Further to my previous post, it seems more than a coincidence that the two most recent stories to grace the top spot on National Newswatch for a day seem to link back to individuals involved with Michael Ignatieff.
As noted by a commenter at Joanne's blog Blue Like You, Attaran and Ignatieff can be linked back to the Carr Center at Harvard.
And now today's top story at National Newswatch links to another individual with ties to Ignatieff, Wesley Wark, of the Munk Center.
What is most disturbing is that the two individuals claim to have seen uncensored versions of security documents. Perhaps it is just a coincidence, but if I were a member of the RCMP I think I would be questioning both individuals and demanding how and who allowed them to see said documents.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Attaran And Canadian Press Prove Government Wise Not To Release Sensitive Documents
National Newswatch, the new voice of the Liberal Party of Canada, continues to inadvertently show why the government has worries about releasing military documents that are sensitive to national security.
Let's start with the Attaran story:
"If the allegation is true, such actions would constitute a war crime, said University of Ottawa law professor Amir Attaran, who has been digging deep into the issue and told CBC News he has seen uncensored versions of government documents released last year.
"If these documents were released [in full], what they will show is that Canada partnered deliberately with the torturers in Afghanistan for the interrogation of detainees," he said."
So exactly how was Attaran able to see uncensored documents? A university professor has connections to view documents regarding the government and military? More importantly, who passed along the uncensored documents?
Next is the Canadian Press, another bastion of Conservative hating propaganda:
"A copy of the document was obtained by The Canadian Press.
Military police “were involved in that, but they weren't necessarily involved in interviewing or interrogation related issues; that would be (censored) or some other parade that had special training in interrogation.”
Sources familiar with the unedited version say the blanked-out references are to CSIS.
Intelligence expert Wesley Wark says the revelations are disturbing, partly because CSIS would have had no specialized knowledge of how to elicit information from Afghan prisoners.
“I find that stunning,” said Mr. Wark, a historian at the University of Toronto."
OK, so who exactly are the sources? And again, how is it that a university historian is able to see such documents uncensored. Both of the above noted professors have ties to Michael Ignatieff, Attaran at the Carr centre and Wark at the Munk Cente (Professor Wesley K. Wark, Munk Centre for International Studies, University of Toronto):
"In 2005, Ignatieff was appointed a senior fellow at the University of Toronto’s Munk Centre for International Studies. Prior to that, he served as Director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard University for five years."
Perhaps in the next session of question period, the PM might point out to Ignatieff that the reason the government is apprehensive about releasing sensitive documents is that professors with Liberal ties are blabbing about in the the media the next day.
Let's start with the Attaran story:
"If the allegation is true, such actions would constitute a war crime, said University of Ottawa law professor Amir Attaran, who has been digging deep into the issue and told CBC News he has seen uncensored versions of government documents released last year.
"If these documents were released [in full], what they will show is that Canada partnered deliberately with the torturers in Afghanistan for the interrogation of detainees," he said."
So exactly how was Attaran able to see uncensored documents? A university professor has connections to view documents regarding the government and military? More importantly, who passed along the uncensored documents?
Next is the Canadian Press, another bastion of Conservative hating propaganda:
"A copy of the document was obtained by The Canadian Press.
Military police “were involved in that, but they weren't necessarily involved in interviewing or interrogation related issues; that would be (censored) or some other parade that had special training in interrogation.”
Sources familiar with the unedited version say the blanked-out references are to CSIS.
Intelligence expert Wesley Wark says the revelations are disturbing, partly because CSIS would have had no specialized knowledge of how to elicit information from Afghan prisoners.
“I find that stunning,” said Mr. Wark, a historian at the University of Toronto."
OK, so who exactly are the sources? And again, how is it that a university historian is able to see such documents uncensored. Both of the above noted professors have ties to Michael Ignatieff, Attaran at the Carr centre and Wark at the Munk Cente (Professor Wesley K. Wark, Munk Centre for International Studies, University of Toronto):
"In 2005, Ignatieff was appointed a senior fellow at the University of Toronto’s Munk Centre for International Studies. Prior to that, he served as Director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard University for five years."
Perhaps in the next session of question period, the PM might point out to Ignatieff that the reason the government is apprehensive about releasing sensitive documents is that professors with Liberal ties are blabbing about in the the media the next day.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Proof Kevin Page Is An Idiot
"It's a good thing most Canadians are fixated on the Vancouver Olympics right now.
Otherwise we'd have to think about Canada's horrendous budgetary deficit.
Then along comes Kevin Page and wakes us up in the midst of our Olympic euphoria.
Page, Canada's parliamentary budget chief, is predicting a deficit crisis in Canada as our population ages.
Forget today's deficit. With rising health care and social security costs we're looking at astronomical numbers facing us.
His message? Without a strong plan including immediate spending cuts and massive hikes in taxes, we're in deep doo doo.
The Fiscal Sustainability Report released Thursday by Page says without action now -- not 10 years from now -- the deficit will rise to 100% of GDP by 2050-51 from 33.8% of GDP in 2013-14. And if left unchecked, Canada could be running an annual deficit of four times the size of the economy by 2084-85, the report says."
Wow. This guy has some kind of supernatural ability to see 40 years into the future. He must know in his crystal ball what interest rates will be for that period. Imagine being able to predict economic growth 40 years into the future. Or Canada's GDP 40 years into the future. He also apparently knows what will be in the Canada Pension Plan fund, the rates of unemployment for the next 40 years, etc.
2084-2085? Come on, this guy has jumped the shark so bad from being useful and doing his job to being a partisan hack it's beyond the funny stage. Perhaps he hasn't noticed that most economists have upgraded the prospects for Canada's economy and growth this year, which already alters their numbers put out just months ago.
Otherwise we'd have to think about Canada's horrendous budgetary deficit.
Then along comes Kevin Page and wakes us up in the midst of our Olympic euphoria.
Page, Canada's parliamentary budget chief, is predicting a deficit crisis in Canada as our population ages.
Forget today's deficit. With rising health care and social security costs we're looking at astronomical numbers facing us.
His message? Without a strong plan including immediate spending cuts and massive hikes in taxes, we're in deep doo doo.
The Fiscal Sustainability Report released Thursday by Page says without action now -- not 10 years from now -- the deficit will rise to 100% of GDP by 2050-51 from 33.8% of GDP in 2013-14. And if left unchecked, Canada could be running an annual deficit of four times the size of the economy by 2084-85, the report says."
Wow. This guy has some kind of supernatural ability to see 40 years into the future. He must know in his crystal ball what interest rates will be for that period. Imagine being able to predict economic growth 40 years into the future. Or Canada's GDP 40 years into the future. He also apparently knows what will be in the Canada Pension Plan fund, the rates of unemployment for the next 40 years, etc.
2084-2085? Come on, this guy has jumped the shark so bad from being useful and doing his job to being a partisan hack it's beyond the funny stage. Perhaps he hasn't noticed that most economists have upgraded the prospects for Canada's economy and growth this year, which already alters their numbers put out just months ago.
Friday, February 19, 2010
Jack Layton: Canada's Greatest Hypocrite!
So Jack Layton is demanding the PM cancel the upcoming corporate tax cuts and instead spend that money money on aboriginals and the homeless. Says it's the right way to go. One problem Jack, and I'll put it on the record now as I'm sure nobody in the msm will bother to bring it up.
Those same corporate tax cuts you demand be rescinded are the same ones you had no problem passing through in your quest to get you and your wife a cabinet seat and limo:
"Layton referred tangentially to the choice we face when explaining at the press conference Monday why he abandoned his demand that corporate tax cuts be reversed in order to achieve a coalition with Liberal leader Stephane Dion and Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe.
"It's actually done with the notion that people who have had differences of opinion, sometimes quite profound, might be able to find issues and avenues and strategies and ways forward together in difficult circumstances," he said."
So be my guess Mr. Layton, spin away!!!
Those same corporate tax cuts you demand be rescinded are the same ones you had no problem passing through in your quest to get you and your wife a cabinet seat and limo:
"Layton referred tangentially to the choice we face when explaining at the press conference Monday why he abandoned his demand that corporate tax cuts be reversed in order to achieve a coalition with Liberal leader Stephane Dion and Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe.
"It's actually done with the notion that people who have had differences of opinion, sometimes quite profound, might be able to find issues and avenues and strategies and ways forward together in difficult circumstances," he said."
So be my guess Mr. Layton, spin away!!!
Thursday, February 18, 2010
IS Ekos Head Frank Graves Part Of The Coalition Pact?
It seems the CBC and Ekos release new polls almost daily, with Liberal puppet Jane Taber and Ekos head Frank Graves giving us a rundown on what the polling data means. Of course Graves always manages to put the pro-Liberal, anti-Conservative spin on things, but something he said in his latest explanation of polling data was quite interesting:
"Mr. Graves says it is now apparent that no political party “can currently produce anything approaching a legitimate mandate to govern the country.”
The only way through this, he says, is for voters to start looking at “options like coalitions if they want to avoid fractious minority rule.”
Hmmm. Is this the newest talking point for the Bloc-NDP-Liberal coalition? We've been seeing tell-tale signs in the recent past that indicates the coalition is alive and well. And now Frank Graves seems to be telling us we should be embracing the thought of a coalition as it would avoid a minority Parliament.
And surely Graves knows that a minority government is legitimate. Perhaps he hasn't noticed the Conservatives under PM Stephen Harper have been in power since January 2006. Come to think of it, that's as long as some of Chretien's MAJORITY Liberal governments. The only blip being the 2008 election, where the Conservatives increased their seat count. it's also odd he says we should be looking at a coalition government, while not mentioning having an election to get that exact result.
The thing is I think the only minority Parliament Graves, Taber, Travers and the other useful Liberal media and pollsters don't want is one led by Stephen Harper. If Ignatieff was leading the polls I'm sure a minority government wouldn't be so hard to accept for the usual culprits. Not to mention the fact Liberals would throw their coalition partners to the curb if they thought they weren't needed.
"Mr. Graves says it is now apparent that no political party “can currently produce anything approaching a legitimate mandate to govern the country.”
The only way through this, he says, is for voters to start looking at “options like coalitions if they want to avoid fractious minority rule.”
Hmmm. Is this the newest talking point for the Bloc-NDP-Liberal coalition? We've been seeing tell-tale signs in the recent past that indicates the coalition is alive and well. And now Frank Graves seems to be telling us we should be embracing the thought of a coalition as it would avoid a minority Parliament.
And surely Graves knows that a minority government is legitimate. Perhaps he hasn't noticed the Conservatives under PM Stephen Harper have been in power since January 2006. Come to think of it, that's as long as some of Chretien's MAJORITY Liberal governments. The only blip being the 2008 election, where the Conservatives increased their seat count. it's also odd he says we should be looking at a coalition government, while not mentioning having an election to get that exact result.
The thing is I think the only minority Parliament Graves, Taber, Travers and the other useful Liberal media and pollsters don't want is one led by Stephen Harper. If Ignatieff was leading the polls I'm sure a minority government wouldn't be so hard to accept for the usual culprits. Not to mention the fact Liberals would throw their coalition partners to the curb if they thought they weren't needed.
Monday, February 15, 2010
The Olympics-A Great Time To Be Canadian, Unless You work For The CBC
So far the Olympics have been fantastic, The opening ceremony was awe inspiring. Canada has had a decent showing in medal wins so far, including the first ever gold won on Canadian soil by a Canadian athlete. People viewing the Olympics via TV and the net see the scenic beauty that is Vancouver and British Columbia.
And the CBC seems to be doing everything within it's power, not to mention billion dollar budget from Canadian taxpayers, to be the downer of the party. Much of CBC's coverage has been pathetic.
1. Not enough french.
2. Too many white people.
3. Not enough natives.
4. Too much money spent on athletes.
5. Not enough money spent on athletes.
6. PM playiong partisan games paying for own tickets.
7. Michael Ignatieff not playing partisan games paying for own tickets.
8. Canada's fault for death in luge.
9. Canadian luge team to blame for death by hogging practice time.
10. Donavan Bailey not invited to join opening ceremony.
The list goes on. If anybody at the CBC reads this, you can see why the writing is on the wall for your public funding to be pulled. Giving you taxpayer dollars is like funding TMZ. Worthless gossip nobody cares about.
And the CBC seems to be doing everything within it's power, not to mention billion dollar budget from Canadian taxpayers, to be the downer of the party. Much of CBC's coverage has been pathetic.
1. Not enough french.
2. Too many white people.
3. Not enough natives.
4. Too much money spent on athletes.
5. Not enough money spent on athletes.
6. PM playiong partisan games paying for own tickets.
7. Michael Ignatieff not playing partisan games paying for own tickets.
8. Canada's fault for death in luge.
9. Canadian luge team to blame for death by hogging practice time.
10. Donavan Bailey not invited to join opening ceremony.
The list goes on. If anybody at the CBC reads this, you can see why the writing is on the wall for your public funding to be pulled. Giving you taxpayer dollars is like funding TMZ. Worthless gossip nobody cares about.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
A Challenge To TD Bank CEO Ed Clark
In light of the fact you seem to be kowtowing the Liberal agenda of raising taxes, along with your TD co-horts, let's see how much skin you really have in the game. Here is my challenge to you Mr. Clark.
I'm prepared to post on my blog or a site of your choice any of my personal tax returns for the past six years, with all personal privacy information omitted. In return, you also post one of your personal tax returns in similar fashion from one of the past six years.
If you pay your fair share of taxes based on income you should have no issue in posting said information. I await your response.
I'm prepared to post on my blog or a site of your choice any of my personal tax returns for the past six years, with all personal privacy information omitted. In return, you also post one of your personal tax returns in similar fashion from one of the past six years.
If you pay your fair share of taxes based on income you should have no issue in posting said information. I await your response.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)