And perhaps I would be more convinced of the lack of substance to the Vancouver Sun story if Stephane Dion hadn't ordered his caucus to vote against extending the anti-terrorist measures; with threat of severe punishment for any dissenters. The phrase "Methinks he doth protest too much" springs to mind.
But the real puzzle is why would Harper risk jeopardizing his current high poll results, by apparently attempting to draw a connection, based on a news story, between Dion's steadfast refusal to even consider the extension for a short period of time and a possible conflict of interest and/or indebtedness to certain factions that supported him during the leadership convention?
I suspect that there is a lot more going on here than meets the eye. Perhaps this was Harper's attempt to warn Canadians about something that he ordinarily would not be able to divulge. Who knows what exactly he was going to say, or how he was planning to frame it? He was never given a chance to finish.
So the Liberals demanding that Harper apologize for something that he was not even permitted to say is rather rich. Why didn't they allow him to finish what he was reading, so that it would be in permanent record in Hansard, and then they could crucify him with the glaring evidence?
* * * *
Update: I highly recommend Phantom Observer's take on this.