Thursday, February 22, 2007

Liberals are Clairvoyant! - Harper reprimanded for unspoken thoughts.

PM Stephen Harper is getting pummelled in MSM today - and of course the sanctimoniously-enraged Liberals are demanding an apology for the alleged allegation that he was never actually allowed to articulate due to their raucous chorus of "Shame"! (Hansard - 14:20). Clearly, they were ready for the Conservatives to reference this article. They had a game plan.

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.

48 comments:

Sandy said...

Joanne -- This is my second try. The first time the visual verification for the word is not showing. This time it is. Anyway, great post today. I've been dealing with the Segal resignation. Agree with all you said! Today we will find out what the Speaker's reaction will be -- if there was something in the Hansard that the PM is supposed to apologize for. Should be interesting!

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Thanks, Sandy. Blogger is being a real pain today. I appreciate that you didn't give up.

Gabby in QC said...

" ... an apology for the alleged allegation that he was never actually allowed to articulate ..."

Joanne, while I agree that the Liberals jumped the gun, crying foul when no accusation had been uttered by the PM, I also have to agree with Don Martin, who wrote:
"But rather than let Mr. Dion twist awkwardly in the wind, Mr. Harper handed the Liberals a club yesterday and invited them to whack his government about the head."

Perception IS everything, and the perception created is that Mr. Bains' reputation has been wrongfully & wilfully tainted.

This being Oscar season, the Liberals and their MSM acolytes will milk it for as long as possible, and 'actors' like Goodale, Robillard, and Holland will continue to extract every last drop of indignation out of the incident.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Gabby, I agree with you. Martin also said:

"Of course, nobody knows how to play the victim card better than the Liberals, who encircled the aggrieved Mr. Bains in a group hug of moral support and dispatched a stream of their most indignant MPs to buttress their wounded sensibilities. The Liberals know an opportunity to deflect attention from their party problems when they see one--and Mr. Harper gave it to them gift-wrapped in news headlines."

Not only that, but this will galvanize support for Dion. Circle the wagons; protect your own.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

" ... an apology for the alleged allegation that he was never actually allowed to articulate ..."

Gabby, BTW, at first I thought you were going to chastize me for that cumbersome alliteration... ;)

Anonymous said...

Just when I thought us Conservatives had the Liberals on the run, the PM forces the Liberals to rally around Bains --- not Dion. Never a good idea to unify your opponent's caucus ---letting Dion off the hook.

What a bonehead move!

Joanne (True Blue) said...

What a bonehead move!.

Perhaps his plan was the old "best defence is a good offence."

One thing for sure. Neither Harper nor Dion should be underestimated. They are both shrewd chess players.

Gabby in QC said...

Joanne, no, I would not presume to chastize you - unlike other posters who shall remain nameless.

Truth be told, I did not notice the alliteration (shame on me!) until you pointed it out. But now, rather than chastize you, I congratulate you for it ...

As for the Liberals, Don Martin is absolutely right:
" ... nobody knows how to play the victim card better than the Liberals ..."

I don't understand the PM's reasons for resorting to the Sun article. Surely the fact that some members of the Liberal caucus are opposed to Dion's position on the anti-terrorism measures gave the PM enough ammunition.

Instead, now the Liberals will all gather in a group hug & continue to depict the PM & the Conservatives as the personification of EVIL. Sigh ...

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Gabby, don't give up. I'm sure Harper has another card or two up his sleeve.

Lord Kitchener's Own said...

Oh, I don't know.

It seems to me as though Harper was singing A, B, C, D, E, F... and was shouted down, and that the argument here is that, because he was shouted down, it's unfair to "clairvoyantly" assume that he was right about to say "G, H, I, J, K" let alone to presume he was singing the alphabet (how can you POSSIBLY know that???).

It's as though he said "this is how the Liberal party makes decisions, The Vancouver Sun has learned that the father-in-law of the member of Parliament for Mississauga-Brampton . . . " and now his defence is that there's no reason to conclude he was going to make any mention of another single word from the article, or mention the Air India trial, or mention that Baines' father-in-law is a potential witness, or remotely suggest that the Liberals are opposing the reauthorization of anti-terror laws that have never been used, to protect a backbenchers' family member (even though he CLEARLY said "this is how the Liberals make decisions" and then began to read from a Vancouver Sun article about MP Baines' father-in-law being a potential witness at the Air India trial). I mean, how could one POSSIBLY conclude that PM Harper was trying to connect the Liberals' opposition to re-authorizing the terror legislation to Mr. Baines' father-in-law, when all he did was begin to read from a Sun article about Mr. Baines' father-in-law being a potential witness, and say "this is how the Liberals make decisions..."??? Because someone says "1,2,3,4,5" doesn't mean their about to say "6,7,8,9,10"! And you certainly can't assume that's what they were about to say just because they began their speech with "Now, I will count to ten!" That's just a CRAZY leap of logic!!!

Of course, what ANY of this has to do with judicial appointments, we'll never know. I miss the days when politicians had to creatively not answer questions, while trying to sound like they were answering the question. Now, you don't even have to PRETEND to respect Parliament. The minute the other side asks a question you don't want to answer, just attack them on a totally unrelated issue (and if possible, drag in their families, imply their family members are a bit shady, and suggest their opposition to your prefered policies are entirely selfish attempts to protect their shady family members from the fate they so clearly deserve, for whatever it is they may have done). If called on it, simply claim that YOU weren't suggesting there was anything untoward, you were simply quoting SOMEONE ELSE who suggested there is something untoward. Yeah, people will buy that.

Not that the Tories invented this of course. The Liberals used to do this when they were in office too. But like so many slimy practices of the Liberals from the past, Tory strategy ssems to be "anything you can do, we can do better, we can play in the mud better than you".

Canada's new government. Following 13 years of Liberal tradition, while slaming the Liberals for their 13 year tradition, since 2006.

PGP said...

Aint nothin puffier than a Liberal all puffed up with righteous indignation!

When these clowns stop wasting MY time paid for with MY tax dollars on this kind of BS posturing I will start to listen to them.
Until then they are just a waste of space and resources!

Anonymous said...

If called on it, simply claim that YOU weren't suggesting there was anything untoward, you were simply quoting SOMEONE ELSE who suggested there is something untoward. Yeah, people will buy that

Good observation. There has been too many MPs reading editorials from newspapers these days.

"Mr. Speaker, the party opposite can try to hide, but this editorial written by a relative nobody from the East Moon River Manitoba Chronicle proves them wrong. And I quote Mr. Speaker...."

Great, read that into Hansard. That's what we want our historians to look back fondly upon in a hundred years.

Zac

Gabby in QC said...

Lord Kitchener's Own, you make very valid points. The only way I can explain the current situation is that the Conservatives are fed up of being portrayed as "ultra right-wing neo-cons" who wish to visit all sorts of injustices on this country.

They were elected on a set of policies that they would like to see implemented, that's all - without the attendant character assassination from various quarters.

Why is it OK to portray the PM as a "climate change denier," echoing the very sinister holocaust denier tag? Why is that accusation not censured as well?

I agree all parties in the House should turn down the volume. But the Supreme Court Justices, as well as ex-Supremes, would also do well to stay out of the debates in Parliament. That goes double for ex-holders of office, for the crusading O'Donnells, Naders, Moores, Gores, Suzukis, Bonos, and assorted self-appointed experts whose advice to Canadians is unsolicited and unwanted. There are far too many UNELECTED interest groups whose only purpose in life seems to be to bring down the Conservatives.

The people will decide at the next election whether the present government has their support or not. Until then, everyone should take a valium ...

molarmauler said...

CTV...
"Nothing to see here... move along..."

6 minutes to Goodale on Duffy.
3 minutes to a Liberal Senator on Duffy.
A photo of the Prime Minister on the stairs talking about QP but not quoting him or showing video.

And it's over.

Damage control for the Liberals courtesy of CTV.
The LPC is gutting the ATA in order to cripple once again the chance for the victims of the Air India bombing to get the truth and possibly justice.

Anonymous said...

From Cold Terror(How Canada Nurtures and Exports Terrorism Around the World) by Stewart Bell

"First, there must be nation-wide recognition that the current Canadian political and administrative structure and system is susceptible and vulnerable to misuse and abuse by terrorist and extremist groups....These terrorist and extremist groups have been able to accomplish this feat by infiltrating Canadian host institutions such as the Canadian political parties, including mainstream political parties." (p xiii)

"The other type of fundraising is the criminal kind.....Now they (the police) are finding that those behind organized crime are terrorist groups such as the Tamil Tigers." (p. 7)

On a different note, Jim Travers called the PM "sleazy" on Don Newman's 3 pm show yesterday. Don Newman didn't call him on that. I wrote a complaint to CBC.

Now my own thoughts...."where there's smoke, there's fire."

One has to also remember that while the sponsorship scandal was going on, none of us knew. It's only after the fact that the truth comes out. Let's hope that it's not the same with any terrorist threats.

Lord Kitchener's Own said...

On another note, will there be an investigation into who leaked the fact that Mr. Baines' father-in-law is on the RCMP's list of potential witnesses? That's supposed to be secret.

Other witnesses who were supposed to testify with regard to the Air India bombing have been killed or had attempts made on their life, and yet names of potential witnesses are still appearing in the papers???

Somehow I doubt that will ever be investigated. The RCMP seems pretty selective as to what investigations they make public, and what investigations they keep quiet (or what RCMP leaks they investigate, and which ones they hush up). Check out the comments to this Macleans story for a more extensive discussion of the RCMP's dismal record of late, and their very selective decision making regarding what leaks are bad, and which are just fine.

Maybe it's just me, but it's getting so that everytime I hear that the RCMP is investigating something, or someone, I start to wonder what their motive is. The RCMP is clearly pretty disfunctional these days, and someone ought to be investigating THAT.

Chuckercanuck said...

joanne,

I think Molar Mauler has it right:

the MSM have moved on.

It was a mistake. But, give me a break. The whole relationship of the Liberal party to Sikh Militancy stinks to HIGH HEAVEN.

Let's not pretend otherwise.

Folks like LKO want to play Ethnic Voting Block politics, they should sleep in that bed then.

Gabby in QC said...

"Maybe it's just me, but it's getting so that everytime I hear that the RCMP is investigating something, or someone, I start to wonder what their motive is. The RCMP is clearly pretty disfunctional these days, and someone ought to be investigating THAT."

Perhaps what we should be investigating is WHO or WHAT bodies are trying to undermine Canadian citizens' trust in our time-honoured though imperfect institutions. But I'll take those imperfect - or dysfunctional as you call it - institutions over any other system available elsewhere.

Lord Kitchener's Own said...

Well, I never made any comment on "Ethnic Voting Block politics" so I don't know why I'm being attacked for that (though, these days, conservatives seem to just attack people for no reason, so I guess it's par for the course... not being a Liberal though I thought I might be immune, but I guess not).

Again, I'd like to know how this leak occured. One of the Liberals' arguments against these provisions is that even though these investigative hearings are SUPPOSED to be secret, that nonetheless witnesses can be exposed, smeared, and put in danger by the process. And the Tory counter to that argument is to quote, in the House, a newspaper article that exposes, smears, and potentially puts in danger a witness who has been cooperative ever since the bombing 21 years ago (and has said he will testify if asked to do so)???

If you want to believe that this is all some vast Liberal conspiracy to protect terrorists in order to secure their votes, and not an effort to protect the civil rights of innocent Canadians, then go right ahead. Personally, I'm more concerned with reality. Like the RCMP leaking like a sieve (not just in this case, but many, many others, some without political implications) and exposing government witnesses set to testify at secret hearings. That, and the PM using such a leak to attack his rivals as terrorist-supporting, Canada-hating dangers to national security (well, just the Liberals... he pretty much just ignores that the NDP and BQ have the same position... it dampens the "liberals are sheilding terrorists" slur).

Keep in mind that the whole reason the Tories are having to fight so hard is that ALL the parties in parliament agree with letting these provisions sunset. It's not just the Liberals. These were heavy-handed provisions put in place shortly after 9/11 that have, almost entirely, never been used, and were set to expire after 5 years so as to restore certain rights and freedoms to Canadians if they were deemed to be overkill (like, say, by the fact that most of the provisions have never, ever been used).

Why is the Air India inquiry still going on? 21 years of RCMP incompetence. A continuing trend it would seem. And if you believe my saying that is the result of another vast conspiracy - this one to make the RCMP look bad (as though they needed help!) well I don't know what to say. Will your tin foil hat look good with this year's spring fashions?

Blame the Liberals for the Air India travesty if you like, but keep in mind that the bombing occured EIGHT YEARS before the Liberals were elected.

Who's really to blame for this farce?

Gabby in QC said...

"Will your tin foil hat look good with this year's spring fashions?"

Too bad you had to go and spoil your argument with this kind of juvenile remark. Sorry, that's my signal to bow out of the discussion, never having mastered the intricacies of name calling.

Anonymous said...

Too bad you had to go and spoil your argument with this kind of juvenile remark. Sorry, that's my signal to bow out of the discussion, never having mastered the intricacies of name calling.

Awww, Gabby's taking her ball and going home.

Brian in Calgary said...

Awww, Gabby's taking her ball and going home.

No, it is just that Gabby is mature enough to prefer a civilized discourse and exchange of views without stepping down into the muck of childish, personal insults, satisfying as those insults may be to the person uttering them.

Anonymous said...

No, it is just that Gabby is mature enough to prefer a civilized discourse and exchange of views without stepping down into the muck of childish, personal insults, satisfying as those insults may be to the person uttering them.

So why come here in the first place, not much "mature...civilized discourse" going on here at any time.

But it is nice of her to put her challengers in their place by leaving holding her nose. Much easier than actually addressing their points - pick one line out of a lengthy argument and deride the person for their immaturity while exiting to the left. Quite an interesting strategy.

Lord Kitchener's Own said...

I'm sorry Gabby, but I just have no other explanation for how someone could believe either of the following conspiracies:

One, that the Liberals oppose renewing this legislation because they're trying to protect a government witness (who's name, and status as a government witness was a secret, until it got leaked) from having to testify, despite the fact that he's been cooperative in the investigation since it started 21 years ago, and has said he would testify. Why would the Liberals engage in a vast conspiracy to protect a man (who's said he would testify) from having to testify? He's a cooperative witness who hasn't even been ACCUSED of ANYTHING! He's said he would testify! His son-in-law (who was nine when the bombings happened, and as far as I know hadn't even met his future wife yet, let alone his future father-in-law) didn't even know he was involved as a witness until it was leaked. Not only is there nothing to protect Bains' father-in-law from, before the leak the Liberals wouldn't even have known he needed protecting (which, he doesn't, since he's never been accused of anything, and is a cooperative witness who's agreed to testify).

or... Two, that there's some sort of conspiracy out there to make the RCMP look bad (somehow making them fail to bring anyone to justice for the Air India bombing for 21 years, forcing them to smear Maher Arar, even as Foreign Affairs tried to get him out of Syria, to smear Greg Sobara, to leak the names of secret government witnesses, to leak details of ongoing investigations... etc... etc...). Sorry, no conspiracy here. Just incompetence.

I do pride myself on being civil in comments on blogs, so I do apologize for the "tin hat" snark (though, in my defence it wasn't TECHNICALLY "name calling") it was silly, true, but hardly hurtful or personal. I just can't come up with any other explanation as to why someone would believe such patently ridiculous conspiracy theories. To me, even blind partisanship doesn't explain it. NO ONE's that blindly partisan. No one.

PGP said...

LKO..
Who's really to blame for this farce?

The Sikh Nationalists who were using our country as a base to raise funds and coordinate terrorist activities against harmless and innocent citizens of Canada and other countries. These same people individually and as a group carried out murder and attempted to interfere in investigations and legal proceedings.
The liberals part is primarily in their failed governance of Canada in general and in their meddling with our justice system among just a few things which helped contribute to the failure of the investigators and justice officials to successfully prosecute the trial of the persons who were charged. It's no accident that the process took over 20 years and failed!

As for the Tact that Harper took in the House I'm surprised! However, when your at war with a bunch of bullies and cowards like the liberals who have themselves pulled every possible low and dishonest tactic to gain political points I don't see any real problem with getting down and giving them some of their own medicine.

I think Harper wanted to cause a meltdown for some reason and I suspect it may have to do with how the liberals could be expected to go overboard with the righteous indignation act!
BTW - The reporter Kim Bolan was interviewed today and says the persons in question as well as some liberal party members knew exactly what was going to be printed. Looks like they were well prepared to have the Conservatives bring it up!

Let's see what happens next!

Anonymous said...

It's no accident that the process took over 20 years and failed!

Your right PGP, that Mulroney guys really screwed the pooch on this one. Kim Campbell too....thanks for pointing that out.

Anonymous said...

I think Harper wanted to cause a meltdown for some reason

If PMSH did it, it must have been done for some reason. I tell 'ya he's is one smart guy.

God forbid he had a temporary lapse in judgement.

Lord Kitchener's Own said...

PGP,

Good point on the thugs who actually brought Air India 182 down, who are of course SOLELY responsible for that act of terrorism. The "farce" I was refering to was the investigation of course, but no doubt the criminals are responsible for the crime.

I'm not so sure you can blame the Liberals for the failed investigation though, or the failure to bring the terrorists to justice. And they certainly don't hold the primary responsibility. Maybe they didn't do all the could between 1993 and 2006, but the trail was already pretty cold by then, and the evidence gone. I'm not so sure the Liberals can be blamed for the farce of no one being brought to justice for the bombing. They certainly can't be blamed for the first EIGHT YEARS of futility and failure. By the time Chretien was Prime Minister the investigation was almost a decade old. At that point, I question what ANY government could have done to see justice done. By the time someone was finally brought to trial, a lack of evidence and a lack of witnesses (due tothe passage of time, and also murder intimidation - ironic given that this post is about the outing of a secret government witness) is what kept the prosecutions from being successful in bringing someone to justice. I certianly blame the police and crown prosecutors before I blame the political party that took power 8 years after the bombing (or the party in power at the time of the bombing). I think if one looks at the Air India investigations, it's police and prosecutors who are most at fault for the failures, not the Mulroney, or Chretien or Martin governments. And I don't think that's an unreasonable position. I do think it's unreasonable to assign as much blame as you do to a political party that took power eight years after the crime occured.

Anonymous said...

However, when your at war with a bunch of bullies and cowards like the liberals who have themselves pulled every possible low and dishonest tactic to gain political points

Sounds a lot like CPC to me:
1. negative ads with dion
2. negative ads in french with Goodale on income trusts (even though he got exonerated)
3. Harper taking a swipe at Bain's family, even though the question directed to him was unrelated to the story...

Give it a rest, its about time CPC looks itself in the mirror when crying a fowl.

Anonymous said...

The Liberals are shutting down the ATA legislation because the party's voting base doesn't like it.

To Liberals votes = favors. The Sikh community just called in a big one.

PGP said...

Actually LKO - I would prefer not to be casting blame.
I would really like to some some standing up and taking responsibility happen.

And you are right there is no single party at fault for the failed investigation and prosecution.

Now somebody needs to get off their high horse and do what needs to be done to give this the thorough airing it needs.

This is where I have a BIG problem with Dion or Anybody else..even Harper and the boys forking this opportunity up.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 6:28: The Liberals are shutting down the ATA legislation because the party's voting base doesn't like it.

Thats unheard of - where did you get that idea from?

(care to explain to me what the liberal's voting base comprises of?) -- as far as I know, it probably the most diverse (i.e. not just exclusive to Alberta like CPC).

I don't know why I even bother, I bet i wont get a straight answer here

Anon at 6:12

john calhoun's musical truss said...

I'm with you Kitchener, RCMP incompetence and malfeasance is, to put it mildly, troubling.

Chuckercanuck said...

LKO:

I should apologize. I went overboard.

You're absolutely right on the Liberals having nothing to do with RCMP incompetence and maybe genuine difficulty in investigating these matters.

But it does not require a vast, intricate conspiracy to worry that Liberals want to shut down the Air India inquiry and the anti-terror provisions.

The Sun reported the other day that Liberals (Paul Martin) went cap in hand to collect funds from now outlawed terror groups - cheering them on for their ability to defend themselves.

Next day, turns out a Liberal MP's father-in-law would be one of the compelled witnesses to the inquiry using those anti-terror measures.

Does it smell kosher to me? No. Smells funky, like there's a whole mess of voting block politics that would blow up in their faces if it comes to light.

Anyway. Since we have nothing to worry about, I'm sure said father-in-law will present himself to the inquiry and provide his testimony without compulsion. Right?

Or will we never know? That would not be a good development, I predict.

biff said...

joanne, seperate post worthy I'd say:

OTTAWA: Access to Information documents obtained by the Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) reveal that St├ęphane Dion’s chauffeur billed taxpayers $14,225 for Montreal hotel and travel expenses. In addition, documents show during the 2005 Kyoto conference in Montreal, Mr. Dion opted to lodge at a hotel at a cost of $5,548, even though he maintains a residence in Montreal where he is the Member of Parliament for Saint-Laurent–Cartierville.

Another Limousine Liberal –

For the period July 2004 to November 2005, records show Mr. Dion’s chauffeur billed $14,225 in 98 separate expenses for trips between Gatineau (the capital region) and Montreal. The expenses include transportation costs, meals, telephone charges, etc. Review the expenses by clicking here.

“Mr. Dion is quick to lecture Canadians on the need to cut greenhouse gases yet as environment minister he opted to drive to Montreal, keep his chauffeur in the city and bilk taxpayers $14,225,” stated CTF federal director John Williamson. “Canadians have had enough of politicians instructing us to change our driving habits when the same elites, like Mr. Dion, refuse to heed their own advice. Mr. Dion should practice what he preaches, take the Ottawa–Montreal train and hail a cab when in Montreal.”

“Under the Liberals, Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions drove upwards, while Mr. Dion was driven back and forth in a taxpayer-funded government car,” noted Williamson.

Hotels in Montreal? That is Mr. Dion’s Hometown –

Other documents report that during the first Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol, held in Montreal from November 28 to December 9, 2005, Mr. Dion expensed another $5,548 for hotel and hospitality expenses. The hotel was over $300 per night and a $700 room service bill was picked up by taxpayers. Review the hotel bills by clicking here.


“Despite the fact that Mr. Dion lives in Montreal he opted to stay at a hotel,” concluded Mr. Williamson. “If Mr. Dion had the interest of taxpayers at heart, he would have slept in his own bed.”

Here:

http://www.taxpayer.com/main/news.php?news_id=2499

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Biff, thx. I just checked that out. Totally shocking. I don't think I have another post in me today, which is too bad, because I was really wanting to talk about Lorrie Goldsteins' column. But it's been a full day, and I have come to learn that blogging when tired is really not a good idea.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Here ya go, Biff. Mike McGuire took care of this one.

Brian in Calgary said...

So why come here in the first place, not much "mature...civilized discourse" going on here at any time.

Maybe she was naive. But, possibly Gabby came here because she wanted a mature and civilized discourse. Look at the comments for this post. Gabby was only the third person to comment. All of her posts were mature, well reasoned, with a respect for points made where she fealt they were warranted. For an example of such respect, see her comment for this date, 12:15:00 PM EST. At no time did she resort to gratuitous personal slurs against another commenter. LKO freely chose to throw in a gratuitous slur. Such slurs always demean the value of any good arguments raised by the person who resort to them, regardless of the political ideology of the slur-caster. At the very least, the slur-caster exhibits a lack of confidence in his/her own reasoning.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

At the very least, the slur-caster exhibits a lack of confidence in his/her own reasoning.

I agree. It makes the person who uses them appear that they have run out of solid debating points and are getting desperate.

Lord Kitchener's Own said...

Slurs, like say, answering a question about judicial appointments in the House by quoting a newspaper article that outs a secret government witness and suggesting your opponents are undermining the security of Canada to protect an MP's family member? That kind of slur?

People on this blog are all but saying that the Liberals are undermining national security so that they can garner electoral support from terrorists.

I already apologized for my little "tin foil hat" quip, but if people still think I'M the one whose smearing people, then there's nothing I can do.

Lord Kitchener's Own said...

And come to think of it, look again at the context of my "tin foil hat" "slur"...

"Why is the Air India inquiry still going on? 21 years of RCMP incompetence. A continuing trend it would seem. And if you believe my saying that is the result of another vast conspiracy - this one to make the RCMP look bad (as though they needed help!) well I don't know what to say. Will your tin foil hat look good with this year's spring fashions?"

I still apologize for the childishness of the remark, but how am I "slurring" anyone? Does gabby believe that my questioning 21 years of RCMP incompetence (on this file... I won't even go in to their more recent incompetence) is part of a vast conspiracy? If she doesn't, then the "tin foil hat" comment, as silly as it was, DOESN'T EVEN APPLY to her. That characterization was limited to people who believe I'm part of some vast conspiracy to undermine the RCMP. If gabby DOES think I'm part of some vast conspiracy to discredit the RCMP, then I apologize for implying she wears a tin foil hat. Though, in that case, what is the worse slur? Me believing gabby is a conspiracy theorist, or gabby believing I'm a conspirator?

Joanne (True Blue) said...

LKO - I'll let you & Gabby work that out. Personally, I couldn't care less if you said tinfoil hat to me. Just no body parts, please.

Lord Kitchener's Own said...

Fair enough Joanne.

Sorry to have hijacked the post a bit there.

On to more important things.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Sorry to have hijacked the post a bit there.

Apology accepted. ;)

I think you made some good points, BTW.

Brian in Calgary said...

I agree, Joanne. LKO does make some good points. And, LKO, my beef was never really with you (if I gave that impression, I apologize), and I did notice your apology. My only real complaint was against Mr/Ms Anonymous.

Anonymous said...

My only real complaint was against Mr/Ms Anonymous.

Thats Dr. Anonymous to you Brain.

Brian in Calgary said...

Thats Dr. Anonymous to you Brain.

I stand corrected. Maybe you should sign your posts "Dr Anonymous." It might help you stand out from among all the other anonymousses (anonymoussi?). Just a friendly suggestion.

Joanne (True Blue) said...

Maybe you should sign your posts "Dr Anonymous." It might help you stand out from among all the other anonymousses (anonymoussi?)

I agree. It would sure help make things less confusing.