Home FAQ Search Memberlist User Groups Register Login   

BloggingTories.ca Forum IndexBloggingTories.ca Forum Index
    Index     FAQ     Search     Register     Login         JOIN THE DISCUSSION - CLICK HERE      

*NEW* Login or register using your Facebook account.

Not a member? Join the fastest growing conservative community!
Membership is free and takes 15 seconds


CLICK HERE or use Facebook to login or register ----> Connect



Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next  

Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 3
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
cbasu





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 391
Reputation: 131.3
votes: 2

PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:57 pm    Post subject: The RCMP elected Stephen Harper? [updated: Oct 6/06] Reply with quote

Updated on Oct 6/06: The Commish gets no break, or respect. On the heels of an ugly Travers column and today's Star editorial, we have Helene Buzzetti suggesting in Le Devoir that the RCMP Commish may have lied when he testified to the House Committee last week.

In an Oct 6/06 Le Devoir article entitled 'Affaire Arar - Zaccardelli a-t-il menti ?' Helene Buzzetti wrote:
(abridged).. Est-il possible que le commissaire de la GRC ait menti et n'ait jamais cru à l'innocence de M. Arar ? «C'est une hypothèse, mais cet aveu est incriminant. Quand les gens mentent, c'est pour s'enlever de la responsabilité.»

By comparing the public declarations of Easter, McLellan and Martin, Buzzetti suggests that when Commish Zach testified to informing his political masters of the RCMP error, he may not have been telling the whole truth.

*********

Updated on Sept 29/06: The press pundits on CBC/Politics still want Zach's head. Badly. Very badly.

*********
According to the PPG participants on CBC Politics (Sept 22, 2006), the RCMP were largely responsible for the 2006 Conservative election victory.

The host, Don Newman, started the discussion by implying that the RCMP cast the "..early ballot" in the 2006 vote. Rob Russo of Canadian Press agreed, and went on to suggest (or state - I do not have the transcript) that Stephen Harper would not be Prime Minister today without the intervention of the RCMP in the income trust affair.

James Travers and Susan Delacourt of the Star seemed to suggest that the reason RCMP Commish Zaccardelli still has his job (even after the publication of the O'Connor Report) is presumably because of his role in Harper's election victory.

Yet, shortly after the election on the same panel with the same participants, it was "accountability package", "child care plan" and "Liberal corruption" that got Harper elected.

Now, I am not as keen an observer of Canadian politics as the self-styled "pundits" on the Newman show. So, I do not quite follow the logic.

Did something change because something surely must have?


Last edited by cbasu on Fri Oct 06, 2006 1:44 pm; edited 2 times in total
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The RCMP investigation announcement certainly impacted the election however, it didn't decide it.

The Libs ran a horrible election and don't want to admit that they lost. They think the loss is some kind of aberration in the normal functioning of the universe.

The lefties have this conspiracy theory that the RCMP played politics by announcing that they were starting an investigation during the election instead of postponing the announcement until after the vote.

The lefties somehow can't figure out that its actually the other way around.

Delaying the announcement would have been playing politics and in fact, announcing an investigation when an investigation begins, is status quo.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Revisionist history is always fun... :lol:

The bizarre part is how many media pundits angrily blame the RCMP for taking action on a complaint. All the RCMP did was respond in writing to the complaint of Judy Wasylycia-Leis (NDP) to say they were investigating as per her request. Wasylycia-Leis took the letter to the media and the feeding frenzy began. So realistically, the NDP elected the Conservatives.

-Mac
Cool Blue





Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 3130
Reputation: 114.9
votes: 10
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Fri Sep 22, 2006 8:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You could argue that the NDP helped elect the CPC.

Not only did the NDP vote to bring down the Liberal government, but they sucked enough Lib. support that many CPC candidates came up the middle.

Its no coincidence that Mulroney won back to back majorities during the NDPs years of highest support.
cbasu





Joined: 03 Sep 2006
Posts: 391
Reputation: 131.3
votes: 2

PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 8:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The NDP and the Bloc helped bring down the Martin Liberals, and the Liberals did run a disastrous campaign.

However, the Conservatives - under the strategic and organizational leadership of Harper, Finley, and Flanagan (according to Wells/Macleans) - ran a flawless campaign that took advantage of every Liberal misstep.

The press recognized that at first. Lately, however, they seem to want to spit at Harper everytime they see his face or hear his voice.

That cannot continue. Whatever changed between then and now needs to be reversed.

Quickly.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Sat Sep 23, 2006 2:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The media aren't happy that Harper doesn't bend to kiss their ring. Read any of Larry Zolf's articles (available on the CBC website) and you'll see the typical MSM position toward Harper and the Conservatives. I don't see that changing anytime soon.

I've discussed this with Lib-bloggers who, after they get past the whole "sigh... not the media bias thing again" agree the majority of journalists do have a left-wing bias... but most journalists are more interested in sensationalism than partisan politics. As a result, if they have a chance to get dirt on Libs, Dippers or the Bloc, they'll run with it... but they go looking for it on the Conservatives.

What the Conservatives need to do is present their ideas and programs in such a way as to be appealing to the media so instead of appearing to be tearing down the old Liberal institutions of government, they're seen as renewing, reinvigorating, restoring dignity and accountability. Making change appear positive isn't always easy, particularly when the media are waiting with baited breath for every misstep.

-Mac
Buddy Kat





Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Posts: 94
Reputation: 24.6Reputation: 24.6
votes: 1
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 3:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It was a little more than the rcmp that elected Harper...it was the US republicans , Canadian and US media as well as the rcmp.

Following a time line of events preceding the election..it becomes obvious. The shocker off course is Taliban/Neocon Jack supporting the conservatives to oust the corruption fighting government, and replace it with a lame duck corruption fighting one.

Polls show a clear corelation between rcmp investigation annoncements and liberal drops as well as annoncements by US investigatores doing the same. All perfectly orchestrated and timed by the rcmp, US embassy, and neocon media.


Canadian Federal Election 2006 B

Beware the "CON" in Conservative

Timeline Of NeoCon Corruption
Post 911 /Pre November-

1.Canada shows it’s allegiance to US security agencies by virtually
obeying them.
2.Country goes as far as throwing out constitutional rights to appease the
new security power.
3. The conservatives assert many times they are pro Iraq war and want to
help the US
4. It should be clear to anyone with a tv set and radio that the Canadian
media is under Tory control
November- Early

1.Strange radio signals are picked up in the Ottawa area. …Causing infra
red garage doors and security systems to malfunction.Later pin pointed as
the US embassy being the source , but they denied it. News stories start
Nov 4th indicating the problem existed for a while. The frequency range
covered a 25 mile radius.

Whoa Nelly …Embassies are noted for eavesdropping and spying as a matter
of historical fact. The US embassy gets away with this…something fishy?
They wouldn’t bug the prime ministers office, would they? Nowadays
eavesdropping can be done from bouncing invisible lasers off walls....in
the same infrared range . I guess we just wait and see what kind of data
they picked up. The same kind of infra diodes used for garage door openers
and security systems are used by these eavesdropping devices.
For those intrested devices of this nature are usually referred to as "
laser listeners " - based on 20 year old technology. I would imagine
todays devices would be more complex and powerfull . Perhaps useing radar
covering a 25 mile radius

Go here for some pics and basic info on a laser listening device (I actually edited this out as it is too revealing)
December-

1.Right wing extreme government party (conservatives) partial to US
interests succeeds in bringing down the government with the aid of 2
lesser political parties.

They do this before the big corruption report is released, why? What are
they afraid of?

2.US ambassador WARNS!!! the prime minister to tone down his sovereign
position defending Canadian interests. The prime minister holds his
ground.

3.US media releases reports supporting a Bush/Harper scenario as being
favourable.

4.It is found out Data related to income trusts is used by companies who
profit from the top-secret information…. information only the prime
ministers office has privilege too.

5.Conservatives and puppet ndp members suspiciously call for resignations
etc. etc. Talk of reopening missile defence, placing troops around major
Canadian cities, beefing up arctic surveillance

Despite the fact that Canada is part of Norad and knows where all subs are
etc. etc. not to mention has superior satellite surveillance technology.

6.Canada’s security agency decides to start an investigation during an
election

This will appease conservative, hence American interests as well, and
create a negative public view of the liberal government. Politically
motivated????? Polls react negatively for liberals and is the beginning of
a trend that follows thru January.

January-

1. Conservatives soar in the polls and the liberals take a drop.

Meanwhile in the US, reports of mass surveillance and eavesdropping on
there own people causes an uproar.

2. The 9 government people investigated are cleared

Who leaked the info if not a person ? ....A mysterious mechanical or
electronic entity of the republican persuasion?

3. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is reviewing November's
alleged income trust leak and may launch an investigation.

This is another booster shot from american neocons to help their Canadian
counterparts , and create a negative public view of the liberal
government. Politically motivated?????

4. Canadian security agency decides to conduct another investigation on a
decade old case and US says it will start investigating.

This will appease conservative, hence American interests as well, and
create a negative public view of the liberal government. Politically
motivated?????

5. Liberals are now crashing in the polls and conservatives poised for
majority


That's enough to convince me Harper should be charged for treason, as liberals pointed out there were secret meetings .

Right now neocons are opening themselves up to military intervention by the US at a meeting in Banff. They are on the verge of destroying our country! Hope you people are happy.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 3:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I hope your medication kicks in soon. In the meantime, step away from the keyboard.

-Mac
Buddy Kat





Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Posts: 94
Reputation: 24.6Reputation: 24.6
votes: 1
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Isn't it mushroom picking season in Vancouver? Shouldn't you be out at the end of a runway with your ass up in the air..picking your magic "tory in la la land" berries. :lol:
PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 5:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is THAT how they brainwash you cons? They make you take your medication? I was wondering how they manage to keep you loony toons from questioning their decisions.
lol just kiddin, don't want to send that big weiner guy on a rampage or anything
don muntean





Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 2262
Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9
votes: 8
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 7:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

...it was Providence that brought the win for the Conservatives and - we shall see it happen again.

God hates the murder that is abortion - so - which of the other party's have the right perspective on that one? [they both support abortions]

How many such 'legal' murders have there been in this nation - since that 'right' was intrenched - by never delimitating the 'law' on the matter?

Abortions are one major reason why Canada has no population anymore - that is why we have to [so-called] employ immigration - to negate the decline in population.

We hear so much about the death-rate in Canada out-pacing the birth-rate - yet - do we see enough of anyone trying to prevent this 'legal' murder by changing the stupid reality of this ghoulish birth-control method - by passing laws to reflect what is actually right?

In contrast - people in Canada cannot have grass to smoke - but - people can murder their [unborn] children - talk about disparities in logic and laws!

With the Conservatives we don't have to convince them of the truth about abortions!

They shall become the most equitable government we've had and - one that can do this - without playing to contradictions - in the process.
PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 7:51 pm    Post subject: PLEASE,PLEASE,Please Reply with quote

Please make this a BIG issue during the next election. Especially the part about God being on your side. Stress that God wants stephen Harper re-elected to fight against abortions. I'd really like you to do that. Or you could just convince him to drop prohibition laws, and then I might even vote for him.
don muntean





Joined: 07 Sep 2006
Posts: 2262
Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9Reputation: 34.9
votes: 8
Location: Saskatchewan

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 8:40 pm    Post subject: Re: PLEASE,PLEASE,Please Reply with quote

DrGreenthumb wrote:
Please make this a BIG issue during the next election. Especially the part about God being on your side. Stress that God wants stephen Harper re-elected to fight against abortions. I'd really like you to do that. Or you could just convince him to drop prohibition laws, and then I might even vote for him.


...Providence works without having to do that - just wait and see...

Why is God such a dirty word for socialists? Are you judging Him and all His sincere followers because of some wrongs - by those only claiming to be His followers?

You have to know that God isn't on anyone's side - it only appears that He is taking sides.

Of course - when He isn't reserving judgment - He takes the side of the 'good people' - not becasue of the respect they offer Him - but rather - because the 'bad people' - are usually doing something - which is a threat to everyone.

God seems to be reserving judgment on a great many issues in our world.

Where wealth and strength are not engaged in real advancement of culture and [non-sectarian] 'God consciousness' - the state and home structures are surely doomed by Providence. So we can see enough - 'Providential Impediments' in our midst to know His judgment on things - like abortion.

I do think at some point the Conservatives shall make a new decision on the issues of marijuana and that there has to be a second choice beside alcohol - [if only] to prevent more people from taking up things like meth and crack - due to the black market sale of grass along side these other dangerous drugs.

No one would ever go to 'a pusher' for beer - no more than they would grass - so there is good sense in that point of regulation of this substance. It is only a so-called gateway drug due to the black market distribution of it.

I think that our new Conservative government - along with the Republicans in America can eventually see the logic of this point.

The Liberals - what was their solution? To change the law - to make a cash-cow law - one that could've been used to harrass so many more people than now! Thank God they are gone! What about the NDP? Layton says he would legalize it - but I think that is only so much double speak - even during the TV debates during the election in January - he avoided the issue.

Layton - like Jimmy Carter - would try to get your vote on this issue and then - if he won - he would not follow through. Oh but they'll fight tooth and nail for the issues that bring down our society like abortions and [dare I say it] same-sex marriage!
Stephen





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 645
Reputation: 72.9
votes: 5
Location: Ontario

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Is this thread getting off topic too?

Instead of locking threads, I'll just start banning the perps.
Mac





Joined: 02 Sep 2006
Posts: 5500
Reputation: 104
votes: 35
Location: John Baird's riding...

PostPosted: Sun Sep 24, 2006 9:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yup, gone sideways again. It would be a shame to ban them. I find their rambling diatribes so amusing.

-Mac
Post new topic   Reply to topic Page 1 of 3

Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next  


 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


The RCMP elected Stephen Harper? [updated: Oct 6/06]

phpBBCopyright 2001, 2005 phpBB