August1991 Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Stephen Harper is not winning this campaign, in any sense at all. Canadians are being dragged screaming to Harper. Harper is a last resort. Rather, the Liberal Party is losing this campaign. Why? Because a whole host of (mostly English-Canadian) Chretien/Trudeau insiders have decided that they don't like Paul Martin. They don't like the way Martin exposed the way these insiders operated the country. The Liberal Party is committing suicide in a civil war. Kinsella and Copps may feel happy on 23 January if Martin loses. But they will wake up to a country fundamentally shifted, just as a tectonic shift occurred in October 1995. Kinsella and Copps are tacticians, with no understanding at all for strategy. ---- Paul Martin is trying to hold this leaky bag together, and he's getting no credit for his efforts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Honest Politician Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 As an expression of your anger over this outrageous unfairness, may I persuade you to vote liberal in protest? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Rather, the Liberal Party is losing this campaign. Why? Because a whole host of (mostly English-Canadian) Chretien/Trudeau insiders have decided that they don't like Paul Martin. They don't like the way Martin exposed the way these insiders operated the country. The Liberal Party is committing suicide in a civil war.They are commiting suicide because they believe they are going down in flames. If the polls had stayed up then Martin would have been fine.Kinsella and Copps may feel happy on 23 January if Martin loses. But they will wake up to a country fundamentally shifted, just as a tectonic shift occurred in October 1995.It already has started. No less than of my 5 friends and relatives that have always voted Liberal will now vote Conservative. I believe simiular stories are happening all across the country. People want change - even the reporters - the shift is gathering speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Stephen Harper is not winning this campaign, in any sense at all. Canadians are being dragged screaming to Harper. Harper is a last resort. Rather, the Liberal Party is losing this campaign. Why? Because a whole host of (mostly English-Canadian) Chretien/Trudeau insiders have decided that they don't like Paul Martin. They don't like the way Martin exposed the way these insiders operated the country. The Liberal Party is committing suicide in a civil war. Kinsella and Copps may feel happy on 23 January if Martin loses. But they will wake up to a country fundamentally shifted, just as a tectonic shift occurred in October 1995. Kinsella and Copps are tacticians, with no understanding at all for strategy. ---- Paul Martin is trying to hold this leaky bag together, and he's getting no credit for his efforts. The Income Trust leak happened under his watch. As panels of experts said, the least Goodale should have done when it was discovered stocks were moving at an abnormal and highly suspicious rate , was say, "hey, something is going on here. I'll call for an investigation!" But both Goodale and Martin did nothing. They even tried to down-play it. A lot of investors lost their savings, a lot of them seniors and small-investors. Foreign investors were affected too that's why SEC is reviewing. Wouldn't this affect our economy somehow? Where is the leadership? And yesterday, all tv talk shows (CPAC and Mike Duffy) explained that the guy involved in the Options Canada scandal was the right-hand man of Martin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiti Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Options Canada was audited by the Auditor General 10 years ago. There is nothing but allegations and slime being thrown by the Bloc and now Harper. There was no leak in the Inocme trust announcement. It is all hype and allegations. And that will be proven. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Options Canada was audited by the Auditor General 10 years ago. There is nothing but allegations and slime being thrown by the Bloc and now Harper.There was no leak in the Inocme trust announcement. It is all hype and allegations. And that will be proven. Your claim is quite so hard to swallow, but just for the sake of argument, let's assume that everything happened by mere fluke. It is the previous PROVEN pattern of corruptions among the Liberals that is the glaring fact. The Liberal Party has a track record of proven corruptions. Btw, lies and Theft go hand in hand. Options Canada was audited by the Auditor General 10 years ago. There is nothing but allegations and slime being thrown by the Bloc and now Harper.There was no leak in the Inocme trust announcement. It is all hype and allegations. And that will be proven. Your claim is quite so hard to swallow, but just for the sake of argument, let's assume that everything happened by mere fluke. It is the previous PROVEN pattern of corruptions among the Liberals that is the glaring fact. The Liberal Party has a track record of proven corruptions. It is peeling like an onion. Leaking like a rusty bucket. Surely you cannot blame the people for not having trust on this government anymore. Why, it's just common sense. Btw, lies and Theft go hand in hand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Honest Politician Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Foreign investors were affected too that's why SEC is reviewing. Please post a link to ANYWHERE that has the SEC themselves saying they are reviewing the Income Trust Leak. From what I understand all the SEC has sent out was basically a form letter type response to the NDP allegations. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiti Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Btw, lies and Theft go hand in hand. And that is what Harper is going to do... steal my tax reduction that Goodale gave me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Foreign investors were affected too that's why SEC is reviewing. Please post a link to ANYWHERE that has the SEC themselves saying they are reviewing the Income Trust Leak. From what I understand all the SEC has sent out was basically a form letter type response to the NDP allegations. I don't know how to do the link-thingy. Go to www.ctv.ca They have an article titled: US Watchdog Looking Into Income Trust Trading Btw, lies and Theft go hand in hand. And that is what Harper is going to do... steal my tax reduction that Goodale gave me. Pure conjecture. Just your own pov at this point. My pov is based on proven facts. What actually happened. The pattern of corruptions exist in the Liberal party. Foreign investors were affected too that's why SEC is reviewing. Please post a link to ANYWHERE that has the SEC themselves saying they are reviewing the Income Trust Leak. From what I understand all the SEC has sent out was basically a form letter type response to the NDP allegations. I don't know how to do the link-thingy. Go to www.ctv.ca They have an article titled: US Watchdog Looking Into Income Trust Trading Btw, lies and Theft go hand in hand. And that is what Harper is going to do... steal my tax reduction that Goodale gave me. Pure conjecture. Just your own pov at this point. Btw, what you are only assuming Harper will do ....the Liberals have actually been doing already! My pov is based on proven facts. What actually happened. The pattern of corruptions exist in the Liberal party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Honest Politician Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 "We are taking your complaint very seriously, and have referred it to the appropriate people within the SEC," Sulzber writes, and refers to a telephone conversation with Wasylycia-Leis from the previous week.Sulzber adds that "the SEC generally conducts its investigations on a confidential basis and neither confirms nor denies the existence of an investigation unless we bring charges against someone involved … As a result, we will not be able to provide you with any future updates on the status of your complaint or of any pending SEC investigation." Hmm... only place it says the SEC is investigating is in your post and in Wasylycia-Leis' oppinion. Sorry, NO SALE!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 "We are taking your complaint very seriously, and have referred it to the appropriate people within the SEC," Sulzber writes, and refers to a telephone conversation with Wasylycia-Leis from the previous week.Sulzber adds that "the SEC generally conducts its investigations on a confidential basis and neither confirms nor denies the existence of an investigation unless we bring charges against someone involved … As a result, we will not be able to provide you with any future updates on the status of your complaint or of any pending SEC investigation." Hmm... only place it says the SEC is investigating is in your post and in Wasylycia-Leis' oppinion. Sorry, NO SALE!!! I said "REVIEWING." I try not to emulate the Liberal party in twisting facts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Honest Politician Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Doesn't say reviewing either! It is a form letter. An automated response. Do you really think the SEC is going to waste their money on this while an RCMP investigation is giong on? They most likely are going to wait for the RCMP report to see if the allegations have any merit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Doesn't say reviewing either!It is a form letter. An automated response. Do you really think the SEC is going to waste their money on this while an RCMP investigation is giong on? They most likely are going to wait for the RCMP report to see if the allegations have any merit. But the fact is that: investors had been burnt. You think this does not put a question on Canada's way of handling things? Yoo-hooo, invest in Canada...and you invest in a banana republic! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Honest Politician Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Let's review. Goodale said he was going to make an announcement. The economic and especially the political indicators (being in an election) suggested a positive announcement. People whose job it is to pay attention to these indicators, did their jobs. Stock was bought on the assumption of a positive announcement. When the announcement was as expected most of the Income Trusts, but not all, gained value. A NDP candidate whose party, of course, had nothing to gain by smearing the liberals, pointed out the increased purchases of stock and cried foul. The RCMP themselves say there is no evidence of wrong doing. The NDP candidate, obviously not intentionally meaning to smear the liberals trot out a form letter, as proof that the SEC is investigating the supposed leak. Proof = 0% Allegations and conjecture = 100% Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcqueen625 Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Stephen Harper is not winning this campaign, in any sense at all. Canadians are being dragged screaming to Harper. Harper is a last resort. Rather, the Liberal Party is losing this campaign. Why? Because a whole host of (mostly English-Canadian) Chretien/Trudeau insiders have decided that they don't like Paul Martin. They don't like the way Martin exposed the way these insiders operated the country. The Liberal Party is committing suicide in a civil war. Kinsella and Copps may feel happy on 23 January if Martin loses. But they will wake up to a country fundamentally shifted, just as a tectonic shift occurred in October 1995. Kinsella and Copps are tacticians, with no understanding at all for strategy. ---- Paul Martin is trying to hold this leaky bag together, and he's getting no credit for his efforts. Quit crying! Martin is as corrupt as was Chretien, after all he was Chretien's Finance Minister, so if one carries the stink of corruption, they all do. Bottom line here is that it is time for a change. When you have a person like Paul Martin so narcacistic that he believes his own hype that he is the only one capable of running Canada, it is time for him and the Liberal Party to go on a long holiday. I'm not saying that Harper is will be any better, but at least it will be a change from having a Quebecois running the country. This is supposed to be a bilingual if you actually believe that crap, because Quebec certainly doesn't believe it, and Martin nor his predecessors from Quebec have done anything to make Quebec comply with bilingualism. I don't believe that to be PM one has to be able to speak French. I say that because even the Bloc members can speaka da English if they have to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Honest Politician Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 If Martin was so close to Chretien, why are Chretien supporters trying ruin the Martin Campaign. Martin and Chretien had parted ways long before Chretien retired. Try to remember the sponsorship program was Chretien's baby, and the Gomery commmission determined that Martin had no involvment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 wrong thread Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Honest Politician Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Sure move your thread after I quote from it. lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml12 Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Stephen Harper is not winning this campaign, in any sense at all. Canadians are being dragged screaming to Harper. Harper is a last resort. Rather, the Liberal Party is losing this campaign. Why? Because a whole host of (mostly English-Canadian) Chretien/Trudeau insiders have decided that they don't like Paul Martin. They don't like the way Martin exposed the way these insiders operated the country. The Liberal Party is committing suicide in a civil war. Kinsella and Copps may feel happy on 23 January if Martin loses. But they will wake up to a country fundamentally shifted, just as a tectonic shift occurred in October 1995. Kinsella and Copps are tacticians, with no understanding at all for strategy. ---- Paul Martin is trying to hold this leaky bag together, and he's getting no credit for his efforts. Quit crying! Martin is as corrupt as was Chretien, after all he was Chretien's Finance Minister, so if one carries the stink of corruption, they all do. Bottom line here is that it is time for a change. When you have a person like Paul Martin so narcacistic that he believes his own hype that he is the only one capable of running Canada, it is time for him and the Liberal Party to go on a long holiday. I'm not saying that Harper is will be any better, but at least it will be a change from having a Quebecois running the country. This is supposed to be a bilingual if you actually believe that crap, because Quebec certainly doesn't believe it, and Martin nor his predecessors from Quebec have done anything to make Quebec comply with bilingualism. I don't believe that to be PM one has to be able to speak French. I say that because even the Bloc members can speaka da English if they have to. I COULD NOT AGREE MORE... While I do not really dislike Martin as much as Chretien though. Chretien was hateful and corrupt. He hated western Canada, hated Quebec nationalism, hated the U.S., and hated our democracy. By creating a scandal that was eerily similar to Watergate, Chretien bought the 1997 election with dirty taxpayer money. Millions of tax dollars were used over a decade to make Chretien rich and ordinary Canadians poor. Over $100 million was used to pay for that jerk's lawyer. You are damn right I think Gomery was 100% correct to say Chretien was the man who oversaw this program. Remember when Chretien made those comments about political expediency? "In your country, in my country, all the politicians would be in prison because they sell their votes." Well I am so happy that in my country the PM just FIXES the elections with MY money. That's NOT political expediency? Chretien was incorrigible. He couldn't govern if his life depended on it. He had no plan B in 1995. Who saved Canada? Charest and Trudeau. NOT Chretien. He only won three times because his opposition was SPLIT THREE WAYS. But, of course, he had a little help from the taxpayer's wallet. Similarly, all of Chretien's policies were straight from the Trudeau playbook. Chretien phoned Trudeau 3-4 times a day because he had no idea what he was doing. Yes I am voting Conservative...how can it be any other way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Of course its another scandal they (Liberals) hid the transfer of $4.8 million right before the 1995 referendum to the (now-defunct) Option Canada -- headed by Claude Dauphin, Martin's right-hand man in Quebec. The facts Maam, just the facts Quebec's chief electoral officer began investigating the transfer in 1996, but later dropped the probe. Former heritage minister Sheila Copps, a Sun columnist, said she flagged the Option Canada grant in about 1998 after she took the post. Copps said she noticed at the time that about $300,000 in work commissioned from the unity organization was never received and Dauphin refused to account for it. She referred it to the auditor general, and "that was the last I heard of it," Copps said. Gee, really. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml12 Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Of course its another scandal they (Liberals) hid the transfer of $4.8 million right before the 1995 referendum to the (now-defunct) Option Canada -- headed by Claude Dauphin, Martin's right-hand man in Quebec. The facts Maam, just the facts Quebec's chief electoral officer began investigating the transfer in 1996, but later dropped the probe. Former heritage minister Sheila Copps, a Sun columnist, said she flagged the Option Canada grant in about 1998 after she took the post. Copps said she noticed at the time that about $300,000 in work commissioned from the unity organization was never received and Dauphin refused to account for it. She referred it to the auditor general, and "that was the last I heard of it," Copps said. Gee, really. I wonder how much dirty money is going into Ignatieff's riding? Are we Canadians so jaded by Liberal dictatorships that when we see an honest Harper we get scared? He MUST have a hidden agenda. It's the only way he could have gotten into politics!!! One thing's for sure: PMPM is done. Even if he wins a minority, that is unstable. And one thing I know about Liberal war rooms...the Libs don't like unstable distatorships. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted January 7, 2006 Author Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Foreign investors were affected too that's why SEC is reviewing. Please post a link to ANYWHERE that has the SEC themselves saying they are reviewing the Income Trust Leak. From what I understand all the SEC has sent out was basically a form letter type response to the NDP allegations. HP, you can interpret this as you will: "We are taking your complaint very seriously and have referred it to the appropriate people within the SEC," legal counsel, Ann H. Sulzberg wrote in an e-mail to Wasylycia-Leis. Sulzberg wrote that the SEC "generally conducts its investigations on a confidential basis and neither confirms nor denies the existence of an investigation unless we bring charges against someone involved." CBC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 There was no leak in the Inocme trust announcement. It is all hype and allegations. And that will be proven. A lot of big connected boys made a fortune because of Goodale's handling of the income trusts and the little investor got screwed as usual. Whether it was corruption or just plain incompetence only time will tell. Either one is a good reason to be gone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Honest Politician Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 Foreign investors were affected too that's why SEC is reviewing. Please post a link to ANYWHERE that has the SEC themselves saying they are reviewing the Income Trust Leak. From what I understand all the SEC has sent out was basically a form letter type response to the NDP allegations. HP, you can interpret this as you will: "We are taking your complaint very seriously and have referred it to the appropriate people within the SEC," legal counsel, Ann H. Sulzberg wrote in an e-mail to Wasylycia-Leis. Sulzberg wrote that the SEC "generally conducts its investigations on a confidential basis and neither confirms nor denies the existence of an investigation unless we bring charges against someone involved." CBC I already posted and exposed that form letter for what it is. A form letter, that promises nothing and confirms nothing other than receipt of the complaint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stignasty Posted January 7, 2006 Report Share Posted January 7, 2006 "We are taking your complaint very seriously and have referred it to the appropriate people within the SEC," legal counsel, Ann H. Sulzberg wrote in an e-mail to Wasylycia-Leis. Sulzberg wrote that the SEC "generally conducts its investigations on a confidential basis and neither confirms nor denies the existence of an investigation unless we bring charges against someone involved." U.S. market watchdog looking into income trust affair Liberal-haters will see this as an indictment, others will see it as a smear campaign in the midst of an election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.