fellowtraveller Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 The number kicked around is $40 million . Harper was asked this question recently and dodged it. What do you think, are the taxpayers entitled to their money back, or is this vindictive partisanship? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 The number kicked around is $40 million .Harper was asked this question recently and dodged it. What do you think, are the taxpayers entitled to their money back, or is this vindictive partisanship? Sue them, I'll do file the papers myself. We should also sue them for the 1-billion dollar fee we are going to have to pay some European aircraft manufacturer in a settlement due to mismangement and political interference in the bidding process by the liberals. I'd rather see at least 10 or 15 go to jail for a few years over the money though. I'm disgusted that over 30% of Canadians could vote for a criminal organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 The number kicked around is $40 million .Harper was asked this question recently and dodged it. What do you think, are the taxpayers entitled to their money back, or is this vindictive partisanship? Vindictive partisanship. Harper has the PMs job now - even with a minority that gives him a lot of power. He should take the high road and implement his agenda as promised. He can always keep lawsuit card in his back pocket if the Liberals give him too much of a hard time in parliment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 If it can be proved in court that they defrauded the public, of course they should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 If it can be proved in court that they defrauded the public, of course they should.The only thing that they will be able to prove is some individuals in the party broke the rules. Attempting to sue the Liberal party itself would likely go no where. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 If it can be proved in court that they defrauded the public, of course they should.The only thing that they will be able to prove is some individuals in the party broke the rules. Attempting to sue the Liberal party itself would likely go no where. Probably. All I am saying is if it can proved a crime was committed and that the party knowingly benifited from that crime, they should be sued. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 If it can be proved in court that they defrauded the public, of course they should.The only thing that they will be able to prove is some individuals in the party broke the rules. Attempting to sue the Liberal party itself would likely go no where. Well it should just be like the Hell's Angels. I'm sure not every one of them is a drug dealer, just as I'm sure that the Liberals aren't all con artists. However, that doesn't change that the Hell's Angels are a criminal organization, why aren't the Liberals viewed the same way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml12 Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 The number kicked around is $40 million .Harper was asked this question recently and dodged it. What do you think, are the taxpayers entitled to their money back, or is this vindictive partisanship? Sue 'em... :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml12 Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 If it can be proved in court that they defrauded the public, of course they should.The only thing that they will be able to prove is some individuals in the party broke the rules. Attempting to sue the Liberal party itself would likely go no where. Well it should just be like the Hell's Angels. I'm sure not every one of them is a drug dealer, just as I'm sure that the Liberals aren't all con artists. However, that doesn't change that the Hell's Angels are a criminal organization, why aren't the Liberals viewed the same way. Chretien, undoubtetly the worst PM in Canadian history, bares, according to Judge Gomery, the ultimate responsibility for the scandal. I'd say we lock him up. That alone is worth about a couple of million to me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Well it should just be like the Hell's Angels. I'm sure not every one of them is a drug dealer, just as I'm sure that the Liberals aren't all con artists. However, that doesn't change that the Hell's Angels are a criminal organization, why aren't the Liberals viewed the same way.What a load of crap. Comparing the Liberal party to the Hell's Angels is as valid as comparing the Conservative party to the Nazis. In other words, there is no comparison.The facts uncovered at Gomery show that a few individuals broke the rules and a larger number of people of turned a blind eye. There entire affair is despicable but that does not add up to a conclusion that the Liberal party itself is a criminal organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speaker Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 As the great Charlie Brown once said, Good Grief! I'm as disgusted with the Liberals as I am with the Conservatives but even I can see the difference between Hells Angels, or the Mafia and a bunch of suburban white guys who are priveldged to serve us and try to quietly skim off a little money that must float in front of them like mannah from heaven. I agree with Wilbur though if there can be accumulated enough proof to do it we better go for them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 The number kicked around is $40 million .Harper was asked this question recently and dodged it. What do you think, are the taxpayers entitled to their money back, or is this vindictive partisanship? The best punishment for a politician is to lose power. We should think twice before imposing great penalties on politicians or political parties. Even Richard Nixon was pardoned. ---- "In War: Resolution, In Defeat: Defiance, In Victory: Magnanimity, In Peace: Good Will". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speaker Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 in victomhood, recompense Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Well it should just be like the Hell's Angels. I'm sure not every one of them is a drug dealer, just as I'm sure that the Liberals aren't all con artists. However, that doesn't change that the Hell's Angels are a criminal organization, why aren't the Liberals viewed the same way.What a load of crap. Comparing the Liberal party to the Hell's Angels is as valid as comparing the Conservative party to the Nazis. In other words, there is no comparison.The facts uncovered at Gomery show that a few individuals broke the rules and a larger number of people of turned a blind eye. There entire affair is despicable but that does not add up to a conclusion that the Liberal party itself is a criminal organization. I don't go with the Hells Angels comparison either but it wasn't just a little matter of the boys breaking a few rules, it was theft from the public purse. I'm not a lawyer but I believe turning a blind eye to a crime when you yourself are benifiting from that crime, is also a crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 I don't go with the Hells Angels comparison either but it wasn't just a little matter of the boys breaking a few rules, it was theft from the public purse. I'm not a lawyer but I believe turning a blind eye to a crime when you yourself are benifiting from that crime, is also a crime.Then everyone in this country is a criminal. Have you ever agreed to pay cash for a service to help someone hide income from the gov't? If you have done that then you have turned a blind eye to someone commiting a crime - and likely benefited from a cheaper price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newbie Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 Well it should just be like the Hell's Angels. I'm sure not every one of them is a drug dealer, just as I'm sure that the Liberals aren't all con artists. However, that doesn't change that the Hell's Angels are a criminal organization, why aren't the Liberals viewed the same way. Uh, I think you lost all credibility with your signature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shoop Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 newbie, Are you that blinded by ideology that your only contribution to the thread is to attack geoffrey because of his signature? Great way to play your part! Uh, I think you lost all credibility with your signature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml12 Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 newbie,Are you that blinded by ideology that your only contribution to the thread is to attack geoffrey because of his signature? Great way to play your part! Uh, I think you lost all credibility with your signature. I don't know what is funnier, that, or the left-leaning members here comparing Liberal corruption with Mulrooney corruption. I thought the Liberals werent't corrupt and so much better than Mulrooney? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 I don't go with the Hells Angels comparison either but it wasn't just a little matter of the boys breaking a few rules, it was theft from the public purse. I'm not a lawyer but I believe turning a blind eye to a crime when you yourself are benifiting from that crime, is also a crime.Then everyone in this country is a criminal. Have you ever agreed to pay cash for a service to help someone hide income from the gov't? If you have done that then you have turned a blind eye to someone commiting a crime - and likely benefited from a cheaper price. Maybe so but at least in those cases the money was paid for services rendered. In the case of ADSCAM there was no service rendered, just theft. If an employee steals from his employer, the employer fires the employee, presses charges and tries to get restitution. If you think politicians stealing from the public purse is OK because some guy tries to get out of paying GST for having his lawn mowed, I think you have pretty low standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riverwind Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 If you think politicians stealing from the public purse is OK because some guy tries to get out of paying GST for having his lawn mowed, I think you have pretty low standards.Evading the GST is stealing from the public purse - you have pretty low standards if you think the amount of money makes a difference. The party workers who benefited from the illegal funds may have never really known where the money came from but probably knew something was not right. They are no different from somebody who pays cash when they know they are helping someone evade taxes. The real criminals are the people who orchestrated the scheme and that is who the government should go after - not the Liberal party itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 If you think politicians stealing from the public purse is OK because some guy tries to get out of paying GST for having his lawn mowed, I think you have pretty low standards.Evading the GST is stealing from the public purse - you have pretty low standards if you think the amount of money makes a difference. The party workers who benefited from the illegal funds may have never really known where the money came from but probably knew something was not right. They are no different from somebody who pays cash when they know they are helping someone evade taxes. The real criminals are the people who orchestrated the scheme and that is who the government should go after - not the Liberal party itself. Paying cash to avoid GST should be equally punished. Just because lots of people (not everyone, I sure wouldn't and haven't) do it doesn't make it right. I see your point Sparhawk, and I agree. Those that stole public money should be jailed. The party, until they co-operate, are equally guilty. They need to tell us who stole the money, and they are hiding this. That is illegal, so they are acting criminally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hicksey Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 If it can be proved in court that they defrauded the public, of course they should.The only thing that they will be able to prove is some individuals in the party broke the rules. Attempting to sue the Liberal party itself would likely go no where. Well it should just be like the Hell's Angels. I'm sure not every one of them is a drug dealer, just as I'm sure that the Liberals aren't all con artists. However, that doesn't change that the Hell's Angels are a criminal organization, why aren't the Liberals viewed the same way. Its kind of like carrying a bag of crap around with you and being surprised the smell is following you around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sage Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 First, jail cannot result from "suing" someone, though it would be great to see Chretien in jail. As for whether the Liberal Party should be sued, as a lawyer I can state that the first thing you do is sue anyone who you may recover from. Politics aside, it would be prudent for a # of reasons to include the Party in any lawsuit. As for the optics of suing the party however, I'm with those who think Harper should avoid using this mechanism so early. If and when information came out that lead one to believe higher-ups in the Liberal Party participated in the kick-backs, politics should be cast aside however and the Party prosecuted (civilly and criminally) to the full extent of the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tml12 Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 First, jail cannot result from "suing" someone, though it would be great to see Chretien in jail.As for whether the Liberal Party should be sued, as a lawyer I can state that the first thing you do is sue anyone who you may recover from. Politics aside, it would be prudent for a # of reasons to include the Party in any lawsuit. As for the optics of suing the party however, I'm with those who think Harper should avoid using this mechanism so early. If and when information came out that lead one to believe higher-ups in the Liberal Party participated in the kick-backs, politics should be cast aside however and the Party prosecuted (civilly and criminally) to the full extent of the law. Sage, You make a good point. We need to see the rest of Judge Gomery's report and make a decision based on that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilber Posted January 31, 2006 Report Share Posted January 31, 2006 If you think politicians stealing from the public purse is OK because some guy tries to get out of paying GST for having his lawn mowed, I think you have pretty low standards.Evading the GST is stealing from the public purse - you have pretty low standards if you think the amount of money makes a difference. The party workers who benefited from the illegal funds may have never really known where the money came from but probably knew something was not right. They are no different from somebody who pays cash when they know they are helping someone evade taxes. The real criminals are the people who orchestrated the scheme and that is who the government should go after - not the Liberal party itself. I don't condone anyone evading taxes but it was you that drew the comparison, not me. If you want to go that route, government goes after people who evade taxes whenever they can. They want restitution plus stiff penalties. If it is a company involved, they don't care if it is one individual acting on his own within that company or not, they want their money and will go after anyone they can to get it, including the company itself. Because it is a political party you seem to believe that it is somehow OK for the public to bear the financial burden of this scam. I don't but that is probably how it will end anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.