Sir Bandelot

The state was Jesus' enemy. When the Romans adopted christianity as the new religion of the empire, they nationalized the religion, and we see the results throughout our history. They took the ideas and inverted them, to place the church and state in position of complete power over individuals. The inversion of christ

Is it true that in America, corporations can make unlimited donations to their favorite candidate? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._Federal_Election_Commission And some of those must have strong multinational ties,

Ouch!

They like to yap a lot?

It seems to me based on the whole comment, he was responding to some kind of criticism from the left that the US has to be the world police. "Like it or not, that's the job we have to do". In other words, US will continue invading countries that are non compliant with the empire, or wherever it's interests are served. Like it or not, the wars will continue.

Scribblet, Argus and other CPC partisans find the whole ugly story hard to swallow. I admire Harper to a point on some if his things, and he would not normally concede to outside pressures or baseless allegations from the media or opposition. Something convinced him this was credible and serious, for him to make the move he did. That's why i say, despite the disbelief and silence coming from the partisans, it is HARPER who condemned them without a trial. CPC'ers must now choke on the bitter bread of the King's own veracity... No papa! No papa!

If there was any significant doubt, Mr. Harper would hold his ground and ignore the innuendo. Five days after the RCMP received "serious" allegations from Prime Minister Stephen Harper I guess he's the one providing the innuendo now?

I'm not suggesting that. McGuintly Liberals would like to see Jaffer take the fall. But if you don't think the feds can reach down to some prosecutor in an Ontario court and persuade them to drop the charges, you're not just a confused partisan, you're naive.

If true, it ties in with the theory that she was "jonesing" for a fix in PEI.

No shit, Sherlock. Gee those officials must be smart as Albert frikkin Einstein to figure that one out. But even the soldiers on the ground could have told you that, a couple of years ago. During the period Specialist Soto served there half of his platoon was wounded or killed, according to the unit’s commanding officer. “It confuses me, why it took so long for them to realize that we weren’t making progress up there,” he said.

Obama reaffirms 2011 Afghanistan withdrawal Speaking in an interview with Australian television broadcast Thursday, Obama said of Afghanistan that United States and its allies "can't be there in perpetuity." Obama told the Australian Broadcasting Corp. that he did not agree that the situation in Afghanistan was getting worse, saying the Taliban's momentum had been "blunted" since he came to office. But winning the nearly nine-year-old war remained a difficult task, he said. "We can't succeed unless President Karzai moves forward on the reforms that are so necessary for Afghans to see a real investment in their lives day-to-day and improvement in their lives day-to-day." Obama is politicizing the war for his benefit, trying to take credit for something that never happened. Clearly his own statements are contradictory. The troops are pulling back, the mujahideen remain, defiant. These rag-tag warriors with bent Kalishnikovs have endured the most high-tech army in the world. What is it about Afghanistan that makes it so difficult a place to defeat militarily?

I guess we'll ignore what McChrystal says about it then. Don't read the article.

Yeah, but there's also a time to know when to call it a day. U.S. leaves Afghanistan’s ‘Valley of Death’ “There’s never a perfect answer,” General McChrystal said as he visited this outpost on April 8 for a briefing as the withdrawal began. “I care deeply about everybody who has been hurt here, but I can’t do anything about it. I can do something about people who might be hurt in the future. “The battle changes, the war changes,” he added. “If you don't understand the dynamics you have no chance of getting it right. We’ve been slower here than I would have liked.” Never mind the hawkish rhetoric. As McChrystal says, you have to understand the dynamics. Sounds like he has decided to cut his losses.

Not the Harper gang, but the Harper supporters on this site.

No that's not really the point I tries to make. But to stay on that topic for one more moment, I feel it's likely the cops do this often, they treat criminals roughly and often get away with it. In this case they did not, probably for a number of reasons. The point I wanted to make was that the tough on crime gang has no criticism of this, in fact they come to the defense of said perpetrators, citing the technicalities as valid reason to let criminals go. That's Southparkian hypocrisy.

They will not allow Tim Osman to be arrested.

I cannot agree or disagree, I am not a legal expert. But even if this is true, it is entirely beside the point I'm making.

One thing that probably helped him greatly is the fact that his case would be very High Profile. There would be a big media spotlight on it. Thus any such procedural errors would come to light. For ordinary Joe-Bobs, they would be told to shut up and sit down. The crown would never say they believe the case has no chance for a conviction, just because some loser didn't get to talk to his favorite lawyer in time, or that the cops felt it was necessary to cavity search Joe-Bob, because he was behaving in a threatening manner. In that case it's called "police discretion". But he got off on the technicality. Too bad we're not tough on crime, right Arguss?

There is no Liberal party, just as there is no Conservative.

The cops must arrest people every day. They know their procedures damn well by now. They know, it's a "procedural error" to give somebody a cavity search under these circumstances. But I have a hunch, there was nothing special in this case as far as the cops were concerned, just another night on patrol, just another drunk driver with coke in his possession. Yet the tough on crimers have little to say now, despite procedural errors. The silence roared.

If you read the news story you'd know, they let him call two lawyers, but neither one answered. Then they recommended he talk to a duty counsel that was available. he did that. After talking to the counsel he agreed to the breathalyzer test. This has to be given by law within 2 hours of the arrest. While the test was in progress, that's when his own lawyers called back. the cops told them they were too late. That last part is debateable. To be fair they could have interrupted the test to let him talk to them on the phone. But cops are not always fair, especially to druggies who have been drinking, going 95 in a 50 zone... Point is, to say they didn't let him talk to his lawyer is not accurate. he was allowed to call two, and spoke to a third. Bigger point is, a technicality that he got off on, which otherwise "tough on crime" cpc'ers would be enraged about "THESE LIBERAL LAWS!!!..." But not today, oh my... Right, Arguss??? Because it brings out the closet Liberal in you, to let him off under these circumstances.

You are not conservative, you are merely partisan. I'll tell you why- your stance on "tough on crime" does not extend to people or situations that involve your party. If this statement is incorrect, tell us your opinion on how Rahim Jaffer got off so easily on some technicalities, that otherwise would be overlooked if he were not a person with political connections.

The Ethics Commissioner said that she CANNOT investigate, once the RCMP are called in. She has no choice in the matter.

Perhaps they all just needed a cocaine fix, and that's why they called Jaffer in. Personal...

Mr. Canada, You can get Hazmat suits on eBay. I suggest you wear one to protect yourself while filming at the parade. Hazmat Suit