nicky10013

Seriously? This is all you can do? Sad....

Really? Because it seems to me I'm not the one incapable of answering a simple question.

That's not my point. Every one of those bastards deserved to be thrown in prison. However, for conservatives to be on here claiming oh well the Liberals did it first is so hypocritcal, that you shouldn't even be allowed to mount a defense.

But of course, it comes down yet again to the fact that you wouldn't accept anything unless it said unmitigated. This says thatthere shouldn't be any limits whether they're appropriate or not because what's appropriate will always be distorted. That's a word by word interpretation. The fact that I needed to interpret it in the first place after the fact that you berated me for not being able to properly comprehend something, well, you've got problems. Go back to school. Gee, that would be a great link. Too bad he didn't actually write it. See, there you go. You just made an argument. Now, prove it. What part of what I said was fallacious? You specifically argued that he's for libel and not for libel tourism. Certainly you should be able to find proof to that extent. Saying there should be restrictions on freedom of speech is in itself a vague statement and can thus be expressed in many different ways. Like the quote I posted above. You either don't or won't understand that. Certainly not my fault. Again, I ask if you're specifically refusing to back up the claims that you made?

I think scholarships for foreign students grad students is a great idea. In the end, it's an incentive for the best to come to our universities. Kids in undergrad programmes learn from who? Oh yeah, those very same grad students who lead tutorial sessions which is where most kids do most of their work. Though optically it's a bad move, it's a benefit to the entire university system.

When has "tough love" as you describe it here, ever worked?

Damnit, you beat me to it. Though, I guess it's a step in the right direction. At least he acknowledges the problem exists in the first place. Half points.

What kind of responsibilities did he have?

Oh, I have. It's not my problem your reading comprehension skills are so bad. He slanders people every day, he's argued against libel laws including the one that saw him sued and he literally said death threats are boring and had no qualms against the death threats against Obama. Quotes I've given. So he's not in favour of only libel tourism and not libel? Prove it. The quotes from Steyn I've provided are very generalized. The fact that you're taking incredibly generalized statements about the state of freedom of speech in his opinion is the only thing here that doesn't add up. Then again, anything to convince yourself that you're right, right? Denial, denial, denial! Sure doesn't sound like he's just speaking about an HRC here. No free society can do that is an incredibly large generality. Very general here as well. Considering he says this in terms of the way he opened the paragraph, he doesn't like any "approproriate limits." His words, not mine. So you're admitting that you won't back up a claim like this?

No, he used his parliamentary office budget to send the letters on commons. That's what it's about. As for Bevilacqua, if he used donated money to send out those letters I don't see much of an issue with it. If he used his budget that's a different story and I'd be claiming the same accountability of Bevilacqua as I would of Thompson. Unlike you bunch of happy clapping seals I've no problem chastising a member of my own team. The continued excuse of "Well, the Liberals did it!" Is so hypocritical it's not funny. The Liberals were never elected on no corruption platform, I believe the CPC was, though.

Depends on what a "consular official" is defined as. All embassies hire locals to do grunt work - IE process passport and visa requests.

1. THe Liberals support the Conservatives because the NDP doesn't. In the end, no one wants an election every 2 months which is why when the Liberals last year said they were pulling the plug, the NDP folded and said they'd be willing to keep parliament alive. - hypocrite 2. Green Shift - Lie 3. I don't recall anyone in the Liberal Party claiming to be a crusader of peace - lie 4. In terms of tax cuts, the Liberals have pledged to freeze corporate tax cuts, a policy which the NDP stole - lie, hypocrite 5. Ignatieff fought tooth and nail to see those documents and fight the hand over of prisoners to torture - lie 6. I don't recall anyone in the Liberal Party saying the NDP hated Harper less than the LPC.

I suggest you talk to the original author of the article for that. None of those arguments are mine.

1. THe Liberals support the Conservatives because the NDP doesn't. In the end, no one wants an election every 2 months which is why when the Liberals last year said they were pulling the plug, the NDP folded and said they'd be willing to keep parliament alive. - hypocrite 2. Green Shift - Lie 3. I don't recall anyone in the Liberal Party claiming to be a crusader of peace - lie 4. In terms of tax cuts, the Liberals have pledged to freeze corporate tax cuts, a policy which the NDP stole - lie, hypocrite 5. Ignatieff fought tooth and nail to see those documents and fight the hand over of prisoners to torture - lie 6. I don't recall anyone in the Liberal Party saying the NDP hated Harper less than the LPC.

This isn't news. It's an op-ed filled with an ad-hominem attack from a Dipper who has the luxury to be able to call out Ignatieff because they know they'll never have to back up what they say. Politics is politics.

Yeah, and if there is a lack of a quantifier, then the thing in question would be absolute. In this case, freedom of speech.

For the people who read those quotes incredibly narrowly sure. When he's literally saying that we have to lift restrictions on freedom of speech regardless of what they are. If you can't or won't see that the HRC's are the vehicle he uses to elucidate his entire argument regarding freedom of speech in general, well, then, is it really me who has the reading comprehension issues? You also do realize that I also posted articles from Maclean's where he's against British libel laws and German freedom of speech restrictions, right? Oh, right, you and your band of willful ignorants didn't even acknowledge that I posted them. You really are nuts. Nothing I ever posted was anything close to that. Even if to you I haven't proven anything, you still just can't say you haven't proven it. Charter.Rights earlier in this way is correct. You don't just say errrrrrrrrr you're wrong, you get your own quote and say why my position is wrong with the proper citations.

You do realize that no restrictions on freedom of speech would result in just that, right?

Who or when have the Liberals trying to be all things to everyone?

I claimed that in his writing's he's been for no restrictions on freedom of speech. You've been denying I've provided proof of this for 23 pages now with absolutely no other argument other than the words "you're wrong." No where on this planet, inlcuding your mother's basement where you're probably typing this from, is that an acceptable response. To refute what I've posted which have been some really substantive quotes, you've got to provide some quotes of your own. Without that, you've been poking holes in nothing. Perhaps in your own deluded fantasy you are, but as I said, this isn't the way it works in the real world.

Out of curiosity, why is it always the Liberals fault? It's the government that's making the decision. If you're really for keeping the embassies open, why not ask them to come up with the money? Do you hate the Liberals so bad that you'll cut off your nose to spite your face by jumping in bed with the CPC?

No, since the Canadian Government is thinking of doing something they've done before makes it that much more likely.

You ignored the second sentence

Who is the one really dancing here? I've been posting substantive arguments. Your reply? Dance dwarf dance... In this thread you once said I was embarrassing myself. If you remember what that looks like, then perhaps you should look in the mirror.

Considering the past history of the government, why wouldn't the government follow through? For Punked.