jdobbin Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 I'll say it! Cheerfully! Then I can say that Harper is soft on crime. He should refer the matter to the Justice department if he thinks the RCMP is corrupt. Quote
Fortunata Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 Does anyone know if the head dude of the RCMP is a Prime Minister appointment? It would explain a lot. I believe it is a PM appointment. So how does that explain the RCMP's actions during the last election? It was a deliberate ploy to help oust the Liberals. That was truly outrageous and smacks of eastern bloc tactics. Quote
Wild Bill Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 Then I can say that Harper is soft on crime. He should refer the matter to the Justice department if he thinks the RCMP is corrupt. Well, I might and you might but I can appreciate a prime minister's position. He may not feel it to be good politics to open up such a can of worms right now. Besides, if he can fix the problem from behind the scenes, perhaps with a new appointment he can preserve the "good name" of the Mounties. It would be a shame to drag the Mounties through the mud, especially if the charges are true! Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Wild Bill Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 I believe it is a PM appointment. So how does that explain the RCMP's actions during the last election? It was a deliberate ploy to help oust the Liberals. That was truly outrageous and smacks of eastern bloc tactics. I for one don't really care! I don't expect one factor to explain EVERYTHING! It's enough that it explains what happened with Chretien and Shawinigate, at least for me. There have been so many Liberal scandals over the years that I'm still a bit behind unraveling them... Quote "A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul." -- George Bernard Shaw "There is no point in being difficult when, with a little extra effort, you can be completely impossible."
Argus Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 Who were these Tamil candidates for the Liberals? When did Paul Martin say he supported terrorism? No one ever says they support terrorism. Even Hamas and Islamic Jihad don't admit to being terrorists. They call what they do "defending our people". But I think that when the RCMP, CSIS, Foreign Affairs, and the US government tell a cabinet minister that a group is raising money for terrorists, and that minister gives them all the finger and goes to a big fund raiser on behalf of those terrorists that minister is pretty openly showing that he supports terrorism. The Liberals fought for years to keep the Tamil Tigers off the list of terrorist groups on behalf of the selfsame supporters who, while funneling money to the Tamil Tigers, funneled money to the Liberal Party, as well. The RCMP cleared Gagliano. I know you think that the RCMP is corrupt but if you think so, you should probably be demanding Harper start an investigation. If he doesn't, he is soft on crime, right? I think Harper should have fired the top several ranks of the RCMP when he took power, and I think he should have launched in depth forensic examinations of the books of all major federal institutions, particularly those "trusts" that Paul Martin hid billions of dollars in to keep the size of his excess taxation hidden. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 (edited) I believe it is a PM appointment. So how does that explain the RCMP's actions during the last election? It was a deliberate ploy to help oust the Liberals. That was truly outrageous and smacks of eastern bloc tactics. Zaccardelli was Chretien's man. He was the one who sent mounties to raid the home of Francois Beaudoin of the BDC because the man had the gall to refuse to loan money to one of Chretien's criminal friends and business partners (who used the money to pay Chretien for his share of a golf course). Maybe it was Chretien who thought up this "ploy" to put a nail in Paul Martin's coffin. For those who don't remember, the sad state of RCMP being abused for political purposes is right here Edited June 6, 2008 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Argus Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 I guess I shouldn't be surprised at how some falsehoods are given as fact here. A few days ago I was told that the Liberals were to blame for the Iltis trucks which were ordered by Mulroney in 1981 and first deliveries made in 1985. Apparently you don't read very well. The trucks were delivered in 1995, and it was the Liberals who closed down the military's testing range for twice failing the Iltis, and contracted the work to a private testing firm in the US which passed them. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jdobbin Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 Apparently you don't read very well. The trucks were delivered in 1995, and it was the Liberals who closed down the military's testing range for twice failing the Iltis, and contracted the work to a private testing firm in the US which passed them. Apparently, you don't read at all. The trucks started being delivered in 1985. You can still buy Bombardier 1985 Iltis trucks used by the Canadian military in buy and sale. Trying to hitch the Iltis to the Liberals is about as dishonest as it comes. The Tories ordered the truck and took in years of deliveries of it. Chretien should have replaced it earlier. That job was left to Martin. Quote
jdobbin Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 (edited) No one ever says they support terrorism. Even Hamas and Islamic Jihad don't admit to being terrorists. They call what they do "defending our people". You said that Martin supported terrorism. You said Tamil Liberal candidates. But I think that when the RCMP, CSIS, Foreign Affairs, and the US government tell a cabinet minister that a group is raising money for terrorists, and that minister gives them all the finger and goes to a big fund raiser on behalf of those terrorists that minister is pretty openly showing that he supports terrorism. The Liberals fought for years to keep the Tamil Tigers off the list of terrorist groups on behalf of the selfsame supporters who, while funneling money to the Tamil Tigers, funneled money to the Liberal Party, as well. And the Tories ran a Tamil candidate in the last election. He and his community were rather surprised when the organization was listed. I think Harper should have fired the top several ranks of the RCMP when he took power, and I think he should have launched in depth forensic examinations of the books of all major federal institutions, particularly those "trusts" that Paul Martin hid billions of dollars in to keep the size of his excess taxation hidden. It still isn't too late. Given his penchant to going to court over everything, I'm surprised he hasn't. Edited June 7, 2008 by jdobbin Quote
jdobbin Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 Well, I might and you might but I can appreciate a prime minister's position. He may not feel it to be good politics to open up such a can of worms right now. Besides, if he can fix the problem from behind the scenes, perhaps with a new appointment he can preserve the "good name" of the Mounties. It would be a shame to drag the Mounties through the mud, especially if the charges are true! I'm sorry that doesn't really cut it. The RCMP are being accused of the biggest corruption in Canada by elements of the right wing and Harper doesn't want to look into it? Quote
Shakeyhands Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 and I think he should have launched in depth forensic examinations of the books of all major federal institutions, particularly those "trusts" that Paul Martin hid billions of dollars in to keep the size of his excess taxation hidden. What??? Quote "They muddy the water, to make it seem deep." - Friedrich Nietzsche
BubberMiley Posted June 6, 2008 Report Posted June 6, 2008 What??? You've never hidden your excess taxation? Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
jdobbin Posted June 7, 2008 Report Posted June 7, 2008 How Van Loan responded in Parliament to straightforward questions. http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/f.../06/173679.aspx On Monday Mr. Rae asked a question about the integrity of the inquiry into the Bernier Affair being conducted by Foreign Affairs. How did the government respond? With this comment:Hon. Peter Van Loan (Leader of the Government in the House of Commons and Minister for Democratic Reform, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I thank the hon. member for his audition before the House. I know that on his previous audition the voters of Ontario watched for five years and then took a pass. Often Van Loan answers all questions even when addressed to others in cabinet. He has become master of the slam and smear. The very least the government can do is answer credible questions in the House from Mr. Rae with credible answers that show more respect for Parliament. Doing otherwise doesn’t cause those who want to support the Conservatives bouts of wheezy laughter — it gives them reason to believe that the Conservatives are quickly falling into a pattern of denial and obfuscation that was the hallmark of Liberal governments of the past when faced with scandal.The Bernier Affair offers the Tories the opportunity to show how different they really are from the Liberals of yesteryear. If they think there is anything to gain by behaving like those Liberals, the danger is that voters may believe there is nothing to lose if they vote the Liberals back into office. Quote
Argus Posted June 7, 2008 Report Posted June 7, 2008 (edited) Apparently, you don't read at all. The trucks started being delivered in 1985. You can still buy Bombardier 1985 Iltis trucks used by the Canadian military in buy and sale.Trying to hitch the Iltis to the Liberals is about as dishonest as it comes. The Tories ordered the truck and took in years of deliveries of it. Chretien should have replaced it earlier. That job was left to Martin. Shockingly - you are correct, but only due to my error in misnaming the vehicle. The Iltis are crappy, underpowered cars, but the more disastrous vehicle to which I was attempting to refer is actually the LSVWS - the Light Support Vehicle Wheeled. all mighty iltis Edited June 8, 2008 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jdobbin Posted June 7, 2008 Report Posted June 7, 2008 Shockingly - you are correct, but only due to my error in misnaming the vehicle. The Iltis are crappy, underpowered cars, but the more disastrous vehicle to which I was attempting to refer is actually the LSVWS - the Light Support Vehicle Wheeled. I can't get the link to work. The Tories began initiated that order in 1991 with their evaluations of the technical aspects. If I recall correctly, they put the order in. Quote
Argus Posted June 8, 2008 Report Posted June 8, 2008 I can't get the link to work.The Tories began initiated that order in 1991 with their evaluations of the technical aspects. If I recall correctly, they put the order in. Sorry, fixed now. I realize Mulroney, no paragon of military virtue, originally agreed to the order. And for political reasons. However, the really damning behavior was that of the Liberals, who overrode the contract which required that Western Star's vehicles pass the military's testing by closing down the military's testing range when it refused to pass the vehicles. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jdobbin Posted June 8, 2008 Report Posted June 8, 2008 (edited) Sorry, fixed now. I realize Mulroney, no paragon of military virtue, originally agreed to the order. And for political reasons. However, the really damning behavior was that of the Liberals, who overrode the contract which required that Western Star's vehicles pass the military's testing by closing down the military's testing range when it refused to pass the vehicles. I don't see anything in the links mentioning the government overriding the decision. What was the government's part in this? Edited June 8, 2008 by jdobbin Quote
Argus Posted June 8, 2008 Report Posted June 8, 2008 I don't anything in the links mentioning the government overriding the decision. What was the government's part in this? The trucks failed (badly) to pass the tests. The government ordered a re-test, and the testing facility still failed them badly. The contract would have been voided. The government then ordered the testing facility closed "to save money", and sent the job of testing the trucks to a private American company, where they passed with flying colours. They have been a burden on the military since day one. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
BubberMiley Posted June 8, 2008 Report Posted June 8, 2008 They have been a burden on the military since day one. SInce you weren't aware of the name of the vehicles, when they were purchased, or which government made the order, would you consider providing a citation from a reputable source to back your claims? Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
Argus Posted June 8, 2008 Report Posted June 8, 2008 (edited) SInce you weren't aware of the name of the vehicles, when they were purchased, or which government made the order, would you consider providing a citation from a reputable source to back your claims? What would you consider a reputable source? Something from the Marxist-Leninist weekly, perhaps? I was aware of the story since I remember following it closely way back when. The quote came from a discussion of Iltis, thus my mistaken use of name. Edited June 8, 2008 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
BubberMiley Posted June 8, 2008 Report Posted June 8, 2008 What would you consider a reputable source? Anything other than an anonymous internet forum poster who consistently gets his facts wrong works for me. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
jdobbin Posted June 8, 2008 Report Posted June 8, 2008 The trucks failed (badly) to pass the tests. The government ordered a re-test, and the testing facility still failed them badly. The contract would have been voided. The government then ordered the testing facility closed "to save money", and sent the job of testing the trucks to a private American company, where they passed with flying colours.They have been a burden on the military since day one. The truck does seem to have its problems. The only government department I see mentioned in the article is DND. How were elected officials involved? I can't find anything out there that gives me any background. Quote
jdobbin Posted June 8, 2008 Report Posted June 8, 2008 Latest attack ads from the Tories. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories There are three such "fuelcast" ads at the website willyoubetricked.ca. The ads will run in Toronto and other parts of southern Ontario, and will be accompanied by standard radio ads, t-shirts, postcards and other materials.However, Jane Taber and Craig Oliver, co-hosts of CTV's Question Period, noted that the Liberal tax -- which hasn't been formally presented yet -- rules out an additional tax on gasoline. Quote
Keepitsimple Posted June 8, 2008 Report Posted June 8, 2008 Latest attack ads from the Tories.http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories Jane Taber - now there's an unbiased journalist. Actually Dobbin, nothing can be ruled out until we all see an actual policy. There's only one reason why they don't have a policy yet - they don't know how much they have to water it down in order to bamboozle the voters. Stephane - the Green Man - has had years to plan and he's got the EU as a model (hardy-har-har). Quote Back to Basics
jdobbin Posted June 8, 2008 Report Posted June 8, 2008 Jane Taber - now there's an unbiased journalist. Actually Dobbin, nothing can be ruled out until we all see an actual policy. There's only one reason why they don't have a policy yet - they don't know how much they have to water it down in order to bamboozle the voters. Stephane - the Green Man - has had years to plan and he's got the EU as a model (hardy-har-har). Yes, I know the right wing thinks all media is biased against them. Harper doesn't really have a green policy either. The main reason is that the Tories don't really believe in reducing carbon. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.