Liberal Party A Haven for Terrorists

Status
Not open for further replies.

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board and Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre appeared on radio in Ottawa recently with explosive information. In a discussion about terrorism he revealed that the Conservatives now know that the Liberal party is a haven for extremist groups and that Liberal leader Stephane Dion has collapsed under their power, a puppet for said extremist elements – who one assumes are pro terror.
When asked directly if Liberal MP Navdeep Bains was an extremist, Pierre took the high road and refused to answer; clearly he knows something we don't.
I for one cannot believe that tanks are not rolling in the streets.
I think based on Pierre's comments we should be afraid. We should be very afraid. If a major political party in Canada has become hijacked by terrorists then we have to get to the bottom of it. And make no mistake about it, Pierre is not a loose cannon on HMCS Harper. He is a trusted and devoted crew member.
And to their credit, there are no more Tory loose cannons. The days of the grassroots are long dead. Conservative cabinet ministers are not allowed to do any media in this country without the express permission of Sandra Buckler, the Prime Minister's Director of Communications. Freedom of speech extends to Conservative MP's when Sandra says it does. If Sandra says "stand on your two hind legs and dance" the finance minister barks "Irish Jig or the Hully Gully?"
Make no mistake about it, Pierre's confirmation about the terrorist insurrection inside the Liberal Party comes directly from Madam Buckler.
I think when you read Pierre's comments below you will agree that we must get to the bottom of this. I suggest a full round of televised hearings chaired by none other than Monsieur Poilievre. Every card-carrying Liberal should be paraded in front of the cameras and made to answer his questions.
Have they now or have they ever been a member of any group? Do they know Navdeep Bains? Have they ever socialized with him or someone who looks like him? These are questions that should be answered.
Pierre is the right man for the job. If you go to his website and read his biography you will see he is an accomplished young man who once worked as an office intern at Magna and also wrote an essay once.
And as far as extremist groups go, Pierre is only a member of two organizations. He is a member of the Conservative Party of Canada and the Blue Label Club. As Pierre explained to the press after his re-election, the Blue Label Club is a private club of young male Conservative MP's who only drink Johnny Walker Blue Label scotch. The price may be extreme but not the members.
I hope all Canadians join me in wishing Pierre best of luck in eradicating extremism and exposing the Liberal Party as a haven for terror.
Go Pierre go!
Pierre's radio interview:
Question: Are the Conservatives then--and I'm trying to get this right--are the Conservatives then insinuating that the Liberal policy of wanting to expire investigative hearings and preventative arrests being done so to protect the father-in-law of Navdeep Bains? Is that the accusation?"
Pierre Polievre: All of us are looking to understand why the Liberals have had this sudden flip-flop. We're looking for an explanation of their motives. Now we know that a lot of extremist groups and people with some very hard left wing views have advocated for along time that these provisions should be scrapped. Now a lot of those people supported Stéphane Dion in the leadership. A lot of them are in Stéphane Dion's caucus. And for example, there are members of Stéphane Dion's Liberal caucus who want to legalize Hezbollah, which is a terrorist organization from south Lebanon. There are people in the Liberal caucus that want to shut down the investigation into the Air India terrorist attack, which is the worst terrorist attack in Canadian history. And up until recently, the Liberal-the former Liberal government was blocking the very anti-terror-the very RCMP investigation and hearings into that Air India investigation. So, we know there are extremist elements in the Liberal party.
Question: Is Navdeep Bains an extremist?
Pierre Poilievre: I don't comment on individuals. But what I would say is we know there is a extremist element in the Liberal party, generally, that has been very vocal in opposing measures that are designed to combat terrorism. And it would seem that Mr. Dion has collapsed under the pressure from those groups. Because that's the only way to explain his sudden flip-flop.
http://www.rickmercer.com/blog/index.cfm
 
  • Like
Reactions: westmanguy

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Well of course, and the Conservatives are such lily-white and noble people...sheesh
No, not at all.

Why is it you feel it necesary to try and turn the focus on to the Conservatiives?

Do they have the son-in-law of a person, that was for some time a fund raiser for a terrorist group in the caucus?

Did they suddenly turn around and go against their own recomendations...


Senators call for extension of terror law
Opposed by Dion: Liberal-dominated committee backs Conservative move
Juliet O'neill
CanWest News Service
Friday, February 23, 2007
OTTAWA - A Liberal-dominated Senate committee yesterday recommended a three-year extension for two anti-terrorist measures the Conservative government is struggling to save from defeat in the House of Commons early next week.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1789767/posts
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
"Given that it was Liberal legislation, given that our own Liberal ministers told us that there was nothing that they could suggest to us to fix in the act, I'm flabbergasted that I now find myself the only person supporting the Liberal legislation that the Liberal ministers supported,''

Tom Wappel, Scarborough Southwest Liberal MP

Said in an interview with Mike Stafford, AM 640.

So what's changed?

Oh ya, Bains and gang!?
 

mabudon

Metal King
Mar 15, 2006
1,339
30
48
Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
As far as I see it, this whole stink is about nothing- the whole notion that the Liberals are somehow "flip flopping" is incorrect- sure, THEY were the ones who put the "laws" on the books (we are still referring to the 2 provisions struck down this week right??). BUT they also added clauses for the provisions to expirre, and voted AGAINST removing them clauses- how that is inconsistent is quite puzzling to me
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
OTTAWA (CP) - The war on terrorism has become the first test of Stephane Dion's fledgling leadership, laying bare ideological and ethnic rifts within the Liberal party.
The matter could come to a head as early as Wednesday, when MPs vote on a government motion seeking parliamentary approval to extend two provisions of the Anti-Terrorism Act, involving preventive arrests and special investigative hearings.
Dion said Tuesday that he expects Liberal MPs to unite behind his decision to oppose extension of controversial anti-terrorism measures.
And he said he won't change his mind, despite pressure from some of his MPs, former cabinet colleagues, Jewish groups and families of victims of the Air India terrorist bombing.
"The decision is final and we made a good decision for Canadians," Dion told reporters.
Dion refused to say what fate might await any Liberal MP who defies him and supports the motion.
"You know what is the rule. When we make a decision, we vote with discipline. Beyond that, it's a matter for internal discussion within the caucus," he said.
But in a taste of the high-pressure tactics that are already being brought to bear, the president of Liberal MP Roy Cullen's Toronto riding suggested Tuesday that the MP shouldn't be guaranteed the right to run for the party in the next election if he can't show loyalty to the leader now.
Cullen has been one of the most outspoken Liberals in supporting extension of the anti-terrorism measures. Indeed, he said last week that he was trying to recruit at least 30 other Liberals to defy Dion and ensure approval of the government motion.
But Ranjeet Chahal said the executive of Cullen's Etobicoke North riding association doesn't agree with the MP's stance.
"There's a line and if he doesn't agree with that, then he should open the nomination and let all the members of the riding decide," Chahal, riding president, said in an interview.
"In the end, we have to stand beside our party leader."
Cullen could not be reached for comment. However, other MPs did not immediately rally to Dion's call for a united front.
Toronto MP Derek Lee said he personally favours extending the anti-terrorism measures but hasn't yet decided how - or if - he'll vote.
"I tend to think that the (terrorist) conspiracy that gave rise to them is still out there," Lee said, noting that "I can't take my shampoo on an aircraft. We have to taper a lot of what we do now based on security concerns."
Montreal MP Irwin Cotler, a former justice minister and human rights advocate, also refused to say how he'll vote. But he reiterated his belief that the measures, brought in by the previous Liberal government in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, should be retained.
"We find that they have not been used and certainly have not been abused. But they might still be needed."
Dion has repeatedly said that Liberal caucus members were consulted before the decision was taken to oppose extension of the two provisions.
But MPs privately complain that the decision was taken by the caucus social justice committee, which is dominated by left-wing Liberals. Most MPs, including those with expertise in national security and human rights matters, were never consulted and were surprised when the decision was presented to them two weeks ago as a fait accompli.
Some privately grouse that Dion has been influenced by militant Sikh and Muslim groups, members of which helped secure his leadership victory last December.
Those complaints were echoed Tuesday by the chairman of the Air India Victims' Families Association.
"It looks like the sympathizers of terrorism have more influence on (Liberals)," Gupta said.
He said Dion may have become "victim of vote bank politics," referring to ethnic bloc voting.
The association fears that scrapping the provision on investigative hearings could hurt the ongoing investigation into the 1985 Air India bombing, Canada's worst act of terrorism which took the lives of 329 people.
The association is lobbying MPs to support the government motion, as is B'nai Brith Canada.
Frank Dimant, the Jewish organization's executive vice president, said he too has heard speculation that the Liberals are "pandering to certain specific groups within the Canadian society."
"In a way, it's a little bit of a continuation of what happened at the Liberal leadership convention. This seems to be becoming more of a pattern," he said.
While B'nai Brith is giving Dion the benefit of the doubt thus far, Dimant said the party will pay a price if the leader doesn't change his mind.
"This stench will go well beyond our community. National security impacts every Canadian in this country and I think Canadians simply cannot comprehend how it is that a party which brought in this legislation now turns on its own legislation." http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/War_Terror/2007/02/20/3648947-cp.html
 

mabudon

Metal King
Mar 15, 2006
1,339
30
48
Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
First question- WHY would "Jewish Groups" have anything to say about this?? What about say, ethnic Albanian groups, or Hutu groups?? That just struck me as odd, is all

Second- WHY is it a big deal that Dion has a different style of party discipline?? Hell, with the Cons, you get kicked out if you don't play EXACTLY the way Harper wants- do you honestly believe that EVERY MEMBER of the conservative government totally agrees with everything without argument?? I certainly don't- if anything it is a fairly good sign- the monolith that is the current government is frankly a tad eerie, knowing that the Liberals are actual people with differeing opinions is not too shocking to me at least
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
First question- WHY would "Jewish Groups" have anything to say about this?? What about say, ethnic Albanian groups, or Hutu groups?? That just struck me as odd, is all

Second- WHY is it a big deal that Dion has a different style of party discipline?? Hell, with the Cons, you get kicked out if you don't play EXACTLY the way Harper wants- do you honestly believe that EVERY MEMBER of the conservative government totally agrees with everything without argument?? I certainly don't- if anything it is a fairly good sign- the monolith that is the current government is frankly a tad eerie, knowing that the Liberals are actual people with differeing opinions is not too shocking to me at least
Ya you gotta love the differing opinions, vote this way or else. You think Harpo micro-manages? PET invented it.

The point isn't disention in the ranks, it's the fact that many Liberals thought extention of their own policy was a good idea, they were coersed into following the partisan rule. Do I actually think there is a hint of terrorist protectionism in the Liberal caucus, perhaps, but I think this desission, was based mostly on partisan politics. Dion did not do what he thought was good for Canada, he did what he thought would get him some ethnic support.

The optics stink in either case.
 

mabudon

Metal King
Mar 15, 2006
1,339
30
48
Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
Okay, I was having a hard time figuring out just what you were driving at-
I really don't have a problem- and I don't care WHO started WHAT, doesn't make it right....

And as far as "ethnic support"- I dunno, I am about as "white" as a person could be and I wanted the provisions to expire, and am glad they got axed no matter what


Anmd since it's about optics- HOW COME no-one has taken the Cons to task on their handling of this- it's one of two things in my mind- they either figured that since it was about "terror" there'd be a big ol rubber stamp come out (and thus did nothing to try and amend or otherwise prepare a modified compromise for a vote they KNEW was coming) which smack of supreme arrogance (and gives the option of playing the US style "flip flop" card which thay actually HAVE played to some effect despite that being absolutely not true)

OR they somehow forgot about it- all this whining and crying and fearmongering (including Harpers suggestion that the Liberals will "PAY" for leting the provisions die as they should have) is silly, they knew it was coming and did nothing, and now they try to pin that "do nothing-ness" on the Liberals, who as opposition weren't in the position to table anything regarding a "redux" of said provisions...

The way I see it, the Liberals did their JOB as opposition, and the Cons STILL have to make a giant fuss- our local Con MP actually went so far as to state in an interview that the Liberals somehow "turned their back on the troops" and would kill the morale of the soldiers in Afghanistan with such "playing politics"- that statement just plain STINKS in the cheapest way...

how doing you actual job is a bad thing is beyond me, too (shoot, so much stuff is beyond me lately, wonder what that means??)

EDIT- I guess I should add, as a minority government, the Cons seem to have taken up the "we'll just have to fight even harder to get everything passed the way WE want" road, which is, in my mind, the opposite of what a minority government means- they should (in my view) be more about trying to build consensuses (is that a word) between the differing views and get some good balanced stuff out there- sadly the "with us or against us" has runied any chance of that ever happening again, with the persistent character attacks and mischaracterized soundbites ruling ALL, the days of a functional minority government are long gone, and I worry about what message this will send to possible future majorities
 
Last edited:

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
I don't think the cons tried to amend or modify it, because it was a Liberal policy. I guess they thought the Liberals would back up their own Senate Committee and their own policy.

btw, I think you get alot more then you give yourself credit, I for one appreciate your opposition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mabudon

catman

Electoral Member
Sep 3, 2006
182
4
18
While B'nai Brith is giving Dion the benefit of the doubt thus far, Dimant said the party will pay a price if the leader doesn't change his mind.
"This stench will go well beyond our community. National security impacts every Canadian in this country and I think Canadians simply cannot comprehend how it is that a party which brought in this legislation now turns on its own legislation."

Really? What is he basing this on? I have not seen any polls yet that show this is such an important issue to Canadians.

I also doubt that Bushism like "Friends of terrorists" will be successful north of the border.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Really? What is he basing this on? I have not seen any polls yet that show this is such an important issue to Canadians.

I also doubt that Bushism like "Friends of terrorists" will be successful north of the border.
Well there is this matter, when added to this...
http://forums.canadiancontent.net/c...4-rise-quebecistan.html?highlight=quebecistan
divided by this...
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060819/mideast_MP_060821?s_name=&no_ads=
Multiplied by this...
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=572691d1-56ba-4268-bc33-0abc4afe890d&k=12857

Adds up to some pretty stiff questions. I think the GP will be asking them real soon.
 

mabudon

Metal King
Mar 15, 2006
1,339
30
48
Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
Only thing that I REALLY don't get is how if one makes a comparison between say, the current US admin and Hitlers regime, folks will scream and cry and shout you down even tho there's LOTS of actual paralells- even just the governing structure is damn near identical, but to even suggest it it looking for trouble...

Meanwhile, it's perfectly alright to take a word that has been fastidiously weighted (emotionally only, there is no real meaning to the term "terrorists" except to smear enemies- see also "classical style Fascist techniques") so as to be used as both a justification for AND a smear against those who would decry certain current trends, and apply it to one of the three (well actually two) parties that make up our government

I would go so far as to say that "terrorism" and "terrorists" have effectively become weasel words, they apply to pretty much anything anyone wants to make appear unfavourable without actually saying anything anymore..
"Liberals are terrorists", "NDP are terrorists", but when you even hint that the Right is employing techniques more suited to the classical examples of Fascism, somehow that doesn't make any sense- to ME at least, the manipulation of emotions is patently obvious, I just wonder why more folks can't see it as such
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Only thing that I REALLY don't get is how if one makes a comparison between say, the current US admin and Hitlers regime, folks will scream and cry and shout you down even tho there's LOTS of actual paralells- even just the governing structure is damn near identical, but to even suggest it it looking for trouble...

Meanwhile, it's perfectly alright to take a word that has been fastidiously weighted (emotionally only, there is no real meaning to the term "terrorists" except to smear enemies- see also "classical style Fascist techniques") so as to be used as both a justification for AND a smear against those who would decry certain current trends, and apply it to one of the three (well actually two) parties that make up our government

I would go so far as to say that "terrorism" and "terrorists" have effectively become weasel words, they apply to pretty much anything anyone wants to make appear unfavourable without actually saying anything anymore..
"Liberals are terrorists", "NDP are terrorists", but when you even hint that the Right is employing techniques more suited to the classical examples of Fascism, somehow that doesn't make any sense- to ME at least, the manipulation of emotions is patently obvious, I just wonder why more folks can't see it as such
Because for the most part it isn't true...

If you examine the facts, the Liberals under Cretien and Trudeau were decidedly more fascist then any Conservative Government combined. People keep chastising Harpo for his tight reign and micro management style, yet Trudeau was worse.

The title of this thread is, Liberal Party A Haven for Terrorists. I wouldn't even dream of calling the LPoC terrorists, that is just as rediculous as saying Harpo/Bush, is a nazi or a fascist. A terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist. If a group would commit violence, almost exclusively against the civilian population and non military targets, to force the GP to vote or move in a certain direction, then they are infact terrorists.

I agree that it is more emotion, then sense that derives these labels, but as I have pointed out, the optics just suck, no matter what label you wish to pin on it.
 

mabudon

Metal King
Mar 15, 2006
1,339
30
48
Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
I don't know why Trudea keeps coming up in here, honestly, I don't have a time machine and can do NOTHING to prevent his having been Prime Minister, like I already said, just cos the Liberals did something in the past, somehow I'm suposed to lower the acceptability bar for the present?? Don't bet on it- I have nothing to say about the past cos I can't change it, only learn from it

And Bear LMAO so "haven for terrorists" is not the same as "comprised of terrorists"??? "haven for terrortists" was the label that got Afghanistan where it is today- you're just mincing words there I would suggest :D
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
I don't know why Trudea keeps coming up in here, honestly, I don't have a time machine and can do NOTHING to prevent his having been Prime Minister, like I already said, just cos the Liberals did something in the past, somehow I'm suposed to lower the acceptability bar for the present?? Don't bet on it- I have nothing to say about the past cos I can't change it, only learn from it

And Bear LMAO so "haven for terrorists" is not the same as "comprised of terrorists"??? "haven for terrortists" was the label that got Afghanistan where it is today- you're just mincing words there I would suggest :D
Well seeing it seems to be the supporters of the LPoC, that keep calling Harpo a nazi, fascist, Bushlite and so forth, it seems odd they call Trudeau a saint, hero etc., considering that he is the only North American leader to completely suspend civil liberties, in recorded history.

What you see as mincing words, I see as fact...

Liberal Ministers attending pro Hezbollah rallies, in the guise of peace rallies.
Liberal caucus turning completely around on their own legislation in the elenth hour, ignoring their own commitees recomendations on the matter, with regards to the extention.
Liberal fumbling of the Air Indian affair.
Liberal member being related to a fundraising spokesman, for a known terrorist group, throughing his support under Dion.
Liberal Ministers being under the impression, that if they do not vote as they were told, they would be denied membership in the future.

I really don't think I need to words to express the foul smell coming off that dung heep.

Now don't get me wrong, the CPoC, is that much better, Kenney and such, Harpo's micro management and tight leash.
 

mabudon

Metal King
Mar 15, 2006
1,339
30
48
Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
I am not trying to paint you as a "con lover" anymore than you are trying to paint me as a "Liberal", I am sure you know that but I wanted to make it obvious for anyone not following along :D

the Air India affair- I somehow thought we had a conservative majority for a while there afterwards- do they get a pass co's somehow the bombing was the Liberals doing and they could wait til they were in power to do something about it?? Otherwise, I would point to the Mulroney regime and start casting blame, unless you want to take the "it was too soon" route, which would be silly- I don't see how Air India is relevant ot the current propaganda is all, beside being another "THEY let this happen" kind of soundbite
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
How Air India plays into this is, Bains Father in law is a person of interest and the RCMP would like to compell him to answer some questions. Under the extended provisions, he would have had to. Now thanks to the partisan politics of Dion, he will not have to.

Seems pretty convenient to me and a tad
to me.

http://www.thestar.com/printArticle/184339
 

mabudon

Metal King
Mar 15, 2006
1,339
30
48
Golden Horseshoe, Ontario
OH, see I- in that case, if it was so important, WHY didn't they use the provisions in the FIVE YEARS they were on the books??? This whole "OH NO- we were just about to use those!!!" is pathetic and I really don't believe it for one second- then having the 9-11 families step up the day before the vote and beg for the extension made me wonder "okay, is the them, the RCMP, WHO is the actual interested party??"... to have the Cons yell "playing politics" whilst engaged in such obvious chicanery is just offensive to my intellect

And the 9-11 families were the real question mark for me- the "investigation" into that was folded up right quick, case closed, without answering ANY of the really good questions, and it was done WITH the new "terror laws" of both countries- how come they haven't been pushing for a REAL investigation since day one?? Why now, when the possible tools were suddenly threatened, did it come ot the fore?? Looks like anothe example of "NO WAIT- we were just gonna use that!!" to me

And I still question how "haven for terrorists" and "providing material support for terrorists" differ, to repeat "haven for terrorists" is MORE than enough justification to bomb the CRAP outta something and using it in the manner the title of this thread does is dangeroulsy blurring lines in my view
 
Status
Not open for further replies.