The Coalition Strikes!!!

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
Easy to say when it isn't your responsibility to protect our international partnerships, security and policy.

I'm sure you'd sing, nicely I might add, a different tune, if it was your job.

If your international partnerships include the bad guys then you're part of the problem. We have a policy for handling prisoners. It has to be respected and when it isn't, we have to resolve those problems. Even if it's our own people doing it we have to adhere to the policy. Again, when it's time to show the proof to parliament, you open the books for the House. Doesn't matter what party you're in, who you're dealing with or any reason you feel might cause you to keep that information from the House.

I don't know what I would do as I don't put myself into that position. Each and every politician on the hill works for the Canadian People first and then the head of their party. If they feel that they can't be honest to the public of Canada, they should leave politics.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
Just Google.

The War Measures Act regulations expired on April 30, 1971.

The WMA does not even exist anymore, having been replaced by the Emergencies Act of 1988.

Chretien attacked the guy.......grabbing someone by the throat is a more serious offense than common assault........

I remember the video. That guy was lucky cretin was feeling polite that day. Then again the guy probably didn't have any money to steal either.

If your international partnerships include the bad guys then you're part of the problem. We have a policy for handling prisoners. It has to be respected and when it isn't, we have to resolve those problems. Even if it's our own people doing it we have to adhere to the policy. Again, when it's time to show the proof to parliament, you open the books for the House. Doesn't matter what party you're in, who you're dealing with or any reason you feel might cause you to keep that information from the House.

I don't know what I would do as I don't put myself into that position. Each and every politician on the hill works for the Canadian People first and then the head of their party. If they feel that they can't be honest to the public of Canada, they should leave politics.

In a perfect world. This isn't.
 

Jack_Of_Spade

Nominee Member
Mar 31, 2011
87
0
6
Get an education, please.

You obviously don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about.

Political parties are most definitely NOT 'employees of the Canadian poeple' (insert rolled eyes here), and you vote in an MP, not a party.

Political parties are an entity created by their members to put forth a particular political philosophy in the hope that their adherents are elected by the people to political office.........

I do give up on you. And you call me brain-dead! ROTFLMAO......
keep rolling your eyes maybe you will notice that your brain is missing . Doesnt mater what philosophy the political party is there nothing unless we elect them and when they get elected they work for us !as you have clearly indicated you vote for a partie not your MP who just happen to be a member of that partie. Please! I beg you pull the trigger your on Concervative intervenuse life suport anyway!
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
If your international partnerships include the bad guys then you're part of the problem. We have a policy for handling prisoners.
That was set up by the Liberals, and enforced by the Troops on the ground. We lawfully handed them over to Afghan authorities.

Again, when it's time to show the proof to parliament, you open the books for the House. Doesn't matter what party you're in, who you're dealing with or any reason you feel might cause you to keep that information from the House.
i would otherwise agree, if it wasn't political hackery.

I don't know what I would do as I don't put myself into that position.
You should try, you might actually look a little more objective.

Each and every politician on the hill works for the Canadian People first and then the head of their party.
Naive.

If they feel that they can't be honest to the public of Canada, they should leave politics.
Witholding sensitive documents during a time of conflict, is not being dishonest to the public.
 

PoliticalNick

The Troll Bashing Troll
Mar 8, 2011
7,940
0
36
Edson, AB
The issue wan't about us holding them, it was about what was happening to them when we lawfully handed them over to Afghan authorities.
If we are in their country illegally and have no lawful jurisdiction how can we 'lawfully' arrest them in the first place?

That wasn't the point. The point is, it's munition procurement during conflict. An oversight solely for the sitting gov't.
Umm, once again, where is the declaration of war? And do not all MP's make up the government?

Well, I believe we should uphold our international obligations, such as NATO. But I've long since stopped supporting the Afghan conflict.
And I believe we should get the hell out of NATO, the UN and a multitude of other international NGO's and governmental agreements yesterday. We'll call it a difference of opinion on this.

Rhetoric, will get you nowhere.
Ditto...

It has nothing to do with answering to another country, and unless there was a referendum I missed. Partisan opposition leaders, not the people, forced an unethical vote in Parliament.
Who do those MP's work for again? I did not hear a huge public outcry against it, in fact the public majority was all for it. And let's not bring the word unethical into any discussion of the party politics in Ottawa, that really is the pot/kettle argument.

Jack Layton.
Wrong..the name is Nick, I thought you knew that by now. Or are you telling me who you are voting for and suggesting I do the same. ;-)

i would otherwise agree, if it wasn't political hackery.

What's that term you like to use? Oh yeah...moral relativism!
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
If we are in their country illegally and have no lawful jurisdiction how can we 'lawfully' arrest them in the first place?
It's only your opinion that we're in Afghanistan illegally.

Umm, once again, where is the declaration of war? And do not all MP's make up the government?
The precedent is set at state of conflict. The Korean war, was a war in title only. It was a police action, no formal declaration was ever made.

And I believe we should get the hell out of NATO, the UN and a multitude of other international NGO's and governmental agreements yesterday. We'll call it a difference of opinion on this.
Fair enough.

I'm glad you agree that your rhetoric will you get you nowhere.

Who do those MP's work for again? I did not hear a huge public outcry against it, in fact the public majority was all for it.
Ya, the polls would seem to indicate just that.<sarcasm.
And let's not bring the word unethical into any discussion of the party politics in Ottawa, that really is the pot/kettle argument.
I never said the sitting gov't was ethical.

Wrong..the name is Nick, I thought you knew that by now. Or are you telling me who you are voting for and suggesting I do the same. ;-)
:roll:

What's that term you like to use? Oh yeah...moral relativism!
Ya, that would apply, if you could show I have had a differing opinion, or held the opposition to a different standard in the same situation.
 

PoliticalNick

The Troll Bashing Troll
Mar 8, 2011
7,940
0
36
Edson, AB
It's only your opinion that we're in Afghanistan illegally.
I'm not the only one. Though I am sure there is a great deal of support for the other side, I would say the greater percentage of the population in Canada and the world don't think it was legal.

The precedent is set at state of conflict. The Korean war, was a war in title only. It was a police action, no formal declaration was ever made.
I am well aware of the illegality of the Korean conflict and almost every other conflict involving the US since 1946. The Geneva Conventions are quite clear that the opening of hostilities is only legal under a declaration of war. http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/FULL/190?OpenDocument . And you avoided the question, do not all MP's make up the government?

Ya, the polls would seem to indicate just that.
Exactly, and you avoided this question too...Who do those MP's work for again?

Ya, that would apply, if you could show I have had a differing opinion, or held the opposition to a different standard in the same situation.
Either you agree with the principle or not, no justifying the lack of response with various reasons like 'in a conflict' or 'political hackery'. Either the Cons (or any other party) do have to produce the documents to the house when ordered to or they don't. The reason that brought about the order is irrelavent.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
keep rolling your eyes maybe you will notice that your brain is missing . Doesnt mater what philosophy the political party is there nothing unless we elect them and when they get elected they work for us !as you have clearly indicated you vote for a partie not your MP who just happen to be a member of that partie. Please! I beg you pull the trigger your on Concervative intervenuse life suport anyway!

Dear Moron....

And yes, political parties exist without being elected.........there are a number of parties on the ballot who have never elected an MP, including the Green Party.

And I do apologize for being so rude.....one really should not swear at the severely mentally handicapped......but instead provide remedial help if possible.

Spelling mistakes in the post above....perhaps it would help if you wrote them out correctly....I know it helped my kids when they were 6 or 7 years old.

conservative

doesn't

matter

last

party

support

intravenous

And please, learn the English language, including the proper use of the words their, there, there and your and you're........you misused both in the post above.

Thank you, and I will be here to help if you wish to post anymore ignorant, incoherent rants.

Your Pal,

Colpy
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
I'm not the only one.
A great many of the worlds population said the attack on the Marmara was illegal too. Funny thing is, as soon as someone actually started reading international law on the matter. The notion fell apart.

I am well aware of the illegality of the Korean conflict and almost every other conflict involving the US since 1946. The Geneva Conventions are quite clear that the opening of hostilities is only legal under a declaration of war. International Humanitarian Law - Hague Convention III 1907 .
You'll have to take that up with the UN. And the ICRC is a joke, the punchline is their admitted re-interpretation of law.
And you avoided the question, do not all MP's make up the government?
I thought I addressed that, the sitting gov't is the body that has in the past, had full unhindered oversight. When I say the "sitting gov't" I mean the one in control. majority or otherwise.

Exactly...
You do realize that Harper is in the lead right? That would seem to say the opposite of what you're claiming.

... and you avoided this question too...Who do those MP's work for again?
My humblest apologies. Their perspective party.

Either you agree with the principle or not, no justifying the lack of response with various reasons like 'in a conflict' or 'political hackery'.
What principle?

The reason that brought about the order is irrelavent.
Only if you run on/with, political hay. I don't.
 
Last edited:

PoliticalNick

The Troll Bashing Troll
Mar 8, 2011
7,940
0
36
Edson, AB
You'll have to take that up with the UN. And the ICRC is a joke, the punchline is their admitted re-interpretation of law.
And I would call the UN a joke, the punchline being that one nation may for any whimsical reason veto the will of all the other nations combined. It is hardly a fair and just body.

I thought I addressed that, the sitting gov't is the body that has in the past, had full unhindered oversight. When I say the "sitting gov't" I mean the one in control. majority or otherwise.
I would not say a minority govt has this or a true mandate from the masses.

You do realize that Harper is in the lead right? That would seem to say the opposite of what you're claiming.
Once again, a minority is not a mandate from the masses. 40% may be the highest of all the parties but is not the will of the majority.

My humblest apologies. Their perspective party.
Apology accepted. While your answer may in fact be a horrible truth as I understand the constitution the MP's work for the people who elect them, not their party or its leader. But thanks for pointing out a glaring problem with our system of govt.

What principle?
The principle is that an order from the speaker of the house is an order and should be adherred to or it is contempt. There is a code of conduct and rules of order for a reason.

Only if you run on/with, political hay. I don't.
Is this your only excuse for disobeying a lawful order or do you have more?
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
And I would call the UN a joke, the punchline being that one nation may for any whimsical reason veto the will of all the other nations combined. It is hardly a fair and just body.
I'm glad we see eye to eye on that.

I would not say a minority govt has this or a true mandate from the masses.
Unfortunately, there is no rule or law that dictates that, either way.

Once again, a minority is not a mandate from the masses. 40% may be the highest of all the parties but is not the will of the majority.
Fair enough. I concede to fact. < It would be nice if you remember that the next time you want to claim I don't.

The principle is that an order from the speaker of the house is an order and should be adherred to or it is contempt. There is a code of conduct and rules of order for a reason.
You mean the supremacy of Parliament. And I agree, with that principle. I don't agree with partisan hackery, that uses rules to further their own political agenda, under the guise of "upholding democracy". I find that level of unethical behavior to be far more abhorrent and repulsive, then failing to concede to the House, in an unprecedented manner.

If you think the opposition parties perpetrated this coup, for your benefit, I have property in Florida for sale. Cheap.

Is this your only excuse for disobeying a lawful order or do you have more?
That isn't an excuse, and it was in reply to your "irrelevant". Because it isn't irrelevant. It's extremely important. It's only irrelevant, if you want to cherry pick facts, to support your position.

I stand by my comment.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
116,701
14,127
113
Low Earth Orbit
I just don't give a sh!t but about this election bull anymore. It makes me want to get drunk regardless of how ill I'll get.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
I just don't give a sh!t but about this election bull anymore. It makes me want to get drunk regardless of how ill I'll get.

Maybe you have it backwards, a sane person would probably have to be drunk to want to get involved with it. :lol:
 

PoliticalNick

The Troll Bashing Troll
Mar 8, 2011
7,940
0
36
Edson, AB
I'm glad we see eye to eye on that.
Cool, but let's keep that hush before we ruin our reputations...:lol:

Unfortunately, there is no rule or law that dictates that, either way.
Hard to argue that point.

Fair enough. I concede to fact. < It would be nice if you remember that the next time you want to claim I don't.
I will, I noticed the apology too. My apologies for claiming otherwise.

You mean the supremacy of Parliament. And I agree, with that principle. I don't agree with partisan hackery, that uses rules to further their own political agenda, under the guise of "upholding democracy". I find that level of unethical behavior to be far more abhorrent and repulsive, then failing to concede to the House, in an unprecedented manner.
I am not endosing the use of partisan tactics and freely admit they are used by all parties for many reasons, I hate the whole party system and would rather have 308 independants. The problem I have with this issue is justifying your own (Harper's) unethical actions by calling anothers actions unethical. It doesn't give you the moral high ground it just makes you sink to the lowest level. He would have earned my respect by stating 'in spite of the unethical manner this order was reached I will uphold my obligation and my own ethical commitment, here are the documents requested'. Something like that would have killed most support for any opposition party in a hurry.

If you think the opposition parties perpetrated this coup, for your benefit, I have property in Florida for sale. Cheap.
I think the Cons wanted this election as much as the opposition. And I bought some during the last election, still waiting for the water to drain....:roll:
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
I will, I noticed the apology too. My apologies for claiming otherwise.
Thank you.

The problem I have with this issue is justifying your own (Harper's) unethical actions by calling anothers actions unethical.
It's a catch 22. He's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't. And I've already stated that the supremacy of Parliament must be supported. The Harper gov't just shouldn't have been put in the position in the first place.
It doesn't give you the moral high ground it just makes you sink to the lowest level.
This isn't a moral argument.

He would have earned my respect by stating 'in spite of the unethical manner this order was reached I will uphold my obligation and my own ethical commitment, here are the documents requested'. Something like that would have killed most support for any opposition party in a hurry.
Actually, he asked for time to consult. On the detainee issue, he even enlisted the assistance of a Supreme Court Justice, to help determine what legal ramifications the gov't may face if any. If their releasing documents caused irreparable damage to our international obligations.

I think the Cons wanted this election as much as the opposition.
I don't think they did, I know they did.
 
Last edited:

ironsides

Executive Branch Member
Feb 13, 2009
8,583
60
48
United States
Remember when Libya was elected chairman of the United Nations Human Rights Commission a few years ago?

That kind of proves to the world that the UN is a joke, no? Why does Canada still support the UN, I know why Presodent Obama does.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.

Unforgiven

Force majeure
May 28, 2007
6,770
137
63
The unReformed liars coalition that is. Lying to Parliament, cheating, record breaking pork barreling, usurpers of the Canadian Government need to go.

OTTAWA—Auditor General Sheila Fraser is rebuking the Conservatives for using an old quote of hers praising the Liberals as proof she approved of last year’s G8/G20 spending by the Tories.

In another twist in the summit spending uproar, Fraser is demanding that the quote cited by the Tories be removed from a recent report by a Commons committee that studied how the Harper government spent $1.2 billion on the Muskoka and Toronto summits.

“We found that the processes and controls around that were very good and that the monies were spent as they were intended to be spent,” Fraser is quoted as saying in the dissenting report written by Conservative MPs on the committee.

But Fraser says bluntly in a letter to former chair and Liberal candidate John McKay that the quote had nothing to do with last year’s summits. It was taken from a 2010 media report referring to the auditor general’s assessment of national security spending by the Liberal government in the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, she says.

“The comments attributed to me in the (dissenting Conservative) report are completely unrelated to G8/G20 spending,” Fraser wrote on April 8.

Noting that she did not give testimony before the Commons government operations committee during its investigation of G8/G20 spending, she demanded that the dissenting report be corrected “as it is clearly erroneous.”
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
848
113
70
Saint John, N.B.
The unReformed liars coalition that is. Lying to Parliament, cheating, record breaking pork barreling, usurpers of the Canadian Government need to go.

OTTAWA—Auditor General Sheila Fraser is rebuking the Conservatives for using an old quote of hers praising the Liberals as proof she approved of last year’s G8/G20 spending by the Tories.

In another twist in the summit spending uproar, Fraser is demanding that the quote cited by the Tories be removed from a recent report by a Commons committee that studied how the Harper government spent $1.2 billion on the Muskoka and Toronto summits.

“We found that the processes and controls around that were very good and that the monies were spent as they were intended to be spent,” Fraser is quoted as saying in the dissenting report written by Conservative MPs on the committee.

But Fraser says bluntly in a letter to former chair and Liberal candidate John McKay that the quote had nothing to do with last year’s summits. It was taken from a 2010 media report referring to the auditor general’s assessment of national security spending by the Liberal government in the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, she says.

“The comments attributed to me in the (dissenting Conservative) report are completely unrelated to G8/G20 spending,” Fraser wrote on April 8.

Noting that she did not give testimony before the Commons government operations committee during its investigation of G8/G20 spending, she demanded that the dissenting report be corrected “as it is clearly erroneous.”

Although completely overstated, you are essentially correct.

These people are morons.

Now offer me someone else to vote for that

1. Won't arrive on my doorstep and start seizing weapons. Or the legal equivalent. And don't tell me it won't happen, I've already lost a gun to the gov't. And both the Libs NDP want to ban semi-automatics and handguns.....of which I own several thousand dollars worth. And I am FAR from rich. BTW, compensation has never been paid for gun seizures in Canada.

2 Will not treat every line-jumping economic refugee like the Queen of Sheba, releasing them immediately into the streets and onto the welfare rolls, some of whom wish to plan and execute their wars either back in the old country OR HERE while living on our dime. Tamil Tigers, Islamists...you name it.

3. Will not crawl back to the UN , begging them for instructions.

4. Will not appear in Beijing on their knees, offering apologetic head.

5. Will not take up the cause of Hamas.

6. Will not totally destroy the Canadian military.

7. Will re-distribute Parliamentary seats to better represent the people, without giving Quebec anything more than they deserve.

8. Will not destroy the oilsands, which are the economic engine of Canada.

9. Will dispose of the cash-per-vote subsidy of the Bloc Quebecois.....and all the rest of the parties.

10. Reform the Senate....which Harper will do, if given the chance.

Just ten off the top of my head, but you get the idea....I could go on. The problem is there is simply no other party offered that is sane.

Better the sane SOBs of the CPC than the Liberals or the NDP.

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...ng-divide-between-toryworld-and-liberal-land/

I really, at this point in history, have no choice but to support the Conservatives.
 
Last edited: