T1B

tough love wrote:
Let every Tom, Dick, and Terrorist in, and their grateful family, friends, and other minorities will know that the Libby's are their friend.

Scary is; just how many sleeper cells these self_serving idiots have allowed to be among us.

Hapday wrote:

tough love wrote:
Let every Tom, Dick, and Terrorist in, and their grateful family, friends, and other minorities will know that the Libby's are their friend.

Scary is; just how many sleeper cells these self_serving idiots have allowed to be among us.

RACK!!!

They are also friends of the NDP. Don't forget that. Jack Chow has been seen many times attending Tamil Tiger meetings, and in fact the Tamil Tigers contributed to Mr. Chow's campaign in the last federal election.

The gLiberals even tried to introduce legislation to allow immigrant's extended families to become Canadian citizens. I wonder why... :roll:
The sad part is that the NDP and Bloc would probably support this legislation.

This country is on death row, the only thing left to question is the exact execution date.

Otis wrote: You're a fucking disgrace to Canadians that actually love this country.

Hapday wrote:

Otis wrote: You're a fucking disgrace to Canadians that actually love this country.

I do love my country, just not the way complete pussies like you and the corrupt parties you idiots keep returning to power are doing to it.

If really think that little piece of legislation, right before an election was about to be called, was all about reuniting families you are just as big of an idiot as everyone knows you are.

Hapday wrote:

Martyred wrote:
I'm not Bushice.

We could spot you 10 additional IQ points so you could be. That would bring your total to 64 and make you smart enough so you wouldn't have to remind yourself to breathe.

War Wagon wrote:

Hapday wrote:

Martyred wrote:
I'm not Bushice.

We could spot you 10 additional IQ points so you could be. That would bring your total to 64 and make you smart enough so you wouldn't have to remind yourself to breathe.

Just passing thru, but...

Doh!!! Score one for hap.

Is this like the absurdly long winded thread where Canucks eat their own?

Otis wrote:

Hapday wrote:

Otis wrote: You're a fucking disgrace to Canadians that actually love this country.

I do love my country, just not the way complete pussies like you and the corrupt parties you idiots keep returning to power are doing to it.

If really think that little piece of legislation, right before an election was about to be called, was all about reuniting families you are just as big of an idiot as everyone knows you are.

Ya, your patriotism really shows it's true colours, red white and blue...


You love your country....



:roll:

War Wagon Wrote:
Is this like the absurdly long winded thread where Canucks eat their own?

Otis Wrote:
We've been keeping it confined to one long winded thread instead of multiple detard'd threads
Your eyes and brain really should be thankful.

Otis Wrote:
You're a fucking disgrace to Canadians that actually love this country.

tough love wrote:Canada's blunt-talking top soldier won praise yesterday for his clear and sometimes brutal description of the coming military effort against terrorist "scumbags" in Afghanistan.

"We're not the public service of Canada, we're not just another department. We are the Canadian Forces, and our job is to be able to kill people," Gen. Hillier said.

In a media briefing two days ago, Gen. Hillier laid out the mission for the more than 2,000 troops who are headed to Afghanistan in the coming year: provide security in the country and, more importantly, go on the hunt for terrorists.

As part of the deployment, the Canadian Forces are sending commando soldiers from Joint Task Force 2 with the expectation that they will be involved in combat.

"We are going to Afghanistan to actually take down the folks that are trying to blow up men and women," Gen. Hillier said.


Quotes:

The chairman of the Conference of Defence Associations, retired lieutenant-general Richard Evraire, praised the comments, although he said he was slightly taken aback by Gen. Hillier's statement that the Forces are designed to "kill people." Mr. Evraire said the comments are evidence of a new style in the Canadian Forces, which he accused of camouflaging the truth about military operations in the past. It's true that it can be a bit surprising if we're not used to it, I don't remember anyone else speaking like that. I think it's time to say things like they are."

"Controlled anger, given what's happened, is an appropriate response, NDP Leader Jack Layton said. We have a very committed, level-headed head of our armed forces, who isn't afraid to express the passion that underlies the mission that front-line personnel are going to be taking on. "A bit of strong language in the circumstances, I don't find that to be wrong.

Conservative MP Gordon O'Connor said Gen. Hillier speaks like a soldier, not a diplomat. He's starting to give the public an idea that the troops are about to go in a dangerous area and he's trying to explain why they're going there in the pursuit of terrorists.

Maude Barlow, chairwoman of the Council of Canadians, said Canada should retain a more level-headed approach to events such as last week's terrorist attacks in London. I'm feeling it's time for people to be as calm as possible...I would love Canada to play a thoughtful, moderating position in this, she said, denouncing Gen. Hillier's comments as "very aggressive.

Jocelyn Coulon, a military expert, said the Canadian Forces strived in recent decades to pretend they were only involved in peacekeeping operations. They never said in the past that people could actually die," said Mr. Coulon, a visiting professor at the University of Montreal's Centre for International Studies. We need a military leader who is frank, even somewhat brutally so.

Stephen Staples, a military analyst at the Ottawa-based, left-leaning Polaris Institute, said he found Gen. Hillier's comments "rather alarming". Are we seeing an Americanization of the Canadian Forces? Mr. Staples asked.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... nal/Canada

Hummm.

Personally; I'm more with the left leaning bitches on this one, but for different reasons.
Hilliers gungho yanky style will play well for the Hapdays of this Cunttree, and the Dr. mv's of Me'sville; but what is gained besides the short lived satisfaction of empty chest pounding, by prematurely announcing your mili_intention.
Now you got the El Fuckos expecting a different responce from our forces than what has been more of a primarily defensive nature.
Why alert your enemy before the first head gets blowed up? It serves no logistical purpose.

IMO: Hilliers' foolish Gunghoe crap, so much as let the cat outta the bag.

BAG being unfortunately, the key word.

Hapday wrote:

tough love wrote:Lying shits like Grewal

:roll: *

tough love wrote:NDP decries 'double-cross by Grits.
Article by Simon Doyle.

Hapday wrote:

tough love wrote:NDP decries 'double-cross by Grits.
Article by Simon Doyle.

You had me here.

I never thought I would post this but RACK THE LIBERALS!!! If Mr. Chow was dumb enough to make that deal, he deserves the screw job.

Otis wrote:Thanks for the new sig!

Nice work tl ;)

Liberals lead in new poll

By ALEXANDER PANETTA





OTTAWA (CP) - The gift of scandal and voter fatigue with the four-term Liberal government have done little for Stephen Harper's Conservatives, a new poll suggests.

A Pollara poll gives the Liberals a commanding advantage - 11 points ahead of their arch-rivals, with staggering leads in battlegrounds like B.C., the Toronto area and Atlantic Canada. Pollara's chairman says the Canadian electorate wants to punish the Liberals and there's only one explanation for such a large lead.

"The whole thing is Stephen Harper at this stage," said Michael Marzolini, who was a longtime Liberal pollster.

"Liberal support is artificially high now because of him.

"If the Conservatives didn't have this hamstring around them . . . they would be in the high 40s in the polls.

"A Brian Mulroney type of Conservative leader would have Conservatives in the 50s right now."

Instead the Official Opposition lagged behind at 27 per cent - while the Liberals were at 38 per cent, the Pollara poll suggested. The NDP was at 15 per cent.

Barely two months ago, the Liberals were being pummelled by the sponsorship scandal and worried they might be turfed from office.

Now the Pollara numbers would put the Liberals within a hair - perhaps just one or two points away - from winning a majority government, Marzolini said.

The poll's 2.8-per-cent margin of error could put the Liberals in majority territory, or at just under 35 per cent support, not enough to make the leap.

As well, the Liberals would have to pick up seats in Quebec - an unlikely event, given the sponsorship scandal.

That's the one saving grace for the Tories.

In that province, the Liberals were at 24 per cent - 36 points behind the Bloc Quebecois. The Tories had five per cent in Quebec, and the NDP had six.

-In B.C. the Liberals held a 21-point lead, 44 to 23 per cent. Even the NDP was well ahead of the Tories at 28 per cent.

-In Atlantic Canada it was 45 Liberal, 33 Conservative, 20 NDP.

-The two biggest parties were tied in Ontario outside Toronto, but the Liberals held a 25-point lead in the Toronto area.

-The Conservatives held a nine-point lead over the Liberals in Alberta and Saskatchewan.

One academic expert on public-opinion polling says the Pollara survey would produce a nearly identical result to last year's election.

The Liberals would probably gain a dozen seats in B.C., lose a dozen in Quebec and wind up again with about a 135-seat minority, said Barry Kay of Wilfrid Laurier University.

He recently published a paper blaming Harper for the Tories' troubles in recent months.

He said Harper failed to manage his caucus, failed to control the parliamentary agenda, and failed to properly sell his party to Canadians.

"Harper has consistently looked like Wile E. Coyote being outmanoeuvered by the Roadrunner," Kay wrote.

"Then after being outstrategized, he shows the gracelessness to engage in name-calling and demonization."

The Tories would have had enough votes to topple the Liberals on May 19 if not for Belinda Stronach's defection and Chuck Cadman, a one-time Tory, who was sitting as an Independent.

Harper reacted to Stronach's departure by questioning her intellectual depth. The key question, Kay said, is why he couldn't get her and Cadman onside.

"Why didn't Harper make sufficient entreaties to bring Cadman back into the fold?" Kay wrote.

"Why . . . couldn't (he) have been more adroit in schmoozing, flattering and cajoling caucus members, especially ambitious ones like Stronach?"

In the meantime his Tories were losing allies on key votes - first the NDP, and then the Bloc Quebecois on several votes in late June.

Harper called the Liberal-NDP budget amendment a deal with the devil. And he questioned the Bloc's legitimacy in Parliament.

But he missed a golden opportunity to tell Canadians what changes the Tories wanted to bring to the country, says Marzolini.

He said the key error came when Harper had a chance to address the country on national television and used that moment to speak about the Liberal sponsorship scandal - something all voters were already aware of.

Harper is touring Canada this summer and putting forward his own policy ideas on issues such as health care, child care, and immigration.

Marzolini says that would be a welcome change from talking about scandal and same-sex marriage.

Harper sees the same-sex issue as a winner with ethnic voters but it's a loser with those he most needs to reach - women and urban and younger voters, Marzolini says.

And he says Pollara surveys have shown that even ethnic voters straying away from the Liberals have been more likely to turn to the NDP than the Tories.

"Every time Stephen Harper talks about same-sex marriage he's not just opposing that issue. He's campaigning for intolerance," Marzolini said.

"That's how Canadians see it."

The survey of 1,259 Canadians was conducted between July 4 and 8. It is considered accurate within 2.8 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

Otis wrote:

Hapday wrote:

Otis wrote:

His entire communications staff should fired for this photo alone. How the hell could they let him out door with that outfit?

BTW, nice Warren Kinsella's Web site is in your rotation. No, you aren't a Koolaid drinker... :roll: :roll:

I guess a Koolaid drinker like yourself is glad to see the Liberal friends in the media haven't taken the summer off.

Otis wrote: Truth be told.. I saw the pic in a thread on another board that I browse.

Hapday wrote:

Otis wrote: Truth be told.. I saw the pic in a thread on another board that I browse.

That Warren Kinsella site has a chat board?

If Bush is a moron, what's Martin?

By LORRIE GOLDSTEIN

It's always amusing when Canadian Liberals smugly look down their noses at American Republicans.

That's because although Liberals seem blissfully unaware of it, Prime Minister Paul Martin and the Grits are virtual carbon copies of U.S. President George Bush and the Republicans.

Not in the things they stand for but in who they are, how they operate and the lengths to which they're prepared to go to keep themselves in power.

Let's consider just a few of the many similarities.

I'm sure you'll able to come up with more of your own.


George Bush is a multimillionaire businessman born into an elite political family who claims to understand the problems of the average working American.

Paul Martin is a multimillionaire businessman born into an elite political family who claims to understand the problems of the average working Canadian.


George Bush owes much of his success in both the political and business arenas to his father, George Bush, a former American president with close ties to the political and corporate elite of his country.

Paul Martin owes much of his success in both the political and business arenas to his (late) father, Paul Martin, a former senior Canadian cabinet minister with close ties to the political and corporate elite of his country.


George Bush and the Republicans have become the dominant -- some would say dangerously dominant -- political force in America's two-party system, presiding over the executive branch, both houses of Congress, and, through the power of judicial appointment, the U.S. Supreme Court.

Paul Martin and the Liberals have become the dominant -- some would say dangerously dominant -- political force in Canada's four-party system, presiding over the executive branch, both houses of Parliament and, through the power of judicial appointment, the Supreme Court of Canada.


George Bush and the Republicans regularly accuse their Democratic opponents of hating America.

Paul Martin and the Liberals regularly accuse their Conservative opponents of hating Canada.


The Iraq war revealed how totally George Bush and the Republicans are hard-wired into America's corporate elite, who donate millions of dollars to the Republicans and receive multi-million dollar government contracts in return.

AdScam revealed how totally Paul Martin and the Liberals are hard-wired into Canada's corporate elite, who donate millions of dollars to the Liberals and receive multi-million dollar government contracts in return.


George Bush and the Republicans cynically and relentlessly shut down debate on the Iraq war by declaring you were either with them, or you were with the terrorists.

Paul Martin and the Liberals cynically and relentlessly shut down debate on the same-sex marriage law by declaring you were either with them, or you were with the bigots.


Any reasonable person knows George Bush should fire his deputy chief of staff, Karl Rove, over his role in the Valerie Plame affair, but that he won't and that he'll get away with it.

Any reasonable person knows Paul Martin should fire his chief of staff, Tim Murphy, over his role in the Gurmant Grewal affair, but that he won't and that he'll get away with it.


And yet despite their many similarities, Canadian Liberals never tire of insisting that American Republicans are ruthless, dangerous, corrupt, and that Bush is a moron.

Someone should explain the concept of irony to them.To say nothing of the definition of hypocrisy.

Liberals seeking support on banks

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OTTAWA - The Liberal government is seeking opposition support to move ahead with bank mergers, a sleeper issue that has remained in the backdrop of federal politics since the 1990s.

Finance Minister Ralph Goodale sent letters to his three opposition party critics last week asking them to move the debate forward as soon as possible.

With only a minority government and ever mindful of public opinion, the Liberals are wary of moving alone on the politically charged file without seeking consent from their foes.

The NDP received the letter Monday and immediately said it would respond by reiterating its traditional opposition to bank mergers.

"What (Goodale's) asking for is the impossible," said NDP finance critic Judy Wasylycia-Leis.

"(He's saying) `Give us support for bank mergers and then we'll proceed to set the guidelines.' That's backwards. . . That's not governing. He's the minister."

The letter, datemarked July 21, asks for a written submission from opposition parties on the merger of Canadian banks with more than $5 billion in equity.

Proponents of mergers argue that Canadian <financial> <institutions> will need to bundle up to compete against the biggest global players.

Opponents worry about the potential impact on services and the potential for price-gouging. Consumer anger at record bank profits and rising service charges in the late-90s helped stir opposition to the mergers.

The federal Bank Act is up for review next year and Goodale is expected to table a government policy paper on mergers before then. The Liberals have avoided a decision on the politically explosive issue since 1998.

At the time, then-finance minister Paul Martin rejected proposed combinations of the Royal Bank with Bank of Montreal, and TD Bank with CIBC.

Some government sources say the Liberals want the NDP and Bloc Quebecois' written support for mergers, so that they could move ahead without fear of getting hammered over the issue.

But Goodale spokesman John Embury said the minister is seeking two things from the letter: clarity and mature debate.

Opposition parties have offered contradictory statements on mergers in the past and Goodale wants to get their opinions in writing, Embury said.

The minister also wants the parties to commit to holding a responsible debate that won't spiral out of control and destabilize Parliament.

"(We're asking) `What's your position? Can you have a serious conversation? Or will you . . . hold the whole process hostage?"', Embury said.