Mackay busted in a lie about the helicopter of doom

[Smallc]

What earlier flight? Also, Mackay's office did not request a SAR helicopter. For some reason, the CS helicopters based at Goose Bay were not there at the time.

[msj]

What earlier flight? Also, Mackay's office did not request a SAR helicopter. For some reason, the CS helicopters based at Goose Bay were not there at the time.

Perhaps you should try reading the link:

In one e-mail, an officer recounted that Mr. MacKay’s staff said the minister took a helicopter flight that landed nearby the year before. When asked about that, Mr. MacKay’s press secretary, Joshua Zanin, said in an e-mail that “any previous flights in the area were in no way related to personal time.”

[Smallc]

I didn't notice that in the link, but irregardless, that doesn't seem to be related.

Edited December 3, 2011 by Smallc

[msj]

I didn't notice that in the link, but irregardless, that doesn't seem to be related.

Yes, and Mackay didn't "seem" to be a liar (or "misleading" if one prefers) until a freedom of information request showed him to be.....

[be real]

Oh god.. 3 more years of lefties reassuring each other that every minor scandal they can conjure up into the next national crisis will be the death knell of the conservatives. I don't know if I can take it.

Can't you guys wait until your parties find leaders before talking about winning the next election?

I know it sure sucks to be involved with such liars. Minor scandal, lefties... excuse me but if this was the NDP I would be disgusted as you would be too you hypocrite. Use your head not your mouth. Expect better from all sides and stop making excuses everytime one of your Cons is caught. Gross.

[be real]

Oh, I'll admit that McKay seems to have blown this one! I just take exception to making it the crime of the century!

I mean, the bar for political integrity is pretty low after all those Liberal years. McKay is just operating in the Ottawa status quo!

Everybody's judgement is off once in a while. Chretien was off by a LOT many times during his terms and I don't recall the same degree of outrage!

The reason I keep bringing up "old stuff" that seems to so infuriate Olp1fan is not that I'm trying to excuse a present sin. I've already said that as sins go this one is pretty lame-ass!

No, I do it to illustrate that Olp1fan's outrage is so partisan and selective, along with so many of his fellows.

The picture is simple to understand.A liberal sins and it is forgiven or even ignored, no matter how egregious. A Tory makes no matter how trivial a sin and always someone like Olp1fan immediately stands up and screams that it is a crime against Man, dogs and God!

And then when I point out his silence on the liberal faux pas he replies "Old stuff don't count! Fugeddabout it!"

THAT'S what I'm pointing out! The hypocrisy! The partisanship!

Partisan thinking is for trolls and idiots! It's a waste of everyone's time on a forum like this! Has anyone ever seen me post that anyone in the NDP is a commie pinko? Never have and never would! But almost every day we see slams against any and all conservatives, as if they were the proverbial reptilian kitten eaters!

And I get called a Conservative as if it's some kind of synonym for evil, when I'm a classic Liberal!

The ignorance is overwhelming!

First Makay's head on a platter, Steven really won't mind and I liked it better when you were conservative.

[be real]

Peter Mackay didn't steal anything. He has the authority to approve all use of DND aircraft.

If I was his senionr I wouldn't hesitate canning his ass, But this isn't the real world, it's politics. Peter's misadventures were all party related photo oppurtunity for himself, it just backfired because someone actually held him acountible for his spending... or no they didn't and that is a real shame on our government. Demand better, no excuses or we mise well just stand and say "hail to the thief" when whatever government walks in.

[be real]

Well if you recall, that's how/why the "cons" came to power. The Libs now have to wander for 40 years in the tundra.

Your funny! Let's go for a drink, I wan't to laugh at you!

[Topaz]

MacKay must have know he had to be in London because Rona was on her way there, so he probably had too much to drink the night before or over slept and decided to call in the military. Anyway, it doesn't matter because Harper doesn't do anything to his ministers for bad behavior and he doesn't dare touch McKay.

[msj]

And yet more fibbing.

Who knows what the real story is?

The last person I would trust, though, is Peter.

[olp1fan]

And yet more fibbing.

Who knows what the real story is?

The last person I would trust, though, is Peter.

whoever Harper has to defend is lying, that's what I go by

This whole government has to go like ASAP

Edited December 6, 2011 by olp1fan

[Guest Derek L]

And yet more fibbing.

Who knows what the real story is?

The last person I would trust, though, is Peter.

Did he deny having a prior flight?

[msj]

Did he deny having a prior flight?

Well, I didn't hear him volunteer info about this SAR flight after his spokeperson had this to say:

"After cancelling previous efforts to demonstrate their search-and-rescue capabilities to Minister MacKay over the course of three years, the opportunity for a search-and-rescue demonstration finally presented itself in July of 2010," Mr. MacKay's spokesman, Jay Paxton, told The Globe and Mail in an e-mail on Thurdsday. "As such, Minister MacKay cut his personal trip to the area short to participate in this Cormorant exercise."

Apparently the search-and-rescue technicians, who have been lobbying for replacements for their fixed-wing Buffalo aircraft, had been urging the minister for some time to participate in a chopper demonstration.

Probably as inconvenient as taking a car ride and plane trip.

Edited December 6, 2011 by msj

[Guest Derek L]

Well, I didn't hear him volunteer his SAR flight after his spokeperson had this to say:

So there was no denial to a prior SAR flight?

How would that be:

And yet more fibbing

[olp1fan]

I thought it was understood that he's never been on a SAR demonstration?

[msj]

So there was no denial to a prior SAR flight?

How would that be:

In my books purposefully omitting relevant information is the equivalent to lying.

Lying is deception and Peter has been trying to deceive (through his spokesperson primarily) all along.

Edited December 6, 2011 by msj

[g_bambino]

In my books purposefully omitting relevant information is the equivalent to lying.

Even if MacKay had been on previous training flights, how is that relevant to search and rescue officials requesting the minister's presence on a different exercise flight?

[ed.: clarify]

Edited December 6, 2011 by g_bambino

[Guest Derek L]

In my books purposefully omitting relevant information is the equivalent to lying.

Lying is deception and Peter has been trying to deceive (through his spokesperson primarily) all along.

Well thankfully, your “books” don’t have precedent over:

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/page-1.html#l_I:s_7

11. ©

not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence;

Self-crimination

13. A witness who testifies in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence.

So, with that being said, and your failing to demonstrate the MND’s denial of a prior SAR flight, aren’t you the one “fibbing”?

[msj]

Well thankfully, your “books” don’t have precedent over:

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/page-1.html#l_I:s_7

So, with that being said, and your failing to demonstrate the MND’s denial of a prior SAR flight, aren’t you the one “fibbing”?

This is just strange.

So perhaps I should call him out for continuing to mislead rather than, technically, "fibbing."

Your anal retentive grammatical/semantic argument is most telling.

The fact is Peter has made every attempt at deceiving people on this issue: claiming his flight from a fishing lodge was related to SAR while conveniently not mentioning that he has already had the SAR experience.

In my books that's certainly misleading.

It's also, imo, fibbing - from a synonymous with "falsehood" point of view.

[g_bambino]

The fact is Peter has made every attempt at deceiving people on this issue: claiming his flight from a fishing lodge was related to SAR while conveniently not mentioning that he has already had the SAR experience.

So, because he had already been on a training flight means the other, older request for his presence on a training flight never happened?

[olp1fan]

people who defend liars when they can't be defended because they are liars anr generally liars themselves

Edited December 6, 2011 by olp1fan

[Guest Derek L]

This is just strange.

So perhaps I should call him out for continuing to mislead rather than, technically, "fibbing."

Your anal retentive grammatical/semantic argument is most telling.

The fact is Peter has made every attempt at deceiving people on this issue: claiming his flight from a fishing lodge was related to SAR while conveniently not mentioning that he has already had the SAR experience.

In my books that's certainly misleading.

It's also, imo, fibbing - from a synonymous with "falsehood" point of view.

Where did he “mislead” on having been on a prior SAR flight?

[g_bambino]

people who defend liars when they can't be defended because they are liars anr generally liars themselves

And people who chronically jump to conclusions are generally idiots.

[msj]

So, because he had already been on a training flight means the other, older request for his presence on a training flight never happened?

Do you honestly expect people to believe his spokesperson's story about this being a SAR exercise when he already was on one 12 months previously?

It defies credibility.

Which is why Peter was mum on it in the first place.

But hey, the spokesperson was insistent that the SAR exercises were continuously cancelled over the course of "three years" and this opportunity just popped out of nowhere....

Nudge nudge, wink wink....

[msj]

Where did he “mislead” on having been on a prior SAR flight?

Read the spokesperson quote again.

If Peter came out with this fact prior to this new story breaking then I will stand corrected.

Otherwise, it is what is called a lie of omission.