Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

Liberals win minority government


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

Its never too late to seek justice.   Its also maddening how long it took in this case.  Sometimes, trying to run out the clock is a strategy by defendants who know they are going to lose.   

The old drag it out and those old folks will die routine.

Similar to the Federal government waiting till almost all the old merchant mariners from ww2 were dead before authorizing a pension for the few survivors.

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, gurn said:

The old drag it out and those old folks will die routine.

Similar to the Federal government waiting till almost all the old merchant mariners from ww2 were dead before authorizing a pension for the few survivors.

Those merchant marines at least were able to talk about their experiences in their fight for benefits.   Try being a nuclear test vet or vets who were used as guinea pigs for other tests.  

 

The despicable treatment of veterans has been a major problem going way back.  Even Canada. 

 

https://www.stripes.com/news/special-reports/conspiracy-of-silence-veterans-exposed-to-atomic-tests-wage-final-fight-1.585789

  • Vintage 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloc Quebecois, being themselves:

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/politics/trudeau-slams-blanchet-for-pandering-to-worst-elements-with-comments-about-new-minister/ar-BB1cN46B?ocid=msedgntp

 

"

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-Francois Blanchet is playing “dangerous games around intolerance and hate” following comments Blanchet made about the new transport minister.

Read more: Bloc takes aim at new transport minister over ‘Islamic movement’ ties

The Bloc leader took aim at the new Transport Minister Omar Alghabra saying that “questions arise” from the minister’s former role as head of the Canadian Arab Federation, which he held until 2006.

"The Bloc leader refuses to accuse anyone, but questions are raised about the proximity of the new transport minister, Omar Alghabra, to the political Islamic movement that he was a leader of for many years," a Wednesday press release from the Bloc Québécois said in French.

Video: Trudeau shuffles cabinet, new ministers sworn-in during virtual ceremony

Trudeau fired back at Blanchet over the insinuations, implying that the leader is contributing to hateful rhetoric that can result in incidents like the riots seen in the U.S. Capitol last week.

"I was absolutely floored to see a federal party leader use insinuations and carefully coded questions, particularly this week when we just lived through last week, what happens when leaders don't take care of the words they do and play these dangerous games around intolerance and hate,” Trudeau said.

He added that these individuals “of course stand there innocently and say, 'Oh, I was just asking questions.'”

“That's ridiculous. That kind of political pandering to the worst elements, and to fears and anxieties, has no place in Canada and all of us need to stand up strongly to push back against that anywhere it happens in this country,” Trudeau said.

In a Wednesday statement sent to The Canadian Press, a spokesperson for the Bloc Quebecois said the party is simply raising questions about the minister’s past.

“It’s really questions about his past and also the separation of church and state, which is a profound value for the Bloc,” said spokesman Julien Coulombe-Bonnafous.

“We don’t want to raise any accusations, because I don’t think there’s that much.”

The Bloc Quebcois told Global News on Friday that they had nothing to add to this statement, aside from to note that it is their job to ask questions – and that’s all they are doing in this instance, according to Coulombe-Bonnafous.

Alghabra, meanwhile, has pushed back on the insinuations.

“Every elected official is normally judged on their positions, statements and actions. Mine have been very clear and consistent from the beginning. I'm curious why Mr. Blanchet is relying on unsubstantiated [innuendo] rather than my actual track record,” he wrote in a statement sent to Global News on Friday.

Alghabra added that Blanchet made a "choice" to use “dangerous” rhetoric.

“I believe that Quebecers and all Canadians will make the appropriate judgment on his regrettable political choices,” Alghabra said.

“As for me, I have just begun an important mandate for all Canadians.”

Link to post
Share on other sites

From above

"

7 minutes ago, gurn said:

“It’s really questions about his past and also the separation of church and state, which is a profound value for the Bloc,” said spokesman Julien Coulombe-Bonnafous.

They are all for the separation of church and state, unless that would annoy the Catholics.

Also if you are going to say something, just say it

No more weasel wording please.

"The Bloc leader refuses to accuse anyone, but questions are raised about the proximity of the new transport minister, Omar Alghabra, to the political Islamic movement that he was a leader of for many years," a Wednesday press release from the Bloc Québécois said in French."

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

FuNkT0iD ~ Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead... by FuNkT0iD | Mixcloud

 

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/other/lynn-beyak-dodges-calls-for-her-removal-by-retiring-from-the-senate/ar-BB1d78nF?li=AAggFp5

 

Quote

 

Lynn Beyak, a senator who known for holding and preaching racist beliefs about Indigenous people, is resigning from the Red Chamber.

This happens just as Upper house members were considering a motion from Independent Sen. Mary Jane McCallum that sought to permanently remove Beyak from the upper house.

 

“A modern Senate is no place for racism to exist,” said McCallum, a residential school survivor. “Beyak’s actions have sown division in our society. By allowing her to remain in a position with the inherent title of ‘Honourable’ while such misdeeds have been appropriated is irresponsible and sets a poor example that is contrary to how Parliamentarians expect themselves and each other to act.”

Beyak is resigning, three years before her mandatory retirement date; if she were to be forcibly removed then her life-time pension would be cut.

And because she has resigned, she gets to keep her pension.

"As per the Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act, parliamentarians who have six or more years of pensionable service are entitled to receive a pension. Sen. Beyak will receive a pension upon retirement from the Senate," a spokesperson for the Senate's internal economy, budget and administration (CIBA) committee said in a statement.

"The act does not allow for a pension to be stripped in the case of a resignation."

During her time on the senate, Beyak was suspended twice due to inflammatory and insensitive comments she made about Indigenous people. For example, in March 2017 Beyak gave a speech to the senate in which she described Residential School instructors and clergy – many of whom were abusers and molesters – as “well-intentioned.” She also condemned the Truth and Reconciliation Committee (TRC) report because it didn’t focus on the good things about Residential schools.

According to the TRC, at least 3,201 children died in Residential Schools, but the actual number is probably much closer to 6,000.

Beyak’s most daring tirade came in the form of letters posted onto her tax-payer-funded website in which she described Indigenous people as lazy, opportunistic, pampered and inept. She then refused to remove the letters at the request of then-conservative leader Andrew Scheer.

While facing suspension, Beyak apologized for her letters. However, after announcing her retirement earlier this week, she revealed in an absolute shocker which surprised no one that she was not sorry about her comments/beliefs.

"Some have criticized me for stating that the good, as well as the bad, of residential schools should be recognized. I stand by that statement. Others have criticized me for stating that the Truth and Reconciliation report was not as balanced as it should be. I stand by that statement as well," Beyak said in the press release.

 

To be clear, I would much prefer this cow be removed and therefore lose her pension, but most importantly, she's gone....

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
6 minutes ago, bishopshodan said:

I heard Canada is heating up at 2x the speed of most countries.

Environment and Climate change Canada says it's effectively irreversible too.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, BoKnows said:

Environment and Climate change Canada says it's effectively irreversible too.

This is the really frustrating part...

 

Scientists have been telling us for 20 years that the damage we were doing was going to be irreversible.....now in 2021, people are somehow surprised...."What? You mean there's nothing we can do?" <_<

  • Hydration 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate that this is an opinion piece.  But it has the relevant information in it.

 

Turns out the "we Scandal" was in fact not a scandal in anything but optics after all

 

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2020/11/03/forensic-analysis-exonerates-we-charity-and-the-canadian-government.html?fbclid=IwAR1uC6bjMA1Tw1UQ3ycsflKdXm3oPXMZWjkXyCb5b6zYZPUB5jr8LBCuksM

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

I hate that this is an opinion piece.  But it has the relevant information in it.

 

Turns out the "we Scandal" was in fact not a scandal in anything but optics after all

 

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2020/11/03/forensic-analysis-exonerates-we-charity-and-the-canadian-government.html?fbclid=IwAR1uC6bjMA1Tw1UQ3ycsflKdXm3oPXMZWjkXyCb5b6zYZPUB5jr8LBCuksM

You mean to say the whole thing was politicized and overblown?! I can't believe it!

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Warhippy said:

I hate that this is an opinion piece.  But it has the relevant information in it.

 

Turns out the "we Scandal" was in fact not a scandal in anything but optics after all

 

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2020/11/03/forensic-analysis-exonerates-we-charity-and-the-canadian-government.html?fbclid=IwAR1uC6bjMA1Tw1UQ3ycsflKdXm3oPXMZWjkXyCb5b6zYZPUB5jr8LBCuksM

I can just imagine what a certain couple of banned posters would have to say about thus.  But, they are banned, so 

Nelson_Ha-Ha.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Warhippy said:

I hate that this is an opinion piece.  But it has the relevant information in it.

 

Turns out the "we Scandal" was in fact not a scandal in anything but optics after all

 

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2020/11/03/forensic-analysis-exonerates-we-charity-and-the-canadian-government.html?fbclid=IwAR1uC6bjMA1Tw1UQ3ycsflKdXm3oPXMZWjkXyCb5b6zYZPUB5jr8LBCuksM

Yeah, that sure is an in depth analysis and presents a good analytic breakdown of over 5000 pages of government documents. I've read movie reviews that are longer.

 

lol Jebus

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, wiseupsucker said:

Yeah, that sure is an in depth analysis and presents a good analytic breakdown of over 5000 pages of government documents. I've read movie reviews that are longer.

 

lol Jebus

The relevant information.

 

Care to post a rebuttal or?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

The relevant information.

 

Care to post a rebuttal or?

What do you want? Post a crappy blurb about a "forensic analysis" that exonerates the Canadian government and WE that is more like a movie synopsis rather than breaking down more relevant points. There is a crap ton of information out there where one can do their own research and with their own critical thinking can come up with their own opinions on the matter.

 

It is what you originally said...An opinion piece, and kind of a fluffy one at that

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, wiseupsucker said:

What do you want? Post a crappy blurb about a "forensic analysis" that exonerates the Canadian government and WE that is more like a movie synopsis rather than breaking down more relevant points. There is a crap ton of information out there where one can do their own research and with their own critical thinking can come up with their own opinions on the matter.

 

It is what you originally said...An opinion piece, and kind of a fluffy one at that

OK fine.  I can post the over 5800 pieces of information derived by independent analysis that literally says the same thing and you can then just claim it is fake news, sympathy pieces or biased and we can carry on

 

or we can just outright admit here and now that nothing short of clear and decisive condemnation of the liberal party and their subsequent removal regardless of the evidence will satisfy you.

 

So what will it be?

 

All of the information that essentially clears the air on the scandal instead of "their own opinions on the matter" based on actual fact

 

or

 

undemocratic removal of a party based on your feelings and drawn opinion over the actual facts as presented and derived by independent analysis.

 

Whatcha gonna call it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

OK fine.  I can post the over 5800 pieces of information derived by independent analysis that literally says the same thing and you can then just claim it is fake news, sympathy pieces or biased and we can carry on

 

or we can just outright admit here and now that nothing short of clear and decisive condemnation of the liberal party and their subsequent removal regardless of the evidence will satisfy you.

 

So what will it be?

 

All of the information that essentially clears the air on the scandal instead of "their own opinions on the matter" based on actual fact

 

or

 

undemocratic removal of a party based on your feelings and drawn opinion over the actual facts as presented and derived by independent analysis.

 

Whatcha gonna call it?

Woa dude, I hit a nerve here

 

Did I say fake news? Nope. No sir I didn't. I said there is a ton of information, that has been fleshed out already, where one can come up with their own opinion. YOU are getting really freaky and defensive. I DID NOT say clear and decisive condemnation of the Liberal party and their subsequent removal will satisfy me, jesus christ WTF?

 

I DID say that based on a opinion fluff article that they have to do a better job of "forensic analysis" in presenting evidence that exonerates the Trudeau government and We charity especially since YOU yourself admitted it's an opinion piece.

 

And what the everloving **** are you talking about - and show me the DIRECT quotes or evidence where I once implied that I ever said anything about me supporting the undemocratic removal of the Trudeau Liberals? Like what the serious ****?

 

Jesus christ dude, why so triggered?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually upon further reflection i'm going to leave it at this.

 

I am a Liberal but I clearly don't support this incarnation of this Liberal party. I have never voted conservative

 

I am open to all sorts of information out there, but to me(and I am biased-much like you are to be fair) I can't say that the article you provided does enough to sway my opinion.

 

I think it does a poor job

 

And that is that

  • Hydration 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...