour Has 22 Minutes picked up on what I and others had noticed, and did a complete bit last night - first SH's words and then GW's. Some papers are even showing identical photo-ops, so what initially may have looked like a good PR move is now losing credibility. Add to that, the fact that recent Gallop polls indicate that 60% of Americans believe that it is an unwinnable war and want to bring their soldiers home; this was not a good time for Harper to hitch himself to GW's wagon.

Bob Rae has been considered for the post of Governer General in the past (unless you mean me, and I'm not a guy) But back to the comparison between Mr. Rae and Mr. Harper. During the last election there was a vast difference between Stephen Harper and Paul Martin so both could feed off the 'right wing', 'left wing' thing. However, there is very little difference between SH and BR, when it comes to their politics. Rae left the NDP because he felt that their economic policies were too near sighted, and supports free trade, so will please the business sector. He supports our involvement in Afghanistan but can back it up with a wealth of experience. He opposed the invasion of Iraq but feels that the western world needs to get involved in rebuilding and forging ties with new Iraqi government. He is much better educated, so a debate would not have to be just mud-slinging, but could have some real substance. He has been the victim of the NCC, so would be better prepared this time around, and since Harper lost his bid to have the NCC's finances kept secret, there would be a little more transparency. His ideology is social democrat, so will please not only the left, but the centre-left and even those just right of centre. Harper has moved, or at least appears to be trying to move toward centre, but still not enough. Bob Rae would be everything Stephen Harper fears - just like him only better at it. As far as the religous thing - Harper's caucus and even his supporters have made it about religion, whether he intended to do that or not. Read Hansard - almost every argument from the Reform/Alliance includes the fact that they are Christian. As I said before: THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT! SO AM I. But if his caucus was mostly Jewish, and they tried to legislate that every Canadian male had to be circumcized, even if it was for health reasons (hypothetical), every non-Jew would say that it was not the government's place to tell them what to do. Gay rights have nothing to do with religion and religion has no place in politics.

I actually like that one. Maybe next campaign.

No time to reply to all, but IMHO Bob Rae is unelectable in Ontario, the Rae days hit people of all political stripes and are not forgotten. As far as religious tolerance goes thats a straw man argument, Harper might be religious but he doesn't wear it on his sleeve or even talk about it, its a non issue, strictly a scare tactic. The majority of his caucus is not evangelical, and a few are not even Christian. I think it might be time for me to donate to the NCC again... Whether he wears it on his sleeve or not, you have to admit that it is a hot topic and many of his supporters certainly do speak of it. Perhaps because of the Reform Party's stance on same-sex marriage, abortion, etc. Most of the debates centered on religous beliefs and not human rights. I'll have to verify the facts on the % of Evangelical Christians, but I know that people like Cheryl Gallant and David Sweet will be watched closely by mainstream Canadians; not to mention Stockwell Day.

I don’t always have a lot of faith in polls, but one conducted after the election, showed that roughly 45% of Canadians voted for Harper’s Party because they felt we needed a change, 25% felt that the Liberals needed a “time-out”, 24% liked his policy but only 6% liked the actual man. So with the majority opting for change and punishment, will they be so inclined next election? Despite the abominable Liberal scandals and the horrible Martin campaign; Harper was still only able to get a minority; so if the Liberals can produce a strong leader without the sponsorship baggage; we could see dramatically different results. Enter Bob Rae. I did read the previous thread asking if Ontarians could forget his tenure as Premier, and I think we could. There were some mitigating circumstances, including the fact that he inherited a recession and the National Citizens’ Coalition backed ‘Ontarians For Responsible Government’, allocated almost $600,000 to defeat his party. Colin Brown, son of the NCC’s founder said they waged an ``all-out electoral war'' against the ``People's Republic of Ontario...We want to wipe them off the electoral map.'' And more recently NCC vice-president Gerry Nicholls: “We set up ORG in the dark days of former Premier Bob Rae. Back then ORG's tough ad campaigns helped to drive the NDP from office.” The fact that Stephen Harper was once President of NCC could be used strategically to discredit him, so long as it was handled better than the way Martin handled it. But what could Bob Rae bring to the table? 1. Better Credentials - In his memoirs, Preston Manning said that "Stephen had difficulty accepting that there might be a few other people (not many, perhaps, but a few) who were as smart as he was...." I won’t deny that Mr. Harper is an intelligent man with a masters degree, but Bob Rae is a Rhodes Scholar, an Officer of the Order of Canada and recipient of the Order of Ontario. He was also appointed chancellor of Wilfrid Laurier University, etc., etc. 2. Better Relationship with Students - As Minister of Training, Colleges and Universities, he prepared a Postsecondary Review report (the Rae Report) that was met favourably with student groups and is often asked to speak at colleges and universities. On the other hand, Mr. Harper has often alienated students with social issues like same-sex marriage and gay rights. 3. Religious Tolerance - Bob Rae was raised Christian, but his grandfather was Jewish, his grandmother Scottish Protestant, he himself a practicing Anglican, and his wife and children Jewish. Mr. Harper is Evangelical Christian, as is most of his caucus. There is certainly nothing wrong with that, but many of us fear that his policies will be faith-based, and not necessarily what is best for all. Religion and Politics simply don’t mix (but I guess that’s the topic for a different discussion). 4. A Better Diplomat - His father was a diplomat and he himself has extensive experience on the world stage; often asked to mediate in volatile situations, like the constitutional discussions between the government of Sri Lanka and Tamil Tiger rebels. 5. A More Constructive Relationship With the US - He advocates a good relationship and supports globalization and open markets. He was invited by the US to be a constitutional adviser to the new Iraqi parliament, despite the fact that he has stated that the war was wrong (but admits that getting rid of Saddam Hussein was a good thing) and calls the Americans “invaders” and an “occupying army”; not liberators. On the other hand, many Canadians feel that Mr. Harper is too pro-American, without objectivity. 6. A More Positive Approach to the Role of Our Military - Mr. Rae’s views on our military’s role on the world stage, are based on fact and not just rhetoric. He believes that we need to be involved with the reconstruction of Afghanistan and Iraq, and it is to our benefit to ensure that a democratic government is allowed to take control, but the difference is, that he has spent a great deal of time in the Middle East and can speak from personal experience and not just a couple of days at a military base. What Canadians need at a time when the world is such a volatile place, is a leader who can and will explain our activities, and not just stand with his arms crossed and say that “it is not open for discussion”. Though I’m not saying that I would vote for him and do find him at times to be just as arrogant and uncharismatic as Stephen Harper; I think he would have more mass appeal and could very well become our next Prime Minister - that is if he decides to run.

It is CADPAT not CANPAT. OOPS.

Wow. A totally original insight. First: have you ever actually been to the U.S.A? Brother, they got flags. So, on the one hand, Canadians are always getting shit on for not being patriotic enough (what was "Stand Up For Canada", but a blatant plea for nationalism?). Then, on the other, we get shit for having the wrong kind of patriotism (like-gasp!- flags on our luggage! How ostentasious!). What the hell is it you want? Good Heavens. I take a lot of pride in the fact that I'm Canadian and would never fault anyone wanting to wear, carry or clutch our flag. For decades we had to live under the Union Jack and pay homage to a Royal Family that had little interest in what we were doing so long as we paid our dues. We've earned this. I don't think "the world" really gives a sghit, which is what really drives right wingers round here absolutely bonkers. Talk about inferiority complexes.

I have no idea what this initial thread was about but I haven't laughed that hard in along time. You guys crack me up. As far as the government legislating or promoting traditional marriage, as written earlier in the thread, it's not the government's job to tell us how to live. In a free society we can marry whomever we want, or not at all. But then what do I know? I'm just a stupid weman.

A credit card isn't necessary. Sometimes dealers will accept money orders and even cash sent registered mail. I just didn't realize how many were available, and not just on Ebay. Militaria dealers all over the net have bits and pieces of gear. Maybe enough to equip a small army or unit. It could be difficult to control.

Thank you.

Actually, I've never been on this board before and am not a guy. I'm just a grandmother who thinks about the Canada she grew up in and the one she want to see her grandson grow up in, so am naturally concerned about where we're headed. I've never used profanity here, nor have I called anyone names...at least I hope not. Just thought I could bring a different perspective. My sarcasm is always meant to be tongue in cheek and find that looking at situations with a little humour (very little obviously) can keep you from taking life too seriously. Have been married to the same guy for almost 34 years, but it is a mixed marriage.....he's NDP.

I'm not sure if I follow the 'greedy oppressive capitalist' comment. Do you mean Bill Gates? Developing software that will help track down sexual preditors is a great contribution. and I'm proud that it was the result of a Canadian initiative. I believe he was being sarcastic. I guess we allk know that the U.S. Justice Department has gone to court to get access to Google search records to help prevent access to online pornography and won. Yahoo, MMSN and AOL had already complied with the government's request. But did you all know that what you search for is stored in that company's records and that it can be traced back to your computer? Ouch! 'Big Brother' has really gone hi-tech. Actually, I'm not 100% against the practice. Apparently we're being video-taped all day anyway, and I really have nothing to hide (except maybe for those vacation photos - but that's a different board). If it will help to catch and convict sexual predators or terrorists, then I guess I can live with a bit of personal invasion, so long as it's not abused.

Sale of CANPAT Uniforms on the Net An investigation has been launced into the sale of CANPAT uniforms on the internet. Since all are numbered and it is illegal for a soldier to sell their uniform, it is believed that the items have been stolen. "The big worry, however, is who is buying the uniforms and why". Should we be concerned? How easy would it really be to smuggle the uniforms into Afghanistan? Any thoughts?

So here I sit with my tinfoil hat and string of garlic around my neck, begging for forgiveness. Ok, I'm not really begging, but I do apologize if my sarcasm has offended anyone. That was never my intention. I've only been here a short time but really like this forum. If I skim past profanities and insults, I always find bits of information that help to make me a more informed voter. If you haven't already guessed, my politics are left of centre, and I am not a big fan of Stephen Harper, mainly because I have no idea who he is. The last election I tried reaching out to his supporters, but if I dared ask about his beliefs or former involvement in the National Citizens' Coalition and how big a role it played in his idealogy, I was met with abuse and called everything from a communist to a 'Liberal Hugging Radical' , despite the fact that I am not a Liberal supporter. I only voted Liberal in the last election because I wasn't yet ready to accept the Reform Party platform. In the past, I voted mostly Tory, (though I admit to liking Ed Broadbent), but when my party was dissolved I began shopping around. I always exercise my right to vote, even if I find it difficult at times to actually like anyone who is running. Oh, and I almost forgot.....I love a good conspiracy theory. However, I realize that there are many here who passionately support Mr. Harper; so while I won't always agree with you; I will try to be more objective, and again if I offended anyone, I am deeply sorry.

Well there isn't a link. The best chance you'll find would be the fact that there are some American's teaching at the U of C where Harper went to school. There isn't a real connection though. That is about all I came up with through initial searches, I am still lookin, but I really doubt I will find anything important. You can try Hill and Knowlton, though my post was not to imply that they are joined at the hip, only that Mr. Harper is more of a Republican than a parliamentarian, so adheres to Bush principles (or lack thereof). By his own admission he is a big fan of Ronald Reagan. He just has to do better if he hopes to convince Canadians that we should get behind him.

Rope.Tree.Pedo. Times.27. Greedy oppressive capitalist who hoards all his riches and contributes nothing good to this world! I'm not sure if I follow the 'greedy oppressive capitalist' comment. Do you mean Bill Gates? Developing software that will help track down sexual preditors is a great contribution. and I'm proud that it was the result of a Canadian initiative.

Maybe someone should behead him in a football pitch.Radwanski has been charged; he has not been found guilty. ---- George Radwanski wrote by far the best Trudeau biography, much better than Richard Gwyn's pretentious nonsense. In 1977, when Trudeau was facing electoral defeat in English Canada and the PQ in Quebec, he turned to Radwanski in desperation to get his message out. Trudeau, the intensely private individualist, answered questions because he thought it mattered. He chose Radwanski to record it all. IOW, Radwanski was an outsider, drawn into the Ottawa lifestyle by the federal Liberals. Radwanski never learned how to make a travel/hospitality claim. In a way, you gotta feel sorry for the guy. Well, I don't feel sorry for Radwanski but I don't think arbitrary vindictiveness will accomplish much in Ottawa. We punish people primarily as an incentive for others not to do wrong. To be effective, punishment should be an accurate signal. Well, Radwanski will get a suspended sentence, Dingwall will get his entitlements. Punishment in Ottawa is purely arbitrary. Arbitrary punishment is an incentive to avoid all risks, or an invitation to the foolhardy to believe they are lucky. Fate. (Ask Argus how civil servants respond to severe punishment visited randomly.) ---- At issue here is not Radwanski, and how much of our money he spent in Hull restaurants. Rather, the question is how to protect against the future Radwanskis (and the Dingwalls) in the year 2020. Random punishment will accomplish nothing. I invite the Left, those who argue for more government, to explain how they'll ensure government money goes to the homeless instead of the Radwanskis, Dingwalls and Chretiens of the future. I consider myself to be left of centre, but have never believed that we need MORE government. Egads! There's far too much money going out to bureacrats now. I am also pleased that criminal charges are being laid and that we are able to get some of our money back. Politicians should be treated like anyone else when it comes to breaking the law and I hope to see more actions like this in the future, especially with regards to the sponsorship scandal, which is not really a scandal so much as it is CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.

Wow. Those numbers are pretty significant. Not a good time to be hitching your wagon to the Bush Mobile.

Chantal Hebert in the Toronto StarThank you for a link to the article. I just read it and do agree to a certain extent. The take charge...my way or the highway...not open for discussion attitude IS pure Chretien. However, Mr. Harper has to be careful because Mr. Chretien had something he does not....a majority government. And perhaps more importantly, he has inherited something from Mr. Chretien that will not fit well with this attitude. A record of what can happen when a PM tries to rule with absolute power: SCANDAL. If the Gomery Report has taught Canadians anything, it's that there has to be more checks and balances, and a little more transparency in government. Mr. Harper promised this, but so far has not delivered. Fastracking your campaign manager to a cabinet post and the whole Emerson deal; and then refusing to even address it; other than I am Prime Minister and can do what I want; is just not going to fly. ---- Before the Internet, Chantal Hebert and Jeffrey Simpson and James Travers and Richard Gwyn and John Ibbitson relied on insider information (schmoozing) to write their columns. That was the justification of their salary. Maybe too, they had a talent with written English. Now, they are like any poster to any Internet political forum who brought any God-given knowledge to the subject at hand. Hebert's column is sad. The Liberals are no longer in power, Chretien's no longer PM, Murphy's no longer Chief of Staff, and Hebert and the Toronto Star are apparently out of the loop. But Harper is apparently speaking Loud and Clear to ordinary Canadians. Hebert's comparison of Chrétien and Harper is absurd and pathetic. Her column is just another Internet forum opinion, and a rather pointless one at that. Harper and Chretien, whatta joke...

Cut out unnecessary elections - 250 million Make Cabinet Ministers take the bus (part of Harper's environmental scheme is to offer bus pass rebates so this would be a twofold savings) - 300,000.00 plus rebate. Fire all of Harper's PR staff and use bubble gum cards. He could print his statements on the back and the other side of his face on the front. This way, not only would we save money but would also generate income from the sales. (That is if anyone would really pay for it) Charge a surtax for every stupid thing members of his caucus have to say. Kazillions of dollars in revenue.