Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,982 
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
November 14th, 2007, 10:51 PM
I thought as much, but required some confirmation.....
According to Jeffrey Simpson in Wednesday's Globe and Mail, it is GOOD Harper never saw Karlheinz Schreiber's letter to him.........and Mr. Simpson is usually such a Liberal Party mouthpiece......sometimes he suprizes.......
And I quote:
"The opposition Parties, predictably, were all over the PM in the House yesterday because of a letter Mr. Schreiber had sent to Mr. Harper that the PM insists he did not see. In point of practise, Mr. Harper was right not to have been shown the letter - from someone (Mr. Schreiber) involved in a private lawsuit and facing extradition. Imagine the stink if Mr. Harper had seen the letter and intervened in any fashion whatsoever"
Exactly.
The bureaucrats in question were perfectly right in with holding the letter from the PM. If the PM had seen it, his only proper course of action would have been to do absolutely nothing............a complete tempest in a teapot.
Mr. Harper has behaved exactly correctly.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it............
I thought as much, but required some confirmation.....
According to Jeffrey Simpson in Wednesday's Globe and Mail, it is GOOD Harper never saw Karlheinz Schreiber's letter to him.........and Mr. Simpson is usually such a Liberal Party mouthpiece......sometimes he suprizes.......
And I quote:
"The opposition Parties, predictably, were all over the PM in the House yesterday because of a letter Mr. Schreiber had sent to Mr. Harper that the PM insists he did not see. In point of practise, Mr. Harper was right not to have been shown the letter - from someone (Mr. Schreiber) involved in a private lawsuit and facing extradition. Imagine the stink if Mr. Harper had seen the letter and intervened in any fashion whatsoever"
Exactly.
The bureaucrats in question were perfectly right in with holding the letter from the PM. If the PM had seen it, his only proper course of action would have been to do absolutely nothing............a complete tempest in a teapot.
Mr. Harper has behaved exactly correctly.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it............
Clever Clogs
Posts: 674
Location: Canada
Location: Canada
November 14th, 2007, 11:35 PM
Oh come on! Like you know whether or not he saw the letter. Harper is such a control freak he doesn't let anything pass without his inspection and this letter was deemed sensitive so not having seen it would at least show some level of incompetence or indifference around him or by him.
That said, nobody knows what Harper has seen or hasn't seen except Harper (or whoever is standing beside him). I wouldn't know, and you sure wouldn't know so the verdict is still out on that (like we'll probably ever find out the truth).
And heck, why are you so willingly take the word of a politician so faithfully?
Oh come on! Like you know whether or not he saw the letter. Harper is such a control freak he doesn't let anything pass without his inspection and this letter was deemed sensitive so not having seen it would at least show some level of incompetence or indifference around him or by him.
That said, nobody knows what Harper has seen or hasn't seen except Harper (or whoever is standing beside him). I wouldn't know, and you sure wouldn't know so the verdict is still out on that (like we'll probably ever find out the truth).
And heck, why are you so willingly take the word of a politician so faithfully?
November 15th, 2007, 03:13 AM
At best, this is a semi-scandal. It's a quasi-scandal. The margarine of scandals. The diet coke of scandals. Just one calorie, not scandalous enough.
And it certainly will have all the lefties falling on their swords if the inquiry clears Mulroney yet again, non?
I now return you to your regularly scheduled program.
At best, this is a semi-scandal. It's a quasi-scandal. The margarine of scandals. The diet coke of scandals. Just one calorie, not scandalous enough.
And it certainly will have all the lefties falling on their swords if the inquiry clears Mulroney yet again, non?
I now return you to your regularly scheduled program.
Knows Too Much
Posts: 2,133
Location: Backwater, Ontario.
Location: Backwater, Ontario.
November 15th, 2007, 05:30 AM
Ah the smoke and mirrors: letter Mulroo Schreiber. Real impotent (not misspelled) stuff.
Stevie would be better inclined to get in touch with some really intelligent folks, if he knows any, and figure out how, with the high dollar, they can entice industry to buy the technology and tool up to save a few manufacturing jobs.
The same "glorp" that cost .85, now costs 1.03, and companies that use "glorps" in their manufacturing processes will likely look elsewhere (China - India) for cheaper "glorps". Goobye some more jobs.
This, IMHO, is a "real" problem, and one that could sink us. No one should be celebrating the high dollar, or dancing around holding up fringe issues.
Goddam populace is too busy treading water, trying not to drown, to pay attention to the stuff that could really sink us.. .
Ah well..............
Ah the smoke and mirrors: letter Mulroo Schreiber. Real impotent (not misspelled) stuff.
Stevie would be better inclined to get in touch with some really intelligent folks, if he knows any, and figure out how, with the high dollar, they can entice industry to buy the technology and tool up to save a few manufacturing jobs.
The same "glorp" that cost .85, now costs 1.03, and companies that use "glorps" in their manufacturing processes will likely look elsewhere (China - India) for cheaper "glorps". Goobye some more jobs.
This, IMHO, is a "real" problem, and one that could sink us. No one should be celebrating the high dollar, or dancing around holding up fringe issues.
Goddam populace is too busy treading water, trying not to drown, to pay attention to the stuff that could really sink us.. .
Ah well..............
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,612
November 15th, 2007, 08:25 AM
Greetins Nuggler!
Your sagacity bursts forth again! (That's a compliment by-the-way!)
But...
Have you ever considered that it's simply the "plan" unforlding as it was intended to unfold?
Keep the great unwashed fiddling while Rome burns and focus on really important stuff like Harper's "folly-lite", OJ Simpson running the networks and Paris Hilton or some other meatstick waiting in the wings to step into the spotlight should "news" need a nudge to get back on the inane banal and entirely useless...?
Now I understand that most folk don't have the appetite for truth and honesty any more, those wines haven't been available here since 1969 (to corrupt an Eagles lyric...)
But it is all rather a waste of time anyway at the most basic level. Governments (Canadian and American) have ceased to be concerned with what the "mob" cares about, there are bigger fish to fry...
Feed them pickled puke and the "electorate" will thank the powers that be, too busy with the nonesense to focus even the most limited capacity for critical thought on the issues that will eventually clout us all in the head....
We know Prime Ministers Presidents Congressmen, Senators, governors, Members of Parliament....the whole machine has been lying to us, stealing from us and "managing" our nations on behalf of wealthy corporate interests while everything that's "real" to the average Joe/Jane goes to Hades in a Handcart....
The apathy of the average person today (throughout the consuming machine that is North America) is eclipsed only by his/her ignorance.
Just like its always been only faster....
Greetins Nuggler!
Your sagacity bursts forth again! (That's a compliment by-the-way!)
But...
Have you ever considered that it's simply the "plan" unforlding as it was intended to unfold?
Keep the great unwashed fiddling while Rome burns and focus on really important stuff like Harper's "folly-lite", OJ Simpson running the networks and Paris Hilton or some other meatstick waiting in the wings to step into the spotlight should "news" need a nudge to get back on the inane banal and entirely useless...?
Now I understand that most folk don't have the appetite for truth and honesty any more, those wines haven't been available here since 1969 (to corrupt an Eagles lyric...)
But it is all rather a waste of time anyway at the most basic level. Governments (Canadian and American) have ceased to be concerned with what the "mob" cares about, there are bigger fish to fry...
Feed them pickled puke and the "electorate" will thank the powers that be, too busy with the nonesense to focus even the most limited capacity for critical thought on the issues that will eventually clout us all in the head....
We know Prime Ministers Presidents Congressmen, Senators, governors, Members of Parliament....the whole machine has been lying to us, stealing from us and "managing" our nations on behalf of wealthy corporate interests while everything that's "real" to the average Joe/Jane goes to Hades in a Handcart....
The apathy of the average person today (throughout the consuming machine that is North America) is eclipsed only by his/her ignorance.
Just like its always been only faster....
Steven Hawking's Tutor
Posts: 4,982
Location: Saint John, N.B.
Location: Saint John, N.B.
November 15th, 2007, 09:42 AM
However, any reasonable soul would give the man the benefit of the doubt in this case; a control freak? Yep, I don't doubt it, but the facts support the claim that he never saw the letter, such as.....
1. The bureaucrats, if doing their job, would NOT have shown it to him. In my experience, when a person's job requires he NOT do something, it usually is NOT done.
2. The PMO receives MORE than 1 million pieces of correspondence each year, including e-mails. Harper is a control freak? Yep, but he doesn't see one in a hundred, probably not one in 500 pieces of correspondence.......why would you assume he'd seen this one, with odds like that.
3. At the time, the letter was insignificant, nothing to raise a red flag, nothing to cause it to be one of the very very few that actually made it to the PM......
Why do you automatically assume Harper is lying, when it is SOOOO much more likely he is telling the truth?
Quoting elevennevele
In all honesty, elevenelle, I don't take the word of a politician so faithfully......none of them.
Oh come on! Like you know whether or not he saw the letter. Harper is such a control freak he doesn't let anything pass without his inspection and this letter was deemed sensitive so not having seen it would at least show some level of incompetence or indifference around him or by him.
That said, nobody knows what Harper has seen or hasn't seen except Harper (or whoever is standing beside him). I wouldn't know, and you sure wouldn't know so the verdict is still out on that (like we'll probably ever find out the truth).
And heck, why are you so willingly take the word of a politician so faithfully?
That said, nobody knows what Harper has seen or hasn't seen except Harper (or whoever is standing beside him). I wouldn't know, and you sure wouldn't know so the verdict is still out on that (like we'll probably ever find out the truth).
And heck, why are you so willingly take the word of a politician so faithfully?
However, any reasonable soul would give the man the benefit of the doubt in this case; a control freak? Yep, I don't doubt it, but the facts support the claim that he never saw the letter, such as.....
1. The bureaucrats, if doing their job, would NOT have shown it to him. In my experience, when a person's job requires he NOT do something, it usually is NOT done.
2. The PMO receives MORE than 1 million pieces of correspondence each year, including e-mails. Harper is a control freak? Yep, but he doesn't see one in a hundred, probably not one in 500 pieces of correspondence.......why would you assume he'd seen this one, with odds like that.
3. At the time, the letter was insignificant, nothing to raise a red flag, nothing to cause it to be one of the very very few that actually made it to the PM......
Why do you automatically assume Harper is lying, when it is SOOOO much more likely he is telling the truth?
November 15th, 2007, 11:09 AM
I'm pretty sure that those in that mail room know the name of Karlheinz Schreiber. That he would send a letter to the PM seems to me to be quite ludicrous to think that no one would think it important to notify PM Harper. Seriously, what if a letter addressed by Jean Pelletier. You can bet your ass PM Harper would have been notified. Perhaps this was just Plausible deniability on the part of PM Harper. Who knows?
I'm pretty sure that those in that mail room know the name of Karlheinz Schreiber. That he would send a letter to the PM seems to me to be quite ludicrous to think that no one would think it important to notify PM Harper. Seriously, what if a letter addressed by Jean Pelletier. You can bet your ass PM Harper would have been notified. Perhaps this was just Plausible deniability on the part of PM Harper. Who knows?
Mighty Intellect
Posts: 1,603
November 17th, 2007, 06:38 AM
Kick Schreiber out
National Post
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Ottawa is set to extradite Karlheinz Schreiber to stand trial in Germany. Mr. Schreiber is threatening that if Canada does so, he won't co-operate with any inquiry into payments he made to Brian Mulroney in 1993 and 1994.
To which we say: Don't let the cell door hit your backside on the way out. Let's kick him out. Now.
On Thursday, an Ontario court said Ottawa was free to send the arms dealer back to Germany immediately. That decision left Mr. Schreiber's fate with federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.
Mr. Nicholson then gave Mr. Schreiber a two-week extension, enough time to appeal to the Supreme Court. The Minister made no promises, though, about letting him stay in Canada beyond Dec. 1, pending an inquiry into the $300,000 in "retainers" Mr. Schreiber paid Mr. Mulroney. Assuming Mr. Schreiber's appeal fails (which seems likely), Ottawa shouldn't hesitate to put him on a plane to Frankfurt.
The opposition will howl that such a move constitutes an attempt by Stephen Harper's government to spare a former Conservative PM. But Mr. Schreiber's testimony would do nothing to help an inquiry get at the truth: Since his only motive seems to be staying in Canada, he could be expected to concoct whatever lies helped him secure that outcome.
Indeed, his latest accusations against Mr. Mulroney are nothing more than a naked attempt to delay extradition. Is it any coincidence that he filed his newest claim just days before the expected Ontario court decision?
The opposition may want to keep Mr. Schreiber around slinging mud at Mr. Mulroney because it hopes some of that mud will stick to Mr. Harper. But the cause of justice no longer requires any contribution from Karlheinz Schreiber. Canada would be a better place without him in it.
Kick Schreiber out
National Post
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Ottawa is set to extradite Karlheinz Schreiber to stand trial in Germany. Mr. Schreiber is threatening that if Canada does so, he won't co-operate with any inquiry into payments he made to Brian Mulroney in 1993 and 1994.
To which we say: Don't let the cell door hit your backside on the way out. Let's kick him out. Now.
On Thursday, an Ontario court said Ottawa was free to send the arms dealer back to Germany immediately. That decision left Mr. Schreiber's fate with federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson.
Mr. Nicholson then gave Mr. Schreiber a two-week extension, enough time to appeal to the Supreme Court. The Minister made no promises, though, about letting him stay in Canada beyond Dec. 1, pending an inquiry into the $300,000 in "retainers" Mr. Schreiber paid Mr. Mulroney. Assuming Mr. Schreiber's appeal fails (which seems likely), Ottawa shouldn't hesitate to put him on a plane to Frankfurt.
The opposition will howl that such a move constitutes an attempt by Stephen Harper's government to spare a former Conservative PM. But Mr. Schreiber's testimony would do nothing to help an inquiry get at the truth: Since his only motive seems to be staying in Canada, he could be expected to concoct whatever lies helped him secure that outcome.
Indeed, his latest accusations against Mr. Mulroney are nothing more than a naked attempt to delay extradition. Is it any coincidence that he filed his newest claim just days before the expected Ontario court decision?
The opposition may want to keep Mr. Schreiber around slinging mud at Mr. Mulroney because it hopes some of that mud will stick to Mr. Harper. But the cause of justice no longer requires any contribution from Karlheinz Schreiber. Canada would be a better place without him in it.
© National Post 2007
November 17th, 2007, 07:21 AM
This whole contraversy, from Mulroney/Schrieber to the PMO, is a great big nothing.
Even if Mulroney is found guilty of some malfesence and if he truly did accept Schriebers funds. It was $300,000 of Schriebers funds, not the public purses and Mulroney ceratinly did abuse the position of the PMO as Cretien did.
YET!!!
Here we are once again inundated by the Liberal masses, the Liberal press and the the leader of the Liberal Party.
IT"S PATHETIC.
Cretien tried to force the head of the BDB, Francois Beaudoin to hand out a loan to a business buddy. When he refused, because the man had a criminal record, a poor credit history, Cretien appointed two cronies to force the loan to take place.
THEN...
He tried to smear Francois Beaudoin into oblivion.
Very little mention in the Canadian MSM, especially on the CBC.
Now we have Mulroney, who already successfully sued the Feds under Cretien and won, being harassed yet again, with the LPoC, flanked by the other party's, leading the cahrge against Harpo and company, over a man that has little to nothing to do with the Harpo Gov't.
Pathetic, a Liberal leader (And I use that term loosely) abuses the power of the PMO, costs that tax payers about 14 mil in the process and nery a word of protest.
A PM, possibly took private funds from an arms dealer, sued the Feds and won and he, along with the present and far removed Gov't, are the target du jour.
Oh give me a break, the LPoC and the left leaning folks of Kanata, really need to set some priorities here. At the very least use the same damn sized brush when they set out to tar the bad guys.
Anyone wonder why people like myself think Liberals are moraly and ethically bankrupt?
Quoting Colpy
That would be to say the least, to express it as it truly is, it's plain partisan BS.
............a complete tempest in a teapot.
This whole contraversy, from Mulroney/Schrieber to the PMO, is a great big nothing.
Even if Mulroney is found guilty of some malfesence and if he truly did accept Schriebers funds. It was $300,000 of Schriebers funds, not the public purses and Mulroney ceratinly did abuse the position of the PMO as Cretien did.
YET!!!
Here we are once again inundated by the Liberal masses, the Liberal press and the the leader of the Liberal Party.
IT"S PATHETIC.
Cretien tried to force the head of the BDB, Francois Beaudoin to hand out a loan to a business buddy. When he refused, because the man had a criminal record, a poor credit history, Cretien appointed two cronies to force the loan to take place.
THEN...
He tried to smear Francois Beaudoin into oblivion.
Very little mention in the Canadian MSM, especially on the CBC.
Now we have Mulroney, who already successfully sued the Feds under Cretien and won, being harassed yet again, with the LPoC, flanked by the other party's, leading the cahrge against Harpo and company, over a man that has little to nothing to do with the Harpo Gov't.
Pathetic, a Liberal leader (And I use that term loosely) abuses the power of the PMO, costs that tax payers about 14 mil in the process and nery a word of protest.
A PM, possibly took private funds from an arms dealer, sued the Feds and won and he, along with the present and far removed Gov't, are the target du jour.
Oh give me a break, the LPoC and the left leaning folks of Kanata, really need to set some priorities here. At the very least use the same damn sized brush when they set out to tar the bad guys.
Anyone wonder why people like myself think Liberals are moraly and ethically bankrupt?
Member
Posts: 149
Location: Alberta
Location: Alberta
November 17th, 2007, 07:30 AM
In a case before the courts the correct thing to do is...nothing!
Quoting elevennevele
There is absolute proof as to whether the PM saw this or not! All mail is stamped with the date it is received by the Department. All mail is signed by who does the initial reading, and with a report of the action that was taken. Therefore if anyone on the staff of the PMs office-right up to and including the PM, saw this correspondence there will be a record of it.
Oh come on! Like you know whether or not he saw the letter. Harper is such a control freak he doesn't let anything pass without his inspection and this letter was deemed sensitive so not having seen it would at least show some level of incompetence or indifference around him or by him.
That said, nobody knows what Harper has seen or hasn't seen except Harper (or whoever is standing beside him). I wouldn't know, and you sure wouldn't know so the verdict is still out on that (like we'll probably ever find out the truth).
And heck, why are you so willingly take the word of a politician so faithfully?
That said, nobody knows what Harper has seen or hasn't seen except Harper (or whoever is standing beside him). I wouldn't know, and you sure wouldn't know so the verdict is still out on that (like we'll probably ever find out the truth).
And heck, why are you so willingly take the word of a politician so faithfully?
In a case before the courts the correct thing to do is...nothing!
