Can we assume that the Conservative Party approves of terrorist organizations?
From the Globe and Mail
From the Globe and Mail
Interesting Conservative Candidate
- Thread starter TenPenny
- Start date
By your standards, I suppose we should be wondering if the Green Party approves of rape since one of their candidates had a facebook page that sure seemed to make light of it. The candidate is gone now and the Greens won't run one in his riding.
Whatever you say, Mr Harper.
I gather you missed the bit about hosting a tribute to the Tigers, which would typically be considered as supporting terrorism.
But I'd hate to make you read anything while you're busy campaigning.
Score one more for the double standard party.
"Do as we say, not as we do" is the subtext slogan of the conservative party.
"Do as we say, not as we do" is the subtext slogan of the conservative party.
Go Go Tigers!
Liberal MP slammed for appearance at Tamil Tigers rally
Liberal MP slammed for appearance at Tamil Tigers rally
Did you notice how a Liberal is now guilty of attending a Tiger rally?
Your response?
That's a stretch. I seriously doubt the Conservatives have a view on terror groups either way. That said, the Conservative party approves of anybody that will give them money. Their background is irrelevant (as long as they haven't posed for a picture with Iggy)
What a dysfunctional family we are. What bothers me is this, if its a Conservative
everyone assumes that the whole party is involved or feels a certain way. If a
Liberal Candidate says something stupid, like not all sexual offenders should go to
jail, the Conservatives then attempt to paint all candidates in the Liberal Party are
all of a sudden soft on crime. A Green Party candidate who has obviously eaten to
much organic granola, says women should enjoy being raped in certain circumstances
then we should assume that all Greens approve of the statement. What is coming for
the NDP, oh for years others have painted them all as being Communists which is also
nonsense.
When are we going to grow up and understand that some people slip through a screening
process and become an embarrassment to an organization? When you are dealing with
somewhere near sixteen hundred candidates, applying for somewhere near four hundred
seats in Parliament there are bound to be some flakes in the mix. It is appropriate to raise
our eyebrows and not vote for someone who is not ready for society let alone to be our
representative in government. I hold that, we as people all have family members in our own
circle, that we do not want others to know we are related. So be it in the Canadian family,
we are as a group related, as Canadians whether we like it or not, and as dysfunctional as we
are.
It is better we stick to the issues before us and find someone else to vote for than to be focused
on someone who is stupid and miss the real business at hand. Remember beauty fades but
stupid is forever. It is obvious, this person does not represent the view of the Greens, about the
rape comment. It is also true that someone may have been a member, or a sympathiser of a
group with links to terrorism, that does not mean the Conservative Party is approving of such an
action. Secondly it does say something is lacking in their screening process, and some action
needs to be taken, like explaining the facts before the confusion envelopes them.
We have heard all kinds of people who are stupid, or ignorant make all kinds of statements like those
above, or the Liberal in New Brunswick that made some nasty statements about Natives in his
Province. At the same time there are natives running as Candidates in the Liberal Party, so we
know they don't all feel the way that single person expressed them self.
Its time we grew up and condemned a single stupid statement and stop painting everyone in a
particular party with the same brush.
everyone assumes that the whole party is involved or feels a certain way. If a
Liberal Candidate says something stupid, like not all sexual offenders should go to
jail, the Conservatives then attempt to paint all candidates in the Liberal Party are
all of a sudden soft on crime. A Green Party candidate who has obviously eaten to
much organic granola, says women should enjoy being raped in certain circumstances
then we should assume that all Greens approve of the statement. What is coming for
the NDP, oh for years others have painted them all as being Communists which is also
nonsense.
When are we going to grow up and understand that some people slip through a screening
process and become an embarrassment to an organization? When you are dealing with
somewhere near sixteen hundred candidates, applying for somewhere near four hundred
seats in Parliament there are bound to be some flakes in the mix. It is appropriate to raise
our eyebrows and not vote for someone who is not ready for society let alone to be our
representative in government. I hold that, we as people all have family members in our own
circle, that we do not want others to know we are related. So be it in the Canadian family,
we are as a group related, as Canadians whether we like it or not, and as dysfunctional as we
are.
It is better we stick to the issues before us and find someone else to vote for than to be focused
on someone who is stupid and miss the real business at hand. Remember beauty fades but
stupid is forever. It is obvious, this person does not represent the view of the Greens, about the
rape comment. It is also true that someone may have been a member, or a sympathiser of a
group with links to terrorism, that does not mean the Conservative Party is approving of such an
action. Secondly it does say something is lacking in their screening process, and some action
needs to be taken, like explaining the facts before the confusion envelopes them.
We have heard all kinds of people who are stupid, or ignorant make all kinds of statements like those
above, or the Liberal in New Brunswick that made some nasty statements about Natives in his
Province. At the same time there are natives running as Candidates in the Liberal Party, so we
know they don't all feel the way that single person expressed them self.
Its time we grew up and condemned a single stupid statement and stop painting everyone in a
particular party with the same brush.
Actually if Jack Layton were to apply the Saskatchewan financial principles of that NDP
movement we could be better off than we have now, the Sask NDP produced 16 yes
count them, 16 balanced budgets in a row. The Federal Tories nor the Federal Liberals
have ever done that.
movement we could be better off than we have now, the Sask NDP produced 16 yes
count them, 16 balanced budgets in a row. The Federal Tories nor the Federal Liberals
have ever done that.
The Dippers in Manitoba haven't done too bad either. I just think westerners, regardless of their political affiliation, are smarter than easterners.
True.... (S)he would know it was a waste of time correcting they who only think it....
The NDP government in Nova Scotia produced a budget surplus, only the third time in something like 70 years that the government has done that, all Tory and Liberal governments before that.
I just checked and it would seem he is.
Now is he a member of the Tigers who has changed his name multiple times or was he at the rally to support actions against humun rights like he says in the article.
ADDED
It would seem it was an impromptu speech about the plight of the civilians caught up in the fighting. Nothing planned. I also notice he wears a Sihk turban so I would think he is not even from Sri Lanka. He was most likely just being oppotunistic and pandering for votes.
Now is he a member of the Tigers who has changed his name multiple times or was he at the rally to support actions against humun rights like he says in the article.
ADDED
It would seem it was an impromptu speech about the plight of the civilians caught up in the fighting. Nothing planned. I also notice he wears a Sihk turban so I would think he is not even from Sri Lanka. He was most likely just being oppotunistic and pandering for votes.
Last edited:
Now we know that two political parties have screening problems, see we are getting somewhere.
I am sure we can find something wrong with every one's screening system and we can debate it
all day. Of course we are no longer talking about jobs, the debt, medicare, pensions, low income
housing, seniors care, the purchase of jets and the only functional submarine being at the West
Edmonton Mall a thousand miles from the ocean.
Of course to talk about the real problems we need to solve should never be given space in the
papers or no radio and TV, not when we can talk about important things like, who attended what
meeting or who does and does not have a chin. Yes I remember years ago it was believed that
if a politician didn't have a chin it was a character flaw. When the hell are we going to grow up?
I am sure we can find something wrong with every one's screening system and we can debate it
all day. Of course we are no longer talking about jobs, the debt, medicare, pensions, low income
housing, seniors care, the purchase of jets and the only functional submarine being at the West
Edmonton Mall a thousand miles from the ocean.
Of course to talk about the real problems we need to solve should never be given space in the
papers or no radio and TV, not when we can talk about important things like, who attended what
meeting or who does and does not have a chin. Yes I remember years ago it was believed that
if a politician didn't have a chin it was a character flaw. When the hell are we going to grow up?
I would say this is a fine example of the typical CPC tactics, When found to have a terrorist supporter in their midst they bring up a 2 year old article and say "but look at this guy".
Harpo was questioned about the candidate today and said about 10 words and then wouldn't answer any more questions on the subject. I suppose we should be happy he even answered 1 considering his record so far in this campaign.