Sunday, July 16, 2017

Andre Duguay Julie Ali You are a total airhead. It's leftist wingnuts like you who will also pay for his muslim sensitivities. You just don't know it yet.--------Julie Ali · University of Alberta Andre Duguay You might at least be accurate. I am a Wildrose supporter dear. See my blog: Now go ahead and call me a rightist wingnut. Just to provide us with the same level of poor discourse that you seem adept at.----

Commenting is getting lively on this newspaper article but I have to focus on working on the portfolio stuff so this is the last post I will do; it's troubling that folks lack insight into their own bias and lack of perspective but there you go.

The lack of insight into the anti-democratic ways of Team Harper are especially astonishing. Folks seem to think just because he has the Conservative Brand he's a fiscal wizard. Not.

There is also selective memory over the submarine fiasco that continues to this very day:

Canada may buy nuclear submarines

Harper government considers mothballing 4 British-made diesel subs

By Greg Weston, CBC News Posted: Oct 27, 2011 9:55 PM ET Last Updated: Oct 28, 2011 7:25 AM ET
The National
Scrapping Canada's subs
00:00 02:07
Scrapping Canada's subs 2:07







Related Stories

CBC News has learned the Harper government is considering buying nuclear submarines to replace its problem-plagued fleet of diesel-powered subs, all of which are currently awash in red ink and out of service for major repairs.
The four second-hand subs Jean Chrétien’s Liberal government bought from the British navy in 1998 for $750 million were portrayed at the time as the military bargain of the century.
Instead, they have spent almost all of their time in naval repair yards, submerging Canadian taxpayers in an ocean of bills now totalling more than $1 billion and counting.
One of the subs, HMCS Chicoutimi, has been in active service of the Royal Canadian Navy exactly two days in the 13 years since it was purchased from the Brits.
The Chicoutimi caught fire on its maiden voyage from the U.K. to Canada, killing one sailor and injuring a number of others.
It has been in the repair shop ever since, and isn’t expected back in service for at least another two years and $400 million more in repairs and retrofits.
'In an ideal world, I know nuclear subs are what's needed under deep water, deep ice.'—Defence Minister Peter MacKay
National Defence said this week that one of the subs, the Victoria, could be back in service in 2012.
The other three would remain out of service until at least 2013. One may not be out of the repair shop until 2016.
By that time, the submarines will have cost taxpayers an estimated $3 billion, almost enough to have bought all new subs in the first place.
But the real problem is that by the time the whole fleet is in active service for the first time in 2016, the submarines will already be almost 30 years old with only perhaps 10 years of life left in them.
High-ranking sources tell CBC News the government is actively considering cutting its losses on the dud subs, and mothballing some if not all of them.


Should Canada buy nuclear subs? Take our survey.
Defence Minister Peter MacKay is hinting they might be replaced with nuclear submarines that could patrol under the Arctic ice, something the existing diesel-electric subs cannot do.
Outside the Commons this week, MacKay told CBC News the government is anxious to have its submarine fleet fully operational as soon as possible, providing a "very important capability for the Canadian Forces."
But asked whether the government might look at other subs, MacKay said: "Well there was a position taken some time ago to go with diesel-electric.
"But you know, in an ideal world, I know nuclear subs are what's needed under deep water, deep ice."

Nuclear submarines $3B each

Nuclear submarines are hugely expensive — they start around $3 billion apiece — and it is unclear where the Harper government would find that kind of money, much less how it could justify such an enormous expenditure during a period of supposed austerity.
The last time a Canadian government seriously considered nuclear subs was in the late 1980s before then prime minister Brian Mulroney sank the whole program amid a public uproar.
A decade later, the Chrétien government bought the four used diesel subs from the British navy in large part because it was seen as such a huge bargain.
Senator Art Eggleton, who was Liberal defence minister at the time, told CBC News Thursday that his government gave "absolutely no consideration" to buying nuclear submarines, although some inside the navy were pushing for them.
"We were coming out of a period of budget-cutting and nuclear submarines would have been far too expensive."
Instead, the British navy was offering a deal Eggleton said the Canadian military couldn’t refuse — the four diesel-electric submarines mothballed after only two years in service when the Royal Navy switched to nuclear subs.
"We got them at a quarter of the cost it would have cost to build new ones," Eggleton says. "We wouldn’t have had the money to build new ones."
He concedes the Liberal government gave serious consideration to not having submarines at all.
"It was either buy these subs, or get out of the submarine business altogether."

'It makes no difference to our security'

Some defence critics think that’s exactly what the current Conservative government should be considering — scrapping the problem-plagued diesel-electric fleet rather than throwing what they see as good money after bad.
"When you look at the cost of trying to get these things seaworthy again, it just doesn’t make sense," said Steven Staples, president of the Rideau Institute on defence issues.
The Harper government has just awarded a $25-billion contract to build a new fleet of Canadian destroyers and frigates, and Staples says that should be enough.
"Once you are in a hole, the first thing that you should do is stop digging, so I think that it is time to say goodbye to the submarines right now and focus on the new surface fleet."
Staples says the history of the diesel subs suggests Canada could get by without them.

"The fact that all four submarines are sitting tied up at a dry dock right now doesn’t mean that Canada is in any great danger. It makes no difference to our security

Harper, Serial Abuser of Power: The Evidence Compiled

The Tyee's full, updated list of 70 Harper government assaults on democracy and the law.

By David Beers and Tyee Staff and Contributors 10 Aug 2015 |
David Beers is founding editor of The Tyee. He was assisted in compiling and writing this list by friends and readers of The Tyee.
Stephen Harper speakingCanada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper: His government has piled up dozens of abuses of ethics and the law since coming to power in 2006. Photo: Flickr/Stephen Harper.
Stephen Harper and his Conservatives have racked up dozens of serious abuses of power since forming government in 2006. From scams to smears, monkey-wrenching opponents to intimidating public servants like an Orwellian gorilla, some offences are criminal, others just offend human decency.
Last week we published 59 examples in two parts, and asked our readers to suggest any we may have missed. Among the many suggestions we gratefully received, we concluded that 11 more meet the criteria for "abuses of power." Today we compile all 70 items into one omnibus of abuse by the Stephen Harper government.
This list is now also available as a tablet-friendly pdf which you can download for free here. Thanks, once more, to friends of The Tyee who help with this list.
This section includes examples of willful misgoverning by the PM and his team, 31 times they have lied, flouted rules and stymied democracy to achieve political and ideological ends.

The Tyee is supported by readers like you

PMO Tied to Senate Hush Money Scandal
An RCMP affidavit reported widespread involvement by PMO staffers in a secret payment to Senator Mike Duffy to try and make a political problem go away. The Senate expenses scandal brought on allegations of a cover-up, a breach of the public trust, and a whitewashing of a Senate report. The PMO was found to have hand in the altering of a damning Deloitte audit.
Harper Found in Contempt of Parliament
For refusing to disclose information on the costing of programs to Parliament, which Parliament was entitled to receive, the Harper government became the first in Canadian history to be found in contempt of Parliament.
Against Court Order, Refusal to Share Budget Info
Even though it lost a court case and was ordered to comply, the Harper government nevertheless refused to share 170 times reasons and impacts for cuts with Canada's independent budget watchdog, mocking Parliament's right to control the public purse.
Conservative Cabinet Staffers Granted Immunity from Testimony
A PMO edict absolved political staffers from ever having to testify before parliamentary committees.
Conservatives Falsify Reports and Documents
Among documents deliberately altered in the writing or the quoting by the government: CIDA document by Bev Oda's office on Kairos; the Senate Committee Report on the Duffy affair; a report by former auditor general Sheila Fraser on financial management.
Repeated Duplicity in Afghan Detainees Controversy
Among the abuses: Parliament was misled and denied documents. An inquiry was shut down. Tories attempted to discredit diplomat Richard Colvin whose testimony diverted from the government's line.
Repeated Duplicity on Costing of F-35 Fighter Jets
An auditor general's report revealed serial deceptive practices used by the Conservatives in misleading the public and Parliament on the projected cost of the fighter jets.
Harper Minister Lies, Blames Statistics Canada for Killing Long Form Census
Under fire for Conservatives killing the long form census, Industry Minister Tony Clement falsely stated that StatsCan backed the idea and assured the voluntary substitute would yield valid statistical data. Neither was true, outraged StatsCan sources confirmed.
Conservative MP Admits He Lied to Parliament
As opposition members claimed the Harper government was out to rig election rules in its favour, Conservative MP Brad Butt rose in the House of Commons to say why the bill was needed -- all the voter fraud he had personally witnessed. Weeks later he rose again to say his statements were false. Delivering his strained apology, he failed to explain why he lied in the first place.
Conservative House Leader Admits to Mockery of Question Period
Criticized far and wide for farcical answers in question period, Paul Calandra, parliamentary secretary to Harper, made a tearful apology for abuse of the democratic process.
Harper Maligns the Supreme Court Chief Justice
The Prime Minister took the unprecedented step of alleging inappropriate conduct by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin. Facts undermined the credibility of the PM's position.
Conservatives Engage in Abuse of Process with Omnibus Bills
Harper's party pushed legislation through Parliament via omnibus bills, the scale of which Parliament had never seen. Such bills are widely condemnedas an abuse of the democratic process, because they blend and bury so many controversial laws within one dense package. Harper himself once railed against them, and his born again love for them made his own MPs queasy. Referencing such bills, former auditor general Sheila Fraser said that "Parliament has become so undermined that it is almost unable to do the job that people expect of it."
image atom
'Parliament has become so undermined that it is almost unable to do the job that people expect of it.' Former auditor general Sheila Fraser on Harper's omnibus bills.
Harperites Deliberately Sabotage, Stymie Committee System
Conservatives used tactics such as barring witnesses, closure, time limitations, and in camera sessions to an extent rarely, if ever, witnessed in Canada. In their early days in power, top Conservatives prepared a handbookinstructing committee chairpersons how to obstruct proceedings.
Harper's Own MPs Protest Muzzling
In a caucus known for his tight discipline, in 2014 some members finally rose up to contest being censored at question period by the Prime Minister's Office. Former Conservative backbencher Brent Rathgeber turned independent and published a book, Irresponsible Government, decrying anti-democratic practices.
Conservative Bill Rewrites History to Protect Mounties from Potential Criminal Charges
To protect the RCMP, the government retroactively made an old bill come into force before it was passed by Parliament.
Harper Minister Caught in Advertising Scam with Public Funds
The Globe and Mail revealed that Harper's chosen Minister for Democratic Reform Pierre Poilievre commissioned a team of public servants for overtime work on a Sunday to film him glad-handing constituents. The vanity video on the taxpayer dime was to promote the government's benefits for families.
Corrupt Conservative Cronies
The Senate scandal is just the latest eruption of crony corruption in Harperite ranks. Take Bruce Carson. He was a convicted fraudster before Harper made him a key advisor in the PMO. There, Carson was lobbied for money for a new University of Calgary eco-think tank. He then left the PMO to run the same think tank, converting it to an oil industry booster with a $15-million grant from the Harper government. The complex saga added one more criminal charge to others Carson faces for allegedly illegally working his connections with the Harper government.
Access to Information System Impeded
Many new roadblocks have been put up by the Harper Conservatives. Former Information Commissioner Robert Marleau concluded that having obtained absolute power, the prime minister "has absolutely abused that power to the maximum."
The Silencing of the Public Service
The PMO took an unprecedented step in instituting a system wherein the bureaucracy has all its communications vetted by the political nerve centre. The policy contribution role of the public service is significantly reduced. Complaints from insiders allege that the Privy Council office has become increasingly politicized.
Loyalty Oaths Imposed on Public Servants
Archivists and librarians were made to swear strict oaths of allegiance and were hit with restrictions on freedom of speech that editorialists of the right and left described as chilling.
image atom
Integrity Commissioner Christiane Ouimet sat on more than 200 whistleblower files before quitting. Her style? 'Gross mismanagement,' concluded the auditor general.
Harper Government Sued by Justice Department Whistleblower
Time and again the Harper government proposes bills that end up being shot down by the courts, prompting critics to say such legislation is more about making political statements than lasting policy. The wasted efforts bothered senior justice department lawyer Edgar Schmidt so much he finally sued the government for breaking the law by inadequately evaluating whether proposed bills violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He was promptly suspended without pay.
Conservatives Block Accreditation for Opposition MPs
In another example of partisanship taken to new heights, the PMO blockedopposition members from being accredited for international environment conferences and from visiting military bases.
Tactic Borrowed from North Korea's Dear Leader
Ostensibly neutral public servants were used as stooges, falsely posing as new citizens in a staged Citizenship Renewal public relations exercise by the Immigration Department. Media critics had a field day comparing the charade to practices undertaken by North Korean dictators.
Clampdown on Freedom of Speech of Diplomatic Corps
Ottawa's diplomats must get all communications approved from Conservative political operatives. Under Harper, the country's ambassadors are hardly heard from any more. In a recent speech, former United Nations ambassador Stephen Lewis said our political culture under the Conservatives has descended into "a nadir of indignity."
Aquatic Science Libraries Decimated
The Harper government's downsizing of federal libraries included sudden closing of seven world famous Department of Fisheries and Oceans archives. A leaked memo revealed the destruction and consolidation would save less than half a million dollars. Scientist patrons of the libraries, who witnessed chaotic chucking of rare literature, called it a "book burning" with no logical purpose other than to restrict environmental information. The Harper government claimed vital works would be digitally preserved, but never provided a plan or cost for doing so, nor any proof it had happened. No scientists interviewed by The Tyee believed digitizing would or could replace what was lost.
UN Blasts Canada's Treatment of Immigrants
Changes made to the Canada's immigration and refugee system under Harper were investigated by the United Nations Human Rights Committee, whose report blasted how thousands of migrants are detained indefinitely without due process, many for over a year or more, as well as poor mental health support for those incarcerated.
Harper Government Denies Khadr Basic Rights
Defying court rulings, the Conservative government refused to accord Omar Khadr basic rights such as access to media. Editorialists of right and left persuasion described the move as unbefitting a democratic government.
Illegitimate Prorogation of Parliament, Twice
Prorogations are a legitimate procedure that can be abused depending on motivations. The Harper government provoked 60 protests across Canada and beyond its borders in 2010 after shutting the legislature's doors to escape condemnation on the Afghan detainees' file. It was the second prorogation in a year's period.
Undue Interference with Independent Agencies
Command and control system was extended to meddling in bodies like National Energy Board and CRTC whose arms-length autonomy is significantly reduced. A special target was the Parliamentary Budget Office, which was hit with condemnations and budget cuts for its critical reports.
Billions Borrowed without Parliament's Permission
The auditor general sounded alarms about the "prodigious" growth and size of federal borrowing. Those billions in "non-budgetary" spending used to get Parliament's oversight, but no more. The finance minister can borrow what he wants without Parliament's permission. Why? A loophole buried in a 2007 Harper omnibus bill.
Lapdogs Appointed as Watchdogs
The most controversial was the case of former Integrity Commissioner Christiane Ouimet. Her office reviewed more than 200 whistleblowing cases. Disciplinary action followed on none of them. Ouimet's own angry staffers blew the whistle on their boss. The auditor general found Ouimet intimidated her employees, took "retaliatory action" against them and may have breached their privacy, all part of the Harper appointee's "gross mismanagement." Ouimet was paid more than $500,000 to leave her post.
This election began the minute the last one ended. Since his first day as PM, Stephen Harper has reinforced his party's 'brand' by rewarding cronies, slapping the Conservative logo on government cheques, perfecting the no questions photo-op, instructing bureaucrats to start calling Canada's government "the Harper Government." The flip side has been relentless monitoring, muzzling and attacks on anyone who might tarnish the image. Here are 22 instances of power abused to build the Harper brand.
PMO Attempts to Cover up Video Leak Putting Troops at Risk
On an Iraq visit, the PMO was caught lying to try and cover up the leak of a promo video, which constituted a security breach. The PMO, noted a National Post editorial, "stumbled from blunder to evasion and falsehood in the service of shamelessly manipulative partisanship, especially in using our troops as PR props."
The 'Harper Government' Labelling Deception
Public servants were told to use "Harper Government" instead of "Government of Canada" in publicity releases. The Conservatives denied it was happening -- until internal memos revealed by the Canadian Press revealed the denial to be without basis.
Conservatives Place Party Logos on Government of Canada Cheques
Once "caught red-handed," they backed off. The federal ethics commissioner, adopting the exasperated tone of an adult lecturing a child, noted: "Public spending announcements are government activities, not partisan political activities, and it is not appropriate to brand them with partisan or personal identifiers."
Record Amounts of Partisan Political Advertising, on the Public Purse
Several media reports told how the Conservatives used taxpayer money for partisan political advertising in record quantity, costing the public treasury $750 million since Harper became PM. In one instance, the Tories spentlavishly on ads for the promotion of a jobs grant program that had yet to be made public or presented to parliament or the provinces. Even more nakedly partisan, a mailed blast, charged to the taxpayers, targeting Justin Trudeau.
Conservatives Stack Their Own Ridings with Infrastructure Funds
In a display of brazen pork barreling, the Conservatives arranged for no less than 83 percent of infrastructure fund projects go to Conservative ridings.
$50 Million Spending Deception as Documented by the Auditor General
The auditor general ruled Conservatives diverted $50-million from spending slated for border infrastructure to political spending on projects in Tony Clement's riding at the time of the G-8 summit. Parliament was willfully misled.
Patronage Run Amok
After promising a new way, the prime minister dismantled his newly created Public Appointments Commission and reverted to old-styled patronage by the barrel. In June 2015, the PM made 98 patronage appointments. That included stocking the National Capital Commission with loyalists in advance of decisions on the controversial monument to the victims of communism.
Undermining Statistics Canada, Killing Data
Against pleas from everyone who needs and uses data from the long form census, the Harper government scrapped it, prompting the Statistics Canada chief to resign in protest.
Government Muzzles Science Community
Top scientists came under such heavy monitoring by the Conservatives that they staged "Death of Evidence" protests for being denied freedom of speech. The Conservatives sent out chaperones or "media minders" to trackEnvironment Canada scientists and report on them.
'Death of Evidence' rally on Parliament Hill, July 10, 2012. Photo: Richard Webster.
Like Never Before, Limits Placed on Media Access
Journalists have been hard-pressed to recall another time when controls put on them were so tight. At the Conservatives' 2013 Calgary convention, reporters wrote of being harassed and penned in at every turn by the PMO's command and control system. In his book Killing The Messenger, journalist Mark Bourrie charts the many examples of new limits on freedom of speech introduced in the Harper era.
Harper's Team Tries to Ban Journalist for Asking Question
Veteran TV cameraman Dave Ellis covered a Harper speech about oil to a business audience. Though media had been instructed no questions allowed, Ellis posed one about charges laid against a Conservative MP. The PMO tried to punish Ellis and his network by kicking him off covering Harper's trip to Malaysia. After media hue and cry, Harper backed down and Ellis went.
Harper Minister Sucker Punches CBC Budget
After the 2011 federal election Heritage Minister James Moore assured Conservatives would "maintain or increase support for the CBC. That is our platform and we have said that before and we will commit to that." The next year, Harper's Cons delivered the biggest government cut to CBC since the mid-1990s, much deeper in proportion than overall trims to federal programs, defying public sentiment.
Suppression of Research
In the gun registration debate, incriminating research and documents such as a Firearms Report were deliberately withheld from the public. While ramping up their prison building, Conservatives suppressed related research and studies contradicting their political priorities.
The Vic Toews Porno Smear
In a vivid example of the browbeating of opponents, the minister of public safety said anyone who opposed federal plans to make electronic surveillance of Canadians easier for authorities was siding with child pornographers.
Harper's Fallen Soldiers Blackout
Emulating George W. Bush's optics tactics, Stephen Harper banned media coverage of fallen soldiers' caskets returning from Afghanistan. He also refused to lower the flag half-mast. Soldiers' family members expressed confusion and anger at the perceived show of disrespect.
Protesters Put under Blanket Surveillance
According to a leaked memo, as part of its command and control approach, the Conservatives have approved a system wherein all advocates, protesters and demonstrations can be monitored by authorities. The Government Operations Centre has requested federal departments to assist it in compiling a comprehensive inventory of protesters. Security specialists have called it a breach of Canadians' Charter of Rights. Conservatives have moved to give CSIS even more powers than the spy agency wants.
Rights and Democracy, Other Groups, Dismantled
In a show of brute force, the Montreal-based group Rights and Democracy was pole-axed for its alleged political leanings and eventually disbanded. Organizations like the church group Kairos were de-budgeted or dismantled for political leanings. Nuclear Safety Commission head Linda Keen was dumped. Among the complaints cited by the PM was that in her distant past, she had some Liberal ties.
Harper Government Spied on Aboriginal Critic, 'Retaliated'
Aboriginal child welfare advocate Cindy Blackstock was spied on by the Harper government, and when she arrived for a meeting with other First Nations leaders at the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs only she was barred entry. Finding Blackstock had been "retaliated" against by a ministry official, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal awarded her $20,000 for pain and suffering.
Revenue Canada Loosed to Attack Charities
Not all charities, just the ones that don't seem adequately aligned with the Harper brand. Enough to include many environmental, aid, human rights and free speech charities that banded together to push back against what looks like a politically motivated witch hunt.
Conservatives Use Unheard of Tactic to Force through Anti-Union Bill
Conservative senators went to the unprecedented extent of overruling their own Speaker. What could be so important to break Senate rules? A bill pushed by Harper that is almost certainly unconstitutional for its privacy invading measures forced onto unions, unlike other groups. Latest in a steady streamof Conservative attacks on organized labour in Canada.
Harper Smears Liberal Sikh MP, Insinuating Tie to Terrorism
When Liberals opposed a 2007 Conservative plan to extend anti-terror legislation, Stephen Harper singled out Grit MP Navdeep Bains, seeming to suggest that Bains' party was motivated by a desire to protect Bains' father-in-law, Darshan Singh Saini. A recent news story had claimed Singh Saini was on a list of witnesses sought by the RCMP for its Air India investigation, but provided no proof he was involved. In the House, Liberals erupted with outrage and Bains asked, in vain, that Harper apologize.
Veterans' Advocates Smeared
Medical files of Sean Bruyea, a strong advocate for veterans' rights, were leaked in a case that privacy commissioner Jennifer Stoddart described as "alarming." Veterans Affairs Canada ombudsman Pat Stogran was dumpedafter criticizing the government.
Stephen Harper's Conservatives have made federal elections a gladiators' arena where anything goes -- unless and until you are caught, that is. Here are 17 times his team violated election laws or ethics.
Conservatives Run Undercover Sting Operations
Conservatives secretly recorded political opponents and also used agent provocateur techniques to try and entrap them. A sting operation against Marlo Raynolds, a Liberal candidate in Alberta, was backed by then employment minister Jason Kenney.
Conservative Convicted on Robocalls Scam
Tory operative Michael Sona was given jail time for his role in the robocallsscam. The judge indicated more than one person was likely involved. In another court judgment in a case brought by the Council of Canadians, the ruling said the robocalls operation was widespread, not just limited to the Guelph riding. Donald Segretti who did dirty tricks for the Nixon White House told a Canadian reporter his skullduggery didn't go so low as to run schemes sending voters to the wrong polling stations.
Harper's Ex-Parliamentary Secretary Jailed for Breaking Election Law
Dean Del Maestro was one of Harper's favourites. As his parliamentary secretary, the PM frequently used him as an attack dog to allege misdeeds by opposition members. Del Maestro was given a jail sentence in June for his own election spending violations.
image atom
Dean Del Mastro received a jail sentence for election overspending.
'Reprehensible' Dirty Tricks Campaign against Irwin Cotler
Conservative Commons Speaker Andrew Scheer ruled his party's own tactics in running a surreptitious misinformation campaign in the riding of the highly respected MP were "reprehensible."
Conservatives Bar Crosbie Candidacy
In a clear-cut case of the party hierarchy's undercutting of democratic rights, Ches Crosbie, son of former Tory cabinet minister John Crosbie, was barredfrom running for the party in Newfoundland.
Election Violations Prompt Resignation of Cabinet Member
Peter Penashue, another Harper Conservative was compelled to step down over election spending violations.
Conservatives Attempt Election Campaign Frame-up
In an attempted smear in the last week of the 2011 election campaign, a senior Harper strategist planted a false story in Sun Media that Michael Ignatieff was an Iraq war planner. (Neither Conservative operatives nor Sun Media opted to make hay with the true story that Stephen Harper had, while leader of the Canadian Alliance in 2003, published a letter in The Wall Street Journal itching to get Canada into that disastrous war and slamming then PM Jean Chretien for saying no.)
Harper's Office Deploys Interns for Dirty Tricks
In one instance that brought on allegations of Nixonian tactics, junior PMO staffers in the guise of normal citizens were sent out to disrupt a Justin Trudeau speech.
Citizens Ejected from Conservative Rallies
Tory operatives hauled out citizens from a Harper rally in the 2011 campaign because they had marginal ties to other parties. A spokesperson for the PM was compelled to apologize. Problem fixed this time around: Only fully vetted Harper supporters will be allowed, by invite only, to attend the PM's campaign stops. If they have a ticket.
Conservatives Make Campaign Event Attendees Sign Gag Order
Not only have Harper's campaign handlers made his campaign events by invite only, they were forcing anyone let in to sign an agreement not to transmit any description of the event or any images from it -- but dropped the gag orders after news stories made them an issue.
Conservatives Unfix Their Own Fixed Date Election Law
In 2008, Harper pulled the plug on his own government, violating his own new law, which stipulated elections every four years.
Guilty Plea on In and Out Affair
The Conservative Party and its fundraising arm pled guilty to some Elections Act charges stemming from their exceeding spending limits in the 2006 campaign. The investigation cost taxpayers over $2 million.
Cons' Elections Bill Strips Power from Elections Canada
The Fair Elections Act also makes it harder for Canadians to vote as more ID is required. Nationwide protests in which more than 400 academics took part forced Pierre Poilievre to withdraw some measures in the bill because of their alleged anti-democratic bent.
Harper Minister Smears Head of Elections Canada
In a bid to impugn his integrity, Democratic Reform Minister Pierre Poilievre accused the Elections Canada CEO Marc Mayrand of being a power monger and wearing a team jersey.
Copyright Grab for Attack Ads
CTV News found out Conservatives aimed to rewrite copyright law to let political parties grab any media content and use it for free in their ads. The impact, warned CTV's Don Martin, "will be to cast a chill on every broadcast appearance" by MPs, commentators and reporters, who "must now be aware their views could end up featured in a political attack ad." By asserting "unlimited access to the airwaves for propaganda purposes," Martin said, the Harper government "could be seen as flirting with fascism."
Conservatives Use Terrorists' Propaganda in Attack Ad
Harper's party created a political ad incorporating music and horrifying images of doomed captives pulled straight from the Islamic State's own promotional video. The target: Justin Trudeau, whose views on the risks and rewards of bombing ISIS differ from Harper's.
Record Use of Personal Attack Ads
Under Harper's leadership, Conservatives became the first to routinely usepersonal attacks ads outside an election writ period. Their ads often usedquotes deliberately taken out of context. Incidence of attack ads by Harper Conservatives was heavier than by any other government.
This list is now also available as a tablet-friendly pdf which you can download for free here

No matter how you add it up, Harper's fiscal record is a catastrophe

Scott Clark and Peter DeVries

Scott Clark and Peter DeVries

Sunday, April 19th, 2015

Featured News

More from Scott Clark and Peter DeVries available here
On April 8, Finance Minister Joe Oliver stood up before the Economic Club in Toronto and delivered what can only be described as one of the greatest “fantasy economics” speeches in decades.
It was a message from a parallel universe — one in which the Harper government delivered ‘sound economic management’ through the recession (it didn’t), the economy recovered its pre-recession growth pattern (it hasn’t) and Ottawa is delivering tax relief for the average Canadian household (it isn’t). Stranger still, it’s a parallel universe where Pierre Trudeau is still around, haunting us.
In his speech, Oliver somehow contrived to blame Justin Trudeau for the alleged fiscal sins committed by his father during Trudeau Senior’s decade in power. (Justin Trudeau is 43. He was in his early teens when his father left office. Somehow we doubt Pierre was taking Justin’s fiscal advice at the time … but that’s the magic of rhetoric for you.)
According to Oliver, federal spending tripled between 1969 and 1979, driven by “the ideology of the man at the wheel and on the reckless assumption that commodity prices would remain high”. Change the timeline and Oliver could have been talking about Stephen Harper — but this is not a crowd that’s open to irony.
How bad a fiscal manager was Pierre Trudeau? Program spending did indeed triple between 1969 and 1979 in absolute terms. But measured as a share of GDP, program spending only rose from 15.4 per cent in 1969-70 to 16.7 per cent in 1979-80. As a share of GDP, revenues actually fell from 17.6 per cent in 1969-70 to 15.5 per cent in 1979-80.
According to Oliver, “Trudeau-era debt clung to Canada like a bad flu”. Actually, the federal debt burden only rose from 23.0 per cent to 27.7 per cent over the ten-year period. It rose further to 37.5 per cent in 1983-84, but this was due to the effects of the 1980-1981 recession.
In fact, the fiscal record of Trudeau Senior actually looks pretty good when compared to that of Brian Mulroney. Under Trudeau, the average annual deficit was 2.9 per cent of GDP between 1969-70 and 1979-80; under Mulroney the average annual deficit was 6.7 per cent of GDP between 1983-84 and 1994-95.
Between 1983-84 and 1994-95, program spending under Mulroney fell from 18.4 per cent of GDP to 15.7 per cent, while the revenue share actually rose from 15.6 per cent to 16.6 per cent. This weak performance, along with rising interest rates, resulted in the debt burden dramatically increasing from 37.5 per cent in 1983-84 to 66.6 per cent in 1994-95.
Mulroney did balance the operating budget — but that wasn’t nearly enough to solve the fiscal problem facing the government. In retrospect, the Mulroney government was simply reluctant to take the fiscal actions needed to stop the country from sliding into crisis in the early 1990s.
In 1984, the Conservative government actually published a document — ‘Agenda for Economic Renewal’ — which stated that, without major action to cut program spending and/or raise taxes, the federal debt burden would double by the end of the decade. Which is exactly what happened. (Disclosure: Both of us were heavily involved in the preparation of all of the Mulroney budgets.)
Mulroney’s Finance minister, Michael Wilson, did his best to warn Canadians about the dangers of failing to aggressively contain the fiscal problem. His May 1985 budget did raise revenues and reduce spending. However, after the confrontation between the “senior from Vanier and Mr. Mulroney” over changes to old age security benefits, Mr. Wilson lost not only the PM’s support for further measures to reduce the deficit, but also the backing of the business community. Wilson was on his own.
So what about the Liberals? Oliver is hardly going to give any credit to Jean Chretien and Paul Martin for getting the federal government out of the worst fiscal crisis it had ever faced.
According to Oliver, the Liberals balanced the budget “by hiking taxes, cutting vital programs and slashing billions in transfer payments.” (Disclosure: Both of us were very involved in the preparation of the Liberal budgets in 1994-1995 and subsequent years.)
open quote 761b1bSince Harper was elected, the federal debt has increased by over $150 billion, wiping out the reduction in federal debt achieved under Chretien and Martin. Not much to boast about there.
Now, as far as we can recall, the Liberals imposed a temporary capital tax on large deposit taking institutions; a higher tax on large corporations; a temporary corporate surtax; and higher excise taxes on gasoline and tobacco products. That was it. There were no higher taxes on the elderly, as Oliver has claimed. Indeed the Liberal government benefitted from the Mulroney government’s decision to introduce the GST in 1991, reform the personal and corporate income tax systems, partially de-index the personal income tax system in 1984, implement the North America Free Trade Agreement and sell several Crown corporations – all major structural changes which fostered economic growth and resulted in a more stable fiscal situation. Finally, the Liberal government eventually implemented the largest income tax (personal and corporate) reduction in Canadian history in the 2000 budget.
There was no slashing of vital programs in the 1995 budget. Quite the opposite; for the first time, the government introduced a process to carefully review federal program spending — what it was doing, what it should be doing. That program review process was transparent and accountable — unlike the spending reviews undertaken by the Harper government since 2010, for which the government has refused to provide information to the Parliamentary Budget Officer.
Granted, the Liberals did cut transfer payments to the provinces. But with debt as a percentage of GDP at a post-Second World War high and with ever-increasing interest rates due to a lack of confidence in financial markets, everything had to be put on the table. Once the federal government achieved a balanced budget, that interest rate risk premium quickly disappeared and all levels of government benefited from lower borrowing costs. The Liberals then introduced a 10-year plan which put the major transfers to the provinces on a sustainable and growing track.
In 1994-95, the federal deficit was 4.7 per cent of GDP. By 1997-98 the deficit had been eliminated and the federal government ran surpluses for the next nine years. The federal debt was actually reduced by $90 billion; the debt burden fell from 66.6 per cent in 1994-95 to 31.4 per cent in 2006-07.
How does this compare to the Harper government’s fiscal record? In 2006-07, the Conservatives inherited a surplus of $13.8 billion — which they turned into a deficit of $5.8 billion within two years.
Since then, they have been in deficit each and every year. In 2009-10, the deficit reached its peak of 3.5 per cent of GDP. They are desperate now to show a surplus in 2015-16 — one surplus in nine years. Since Harper was elected, the federal debt has increased by over $150 billion, wiping out the reduction in federal debt achieved under Chretien and Martin. Not much to boast about there.
Joe Oliver has announced that the government will introduce balanced budget legislation. But legislation won’t keep a government out of the red if it lacks the political will to do so.
What about the government’s commitment to economic growth and job creation? Who hasn’t heard about the 1.2 million jobs created since “the depths of the recession”? Again — time for a reality check.
The figure — 1.2 million — is correct, but almost meaningless. It certainly doesn’t describe the performance of the economy since 2006 and the labour market situation in Canada. Since 2006, economic growth has declined in every year since 2010 and averaged only 1.7 per cent per year. In the previous nine years, economic growth averaged 3.4 per cent per year. In 2014, only 120,000 new jobs were created — less than in 2013.
At the end of 2014, the unemployment rate was higher than at the end of 2008. The labour force participation rate was lower than in 2008. The employment rate (the percentage of the adult population employed) was lower than at the end of 2008. The youth unemployment rate was higher than at the end of 2008. The share of total employment made up of full-time jobs was less than in 2008 — and the quality of jobs had sunk to its lowest level in a quarter of a century.
Then there’s Oliver’s claim that his government has put money back in the hands of Canadians through its commitment to reducing taxes. This government has definitely cut taxes for high-income, single-earner families with children under 18 — just 15 per cent of all families. They’ve been very good to families with teenage children who — somehow — still need ‘child care’. They’ve been generous to families who can afford to put their kids in sports leagues and summer camps, and they’ve cut taxes for high-income seniors who can split their pension income with a spouse.
The government has announced it will double the contribution limits for Tax-Free Savings Accounts, despite research by the PBO and others indicating this will — again — overwhelmingly benefit high-income Canadians and leave a growing unfunded liability to be paid for by all Canadians in the future. Oliver and Harper claim to be doing this for our grandchildren. Somehow we don’t think they’ll be grateful.
All of this, of course, came after the government’s biggest and most foolish tax cut — the two point cut in the GST which every economist warned them was a terrible idea. Sure enough, it was a major factor in putting the government into deficit.
The key thing to remember here is that these tax cuts accomplished nothing for the economy. None of them contributed to economic growth or job creation. They certainly didn’t contribute to tax fairness.
Numbers don’t lie, but people do. It’s one thing to spin your failures as successes — it’s another thing entirely to try to present a decade of fiscal failure as one long triumph. The journalists going into the budget lockup will have their work cut out for them, trying to separate the Harper government’s fiscal fantasies from the true record of the past ten years.
Scott Clark is president of C.S. Clark Consulting. Together with Peter DeVries he writes the public policy blog 3DPolicy. Prior to that he held a number of senior positions in the Canadian government dealing with both domestic and international policy issues, including deputy minister of finance and senior adviser to the prime minister. He has an honours BA in economics and mathematics from Queen’s University and a PhD in economics from the University of California at Berkeley.
Peter DeVries is a consultant in fiscal policy and public management issues, primarily on an international basis. From 1984 to 2005, he held a number of senior positions in the Department of Finance, including director of the Fiscal Policy Division, responsible for overall preparation of the federal budget. Mr. DeVries holds an MA in economics from McMaster University.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by all iPolitics columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of iPolitics.

While it was illuminating getting insults from the ordinary citizens of Alberta and elsewhere it's time to get back to portfolio preparation. This stuff is mind boggling but there you go. Some folks lack insight, some have a severe case of Islamphobia and most of these folks think I am a Liberal clone. Wow.

LikeShow more reactions

Justin Trudeau offers strongest defence yet of Omar Khadr settlement at Calgary Stampede

Published on: July 15, 2017 | Last Updated: July 15, 2017 6:11 PM MDT
Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau during his visit to the 2017 Calgary Stampede. AL CHAREST/POSTMEDIA
Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau during his visit to the 2017 Calgary Stampede. AL CHAREST/POSTMEDIA
Justin Trudeau offered his strongest defence yet of his government’s $10.5-million settlement with Omar Khadr on Saturday, saying he hopes it serves as an example to future governments.
“When governments violate Canadians’ fundamental rights, there have to be consequences and we hope that the message going forward to all future governments is: you can not ignore or be complicit in the violation of Canadians fundamental rights, regardless of what they did,” said Trudeau.
The prime minister spoke at the Indian Village on the Calgary Stampede grounds, initially reiterating what he’s been saying for the past few days: he understands why people are frustrated but he thinks the government would have lost the case to Khadr if they had fought in court, and it would have cost between $30-40 million in the process. Trudeau then went on to offer the more strident human rights defence.
Trudeau spent the day in Calgary, attending two pancake breakfasts in the morning before visiting the Indian Village in the afternoon and rounding off the day at the rodeo.
He’s faced widespread criticism over the past few days over the Khadr payment. Khadr fought against coalition forces in Afghanistan as a 15 year old, before being sent to Guantanamo Bay where he was repeatedly tortured.
The prime minister initially wasn’t planning on coming to Stampede this year due to a scheduling conflict with the United States’ National Governors Association conference in Rhode Island. However, he managed to get to all his meetings at the conference, including a sit-down with vice-president Mike Pence, scheduled for Friday, freeing him up to spend time in Calgary on Saturday.
The prime minister largely had a friendly reception in the city, although he spent most of his time in solid Liberal territory.
Trudeau started the day by meeting Mayor Naheed Nenshi. Neither the mayor nor the prime minister took any questions from the press.
Next he went to the Marda Loop Communities Association Stampede breakfast with Liberal Calgary Centre MP and Veterans Affairs Minister Kent Hehr. The prime minister was greeted by a little girl in a pink cowboy hat, whose cast he signed and a little boy who got him to sign a copy of the Marvel Civil War comic book in which Trudeau appears on the cover as part of the Canadian super hero team Alpha Fight.
Trudeau declined to weigh in on the decision of interim NDP leader Tom Mulcair and the candidates running for the federal NDP leadership, to skip Stampede, simply saying: “I’m not going to comment on decisions that other political parties make.”

He said that several people teased him about his failure to mention Alberta during a Canada Day speech, but they were generally understanding of his explanation that it was a honest mistake.

Sort by
Julie Ali · 

Congratulations Mr. Trudeau for standing up for the rights and freedoms of citizens. Of course it would have been better if this case had never happened so we're not paying out millions for previous government incompetence but there you go. If folks who are against this payout would imagine what happened to Mr. Khadr happening to them -then I'd imagine that there would be agreement over this payout.
Good job Mr. Trudeau.
LikeReply515 hrs
Peter Fit · 

LikeReply914 hrs
Penny Russell Leman
You are wrong. The alleged abuses took place under the Cretien and Martin LIberal governments. Mr. Harper repatriated him, but would never have settled out of court because Mr Khdar's accusations of torture had never been proven in a Canadian court of law. The assertion by Mr. Trudeau that it would have cost 30 - 40 million dollars by all accounts has no basis in fact. His payout of 10.5 million was purely a political move that backfired because the very wealthy trust fund child that is our prime minister is woefully out of touch with the majority of Canadians on this issue.
LikeReply1714 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Penny Russell Leman I don't agree with you. Mr. Harper is responsible for this payout. It was the Harper government’s decision to, from 2008 to 2015, ignore the Charter of Rights, the Supreme Court and Canada’s obligation to rehabilitate child soldiers.

This inaction resulted in the lion’s share of the $10.5 million paid to Khadr for being wrongfully imprisoned and mistreated. As I told my students in 2008, Khadr eventually would be entitled to a legal settlement from the Canadian government. The longer the government left him in Guantanamo, the larger the sum of money that would have to be paid out. In an entirely just world, that settlement would be paid out personally by Harper and his cabinet colleagues.
LikeReply214 hrsEdited
Julie Ali · 

Peter Fit Shame for what? For doing the right thing? Give me a break.
LikeReply214 hrs
Abraham Shtevi
if this settlement was the right thing to do then why was it a secret
LikeReply714 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Abraham Shtevi I don't know. Maybe you can enlighten us.
LikeReply13 hrs
Penny Russell Leman
Julie Ali Are you saying that the Cretien and Martin governments that were in power at the time the alleged abuses took place are not responsible at all for any of this? Why didn't they repatriate him then instead of leaving him in Guatanamo for Mr. Harper to deal with? They had the power to do so and did not. Making a bad situation worse. And please respond to Mr. Trudeau settling out of court and authorizing the rich payout before a Canadian court of law could rule on the allegations of torture. As I said earlier, his assertion as to the cost has been totally unproven and in fact there is no determination made of how he even came up with those dollar figures. The Supreme Court ruled there had been human rights abuse but they NEVER said that a rich payout was required by the government to address that. I stand by my assertion that the prime minister misread the will of Canadian people to battle this suit to the end, and this award was not necessary or just.
LikeReply513 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Penny Russell Leman The previous governments whether Liberal or Conservatives did not follow the rule of law.This is why we are paying the compensation from our tax dollars. Government incompetence, indifference and failures.
LikeReply113 hrs
Penny Russell Leman
Julie Ali Previously you said "Mr. Harper is responsible for this payout", and now you say the previous governments did not follow the rule of law - which I agree with. Having said that now, how do you defend the Prime Minister authorizing this rich payout without the allegations of torture made by an admitted terrorist even being heard in a Canadian court of law? A clear majority of Canadians (regardless of their political leaning) would have preferred to wait until Khdar's allegations or torture and abuse were proven or disproven here before a settlement was determined. It was wrong to not allow justice to run its course in this matter. It is my feeling that Mr. Trudeau will suffer politically for this decision. And rightly so.
LikeReply513 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Penny Russell Leman Look, I am not a lawyer. Lawyers have decided this case. Maybe we should believe that the legal professionals know what they are doing as well as the court system?
LikeReply113 hrsEdited
Penny Russell Leman
Julie Ali I'm not a lawyer either, but you seemed to have strong opinions and be a reasonably good debater. I also agree that the legal profession should know what they are doing as well as the court system. I am just dissappointed that our Prime Minister did not feel the same and gave away millions of hard earned taxpayer dollars to a terrorist instead of letting the Canadian court system do its job. Have a good evening.
LikeReply213 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Penny Russell Leman The government wastes a ton of cash. For example the NDP government in Alberta has given a loan of $235 million to big oil for their liabilities in the orphan well program. Why don't we have citizens yapping about this major waste of cash? Why did we give $30 million of federal cash from our tax dollars to big oil to ensure this loan would be interest free? We're giving money --our money to a sector that is sitting on billions of dollars in assets and profits. Why? And yet everyone is yapping about $10 million.We also have billions of dollars wasted by the PCs in the past. No one talks about the Tapcal Trust Fund that is a legacy project of Lougheed and company. A selective accountability is present in Alberta.
LikeReply13 hrsEdited
Colin John Wallace
That's fine. Perhaps you could craft some clear guidelines for these idiots who insist on travelling back to countries that have "a dismal human rights record". Tired of them using their new citizenship as cover for their continued activities. Also tired of us taking people who have been booted from other countries, for obviously valid reasons. Arar, the original winner of "6-49 (Halal edition)" was deported from the US. We should have done the same.
LikeReply112 hrsEdited
Julie Ali · 

Colin John Wallace Since I am not a politician I am in no way able to craft any guidelines for you. Perhaps you can go to your elected representative for such helps.
LikeReply11 hrs
Brad Rohlin
Julie Ali - when you comment, I am reminded of the Mark Twain quote which goes something like this- "better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it and remove all doubt. I'm sure your family, friends and people who know you, have thought for years that you are not the "sharpest knife in the drawer" so to speak, however after reading your comments on here, they now know your lack of intelligence without a doubt. In the future, I would lay off any more comments unless you want even more people thinking of you as a fool.
LikeReply210 hrs
Harvey Bishop
Penny Russell Leman What led up to this Supreme Court of Canada ruling, and payout came from three former Canadian prime ministers of Canada. Jean Chretien, Paul Martin and Stephen Harper. This is Alberta. The Conservatives aren't guilty of anything and never do anything wrong. Many Albertans feel that way.
LikeReply10 hrs
Harvey Bishop
Abraham Shtevi What secret? We know about this settlement because the media reported on it.
LikeReply10 hrs
Abraham Shtevi
Julie Ali this story was leaked out,Trudeau and his regime tried to conceal this deal, this is your democratic liberal leader that you love
LikeReply25 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Brad Rohlin Personally I think I am bright enough. But usually I find folks who are foolish tend to think others are. Sort of like they can't see the log in their own head.
LikeReply3 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Abraham Shtevi I don't love any leader. I think, all of them are the same. But you can go ahead and assume I am liberal. Conservative voters I find aren't very imaginative.

Mr. Trudeau is way better than the science suppressing Mr. Harper.
LikeReply3 hrsEdited
Don Eklund
Julie Ali
LikeReply12 hrs
Mary Dee Thompson · 

Julie Ali while we're at it, let's not forget Bombardier. And you're mixing up provincial and federal money. And giving money to a terrorist is completely different than giving it to a business. And how about the millions Trudeau is wasting fighting our veterans in court after promising a return to life-long pensions? Don't you think our veterans deserve that money as much as a terrorist?
LikeReply21 hrEdited
Tango Charlie
Julie Ali perhaps you need to read the Supreme Court judgement for yourself. The suggested remedy was to have him repatriated to Canada. That was it. While the charter rights breaches occurred under the Chrétien and Martin governments, The Harper government actually did exactly what the Supreme Court of Canada suggested needed to be done. There is no basis in law for this payment, no precedent from a Canadian court to follow, nothing.
LikeReply11 hrEdited
John A. D. LoGiudice · 

"..before being sent to Guantanamo Bay where he was repeatedly tortured.". Funny, because it was determined that he WASN'T tortured.
LikeReply3 hrs
Matthew S. Rhodes
America needs to send a team north of the border, and take Khadr back, and execute him. If Canada won't give us justice, then we will take it, and Canada will have made an enemy.
LikeReply13 hrs
Manuel Dingez
You spend too much time in mothers basement reading comic books
LikeReply3 hrs
Matthew S. Rhodes
Manuel Dingez Nope, I'm a Reverend. And we are at war with Islam.
LikeReply3 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Matthew S. Rhodes I think if you met a few Muslim families you would find out you are at war with baloney. They're nice people. You are spreading Islamophobia.
LikeReply3 hrs
Verna Robart
Trudeau did what he did because, he didn't want the Chretien/ Martin/ Goodale dirty deeds to come out AND if this went to court they would of been called to testify. THEN it would be know that Chretien got Khadr;s father out of prison for bombing an embassy, then he turns around and brings Khadr to bomb school.Then Martin send CSIS to Gitmo to get information and hands it over to the US.officals. Ralph Goodale was in the Chretien cabinet in 2002 and onward. No wonder the lying sneak wanted to plant a seed and say it was PM Harper.'s fault. In 2012 Khadr came back to Canada under Harper. That was his compensation. His get out of jail free card. Trudeau got word from the old backroom boys club(Chretien/Martin) to make this go away and Trudeau complied to save the Liberal skin.
LikeReply104 hrs
Julie Ali · 

So I imagine that Mr. Trudeau didn't want to save taxpayers money and this is all about cover up?
LikeReply3 hrs
Verna Robart
.."Khadr would spend 10 years at the U.S. military prison, during which time he was interrogated by American and — in two instances in 2003 and 2004 (Chretien/Martin in power) — Canadian intelligence officials.. sent by Martin. The Supreme Court later ruled in 2010 that those Canadian officials in 2003, had violated Khadr's rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms during their interrogations."He had no lawyer”.
BTW in 2004 Khadr sued for $100,000 and Martin did nothing to have him returned to Canada.. In 2010 there was NO MONEY VALUE the supreme court. Trudeau could of gave Khadr $1 and said get lost, and nothing could of been done about it.

So, please explain what the SC ruling about "instances in 2003 and 2004" have to do with Harper?
LikeReply64 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Mr. Harper delayed implementing the rule of law. I guess he was anti-democratic.
LikeReply3 hrs
John A. D. LoGiudice · 

Julie Ali It was Cretien who handed him over.
LikeReply3 hrs
Suzanne Normoyle ·

If anyone has seen the video of the journalist asking Justin if he had contacted Mrs. Speer, his answer was no. And when asked about what he thought about Mr. Harper contacting her, he said he had no opinion but his smug face told a different story.
LikeReply54 hrs
Blandy Glistening
If playing morality cop, continuing to lie to Canadians and pulling ridiculous numbers out of his wazzoo is his "strongest defence yet" then our little dweeb of a Prime Minister is in much deeper doo-doo than his severely limited intelligence can comprehend.
LikeReply74 hrs
Bruce Richards · 

Where is the "strongest defence yet" promised in your headline, surely not that the Prime Minister thought the government would loose and therefore simply stopped trying to find a fair and just solution. And what is the source for your assertion that Mr. Khadr was repeatedly tortured...shamefully inaccurate journalism.
LikeReply44 hrs
Suzanne Normoyle · 

And now Trudeau voluntarily made Khadr a rich man, absolved him of his sins and desecrated the sacrifice our fallen and our veterans from Afghanistan. What is even worse, is that Trudeau waited to pay Khadr while Parliament wasn't sitting and he was at an international summit with no political or media scrutiny.
LikeReply44 hrs
Suzanne Normoyle · 

No court has ordered to pay the money to Khadr or to give an apology. No court has ever ordered that a settlement of this magnitude be released. This is a negotiated settlement. Khadr could have lost in court. He could have lost at appeal if he had won in court. There is no way of knowing which way courts will rule. The Supreme Court said that Khadr’s rights were violated; they did not say that he had to be paid $10.5M or given an apology. Jean Chretien had the chance to help Khadr back in 2002 but he didn’t because he knew what Khadr was – a terrorist. Paul Martin and Stephen Harper followed suit. They all recognized that Khadr took up arms against the country of his birth and did not deserve any assistance from us.
LikeReply34 hrs
Suzanne Normoyle · 

LikeReply17 hrs
Suzanne Normoyle · 

Trudeau is a liar and is in damage control because 71% of Canadians don't agree with Khadr's settlement.
LikeReply57 hrs
Ron Christensen
Suzanne Normoyle 71 % of ill informed Canadians then are the ones you are talking about?
LikeReply16 hrs
Verna Robart
Suzanne Normoyle: I noticed someone did the math...Taking Trudope cost of $40 Millions, a top private lawyer paid $1,000. per hour would take 10 years at 40 hours per week, 50 weeks per year, to arrive at a total cost of $20Millions, assuming the court would have obliged the gov’t to pay the full $20 Millions to Khadr. TruDope is a liar and incapable of doing simple arithmetics. The whole thing is a total fraud.

Also, I read a story of a LAWYER who said the $5 Millon in court costs is not believable.
LikeReply3 hrs
Rajesh Rampersad
The Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Rights of the Child on the involvement of children in armed conflict, also known as OPAC (2000) prohibits the conscription of children under the age of 18 and their participation in hostilities. It also prohibits the voluntary recruitment of children by non-state armed groups, although it allows state armed forces to recruit from age 16, as long as the children recruited are not sent to war.

Here's what Article 6 (3) says:

"States Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure that persons within their jurisdiction recruited or used in hostilities contrary to the present Protocol are demobilized or otherwise released from service. States Parties shall, when necessary, accord to such persons all appropriate assistance for their physical and psychological recovery and their social reintegration.".
LikeReply10 hrs
Mike M Hall
The age was 15 when he was convicted in international court...
LikeReply3 hrs
Terry Britton
He is not a convicted terrorist - what a stupid thing to say - we accepted his transfer of prison sentence here - thereby accepting his conviction - this is sooooo dumb - he laid mines - he killed people - he injured people - yes lets give him a parade and 10.5 million - really - we are so lost as a people - how many average taxpayers had to pay to get 10.5 million? - I bet lots - and all the military on the highway of heroes got what? Smiles and squat. How many families got 10.5 million who lost their soldier wife/ husband?
I geuss none.
LikeReply711 hrs
Harvey Bishop
Terry Britton Do you know that he was a convicted terrorist? Were you there? I wasn't. I don't condone terrorism at all. But I do know that there is way more to this situation than we know about. It was a Supreme Court of Canada ruling. It originated from three former Canadian prime ministers of Canada. Jean Chretien, Paul Martin and Stephen Harper. Don't forget that a similar situation and payout happened when Stephen Harper was prime minister of Canada. There was a person who was accused of being involved with terrorist activities, detained and tortured. They got a big payout, which was more than Omar Khadr got.
LikeReply210 hrs
Linda Pekrul
Harvey Bishop Layne Morris was there. He tells exactly what it was like in this interview.
LikeReply3 hrs
Cat Gunther
Beyond despicable
LikeReply312 hrs
Dave Klyne · 

First of all WHY in hell did we bring back a convicted terrorist? Second if we are going to spend money to bring him back whomever was responsible foe negotiating to have him returned, should have been smart enough to have him sign that he cannot sue the Canadian Government for anything! But obviously that was not the case.
Secondly if you know you are right , would you rather pay $10 dollars and admit you are wrong because if you stick to your principles it may cost you $30 dollars? Obviously there are no principles, just give in to the terrorist because you think Canadians are Dumb and forgiving and will go along with it.
LikeReply512 hrs
Stephen Martin · 

He was not a convicted terrorist, not in any legitimate court of law. The suit had to do with the liberal and conservative governments' refusal to acknowledge Omar Khadr's rights as a Canadian citizen. That refusal was in the face of three court rulings in his favour. 10.5 million is the cost of reasserting the rule of law.
LikeReply612 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Stephen Martin Thank you.
LikeReply211 hrs
Marilyn Nicholson · 

Stephen Martin hes a murder than cuz he killed a man and blinded an other ..
LikeReply28 hrs
Mike M Hall
Stephen Martin, his whole disgusting family including Omar are terrorists. His sister is currently in jail in Turkey on terrorism charges. A simple internet search will provide all the information...
LikeReply3 hrs
Barry Ross Sr. · 

Hard to respect this prime minister !
LikeReply912 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Hard to respect commenters who don't respect the PM
LikeReply211 hrs
Marilyn Nicholson · 

Julie Ali yah i can see your a liberal ...this pm has done not one thing for Canada hes to busy trying to buy his way into the UN and tring to butter up his Immgants so they will vote for him next election ...I didnt vote for him last time and i will NEVER vote for a liberal again!!!! Oh and by the way YOU HAVE TO EARN RESPECT!!!
LikeReply68 hrs
Lizette Dufour
Marilyn Nicholson Being a Liberal has nothing to do with it. We have a Charter of Rights and Freedom and a Justice System that enforces it. Don't like it to bad it is the law of the land.
LikeReply26 hrs
Carolyn Fox · 

Julie Ali he has to earn that respect..
LikeReply3 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Marilyn Nicholson It's typical of Conservatives to think I am a Liberal. I vote Conservative for your information. I only voted NDP in the last election in Alberta to dump the non performing PCs who in my opinion did not do much for Alberta. Mind you the NDP aren't doing much either. It maybe that all political parties are pretty poor in governance.
LikeReply3 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Carolyn Fox He is doing much better than Mr. Harper. You don't have to earn respect. Every human being deserves to get respect. You can disagree respectfully with anyone without insult and shaming.
LikeReply3 hrs
John Allan Ambury · 

He is a complete and utter disgrace to ALL Canadians if I travel anywhere I would be sure not to admit I have this loser in charge of our country soon it will be sharia state if he has his way
LikeReply912 hrs
Julie Ali · 

No one is asking you to admit anything. He is however our PM. As such he deserves the courtesy of our respect.
LikeReply111 hrs
Lizette Dufour
I hope you are speaking for yourself becasue you as sure as helll don't speak for me. Our
Pm is not a disgrace on the world stage that is just wishful thinking I beleive you have him mixed up with big lump all hair guy that hid in bathrooms.
LikeReply26 hrs
Carolyn Fox · 

Julie Ali not a chance...
LikeReply3 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Carolyn Fox Those who don't respect others --well --its evidence of their own failures.
LikeReply3 hrs
Julie Ali · 

James Steele He doesn't have to be your PM. But he has been voted by the majority to represent us. As we live in a democracy rather than a totalitarian situation it might be reasonable to expect voters to at least respect him. But there you go. It's clear that folks have a thing about the Trudeau.
LikeReply3 hrs
Joan Johnson
Why does Trudeau say it could have been 30 to 40 million when Khadr only sued for 20 million? Don't forget khadr has to pay lawyer fees as well. Just another fuddle duddle.
LikeReply413 hrs
Julie Ali · 

I guess if you look at how much we could have paid in lawyers fees if we lost this case, then the cost would have been higher. In the cases where First Nations folks went to court, we paid big bucks for the poor decision of both Conservative and Liberal governments to litigate.

In a year that saw aboriginal concerns take centre stage with the Idle No More movement and Attawapiskat Chief Theresa Spence’s hunger strike, public accounts figures for 2012-13 released at the end of October show Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada with a legal tab of $106 million. That amount far exceeds the legal tab at the Canada Revenue Agency, the department that was next on the spending list. The CRA spent $66 million.
LikeReply211 hrsEdited
Brian W. Allan · 

He's lost a lot of support for his government's handling of the Khadr B.S.!! Canada should not be known as a supporter of terrorists which it now is!
LikeReply613 hrs
Cliff Moen
The people that say CANADA violated his rights fail to say what CANADA did. Even the Supreme Court is no more specific than saying someone from External Affairs interviewed him while he was sleep deprived and that they gave a transript of the session to the Americans. I bet the Americans had their own transcript long before that.
LikeReply313 hrs
Paul Hahrgis · 

There is ABSOLUTELY no defense for Canadian taxpayers to compensate a terrorist
LikeReply713 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Please all of you keep commenting. It makes for great blog posts.
LikeReply113 hrs
Bryce Currie · 

If he didn't do what he did he would have violated canadian rights. If you disagree fight to change our rights.
LikeReply13 hrs
Dan Cole
I get it Justin, his rights were violated? Maybe? Sooooo instead of 10.5 million, give him a dollar! Pretty sure that would assuage your guilty feelings? Your decision is the kinda thing that brings down governments.....Not that that would upset me, seeing as how you're an idiot and all!
LikeReply714 hrs
Abraham Shtevi
Trudeau is unfit to govern and he needs to get thrown out in 2019
LikeReply1414 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Mr. Trudeau is way better than Mr. Harper and crew. Such an anti-democratic bunch.
LikeReply513 hrs
Scott Chadsey
Julie Ali The alleged abuses of Khadr happened under Chretien and Martin (Liberal governments)
LikeReply913 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Scott Chadsey So what? If both the Liberals and Conservatives did not follow the rule of law then this means only the NDP folks are clean in this junk. It is up to government to follow the laws of the land. If they don't then hopefully successive political parties will pay for their mistakes. Unfortunately both the Liberals and Conservatives were incompetent and we are now paying out of our tax dollars.
LikeReply213 hrsEdited
Scott Chadsey
Julie Ali you threw out the castigation of PM Harper. It didn't happen under his Admin
LikeReply313 hrsEdited
Julie Ali · 

Scott Chadsey Mr. Harper was anti-democratic.
LikeReply213 hrs
William Robert Richér · 

Julie Ali here's reality you would think a new life in Canada would be worth more than money verses killing are troop Harper would said new life or stay were you are ....Trudeau wather spend tax $$ hey thanks for killing our troops
LikeReply113 hrs
Barry Ross Sr. · 

we wer in the black with Harper ,if this is how you think ,soooo sooorrrrry !
LikeReply412 hrs
Julie Ali · 

William Robert Richér I have no idea what you are saying in your comment. The Conservative and Liberal governments made the mistakes that are costing us big bucks.
LikeReply11 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Barry Ross Sr. Mr. Harper and crew wasted a ton of cash. Remember the airplanes and the useless submarines? Canada has failed to disclose the full costs of buying controversial stealth fighters, a new independent report says, warning that the true price tag is at least $10-billion higher for a total of $56-billion.
Mr. Harper wasted this money. And the submarines were a bad purchase. Don't forget the Gazebo junk too.
- spending $50-million of public money in the Muskoka region of Ontario for the 2010 G8 summit, and calling it "investments in infrastructure to reduce border congestion."
LikeReply11 hrs
Harvey Bishop
Scott Chadsey Try Jean Chretien, Paul Martin and Stephen Harper. All three. This was a Supreme Court of Canada ruling. It would have happened even if Justin Trudeau wasn't the prime minister of Canada. Don't forget that a similar situation and payout happened when Stephen Harper was the prime minister of Canada. A person was accused of being involved with terrorist activities, detained and tortured. They got a big payout. It was more than what Omar Khadr got. I don't like terrorism at all, but I do know that there is way more to this situation than we know about. I also voted for a totally independent candidate in the last federal election.
UnlikeReply110 hrs
Andre Duguay
Julie Ali You are a total airhead. It's leftist wingnuts like you who will also pay for his muslim sensitivities. You just don't know it yet.
LikeReply39 hrs
Steve Clawson · 

Harvey Bishop It was not a Supreme Court ruling, it was an out of court settlement made by the Liberal government. Trudeau claims that it would have cost the govt 30-40 million, but even if Khadr did win, I doubt the judge would have given him nearly the 20m he was asking for. Either way, it should have been left for the courts to decide.
LikeReply18 hrs
Abraham Shtevi
Julie Ali Harper did a better job protecting Canadians, growing the economy and lowering taxes, Trudeau and his regime have broken every promise expect for raising taxes,increasing the deficit and creating incompetence on all levels, Trudeau is unfit to lead children.
LikeReply36 hrs
Lizette Dufour
Scott Chadsey But Harper is the guy that had the biggest part.
LikeReply6 hrs
Ken Howe
Julie Ali you do know that they did not actually spend any money on the F35 besides the funds that were paid to be part of the group of countries that are the developers for lack of a better word, the governments of PMJC, PMSH and the present govt have all paid millions into the fund. As to the subs, you are correct, pieces of junk, truly wish the Liberal govt of PMJC never bought them
LikeReply14 hrs
Ken Howe
Lizette Dufour Not even close Lizette close to factual, the Supreme Court ruled the two interrogation in 2003 and 2004 under PMJC and PMPM were when his rights were violated. They also ruled that when or if he was ever brought back to Canada was for the govt to decide and they had no authority to order the govt to bring him back as it was a matter of foreign policy
LikeReply3 hrs
Ken Howe
Sorry should read " not even close to being accurate
LikeReply3 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Andre Duguay You might at least be accurate. I am a Wildrose supporter dear. See my blog: Now go ahead and call me a rightist wingnut. Just to provide us with the same level of poor discourse that you seem adept at.
LikeReply3 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Abraham Shtevi That is your opinion and you are entitled to it. But Mr. Harper did waste a ton of cash, divided the people, suppressed scientists, labelled any citizen who had any sort of environmental concerns as problematic and wasn't that much of a leader in my opinion. Government Denies Khadr Basic Rights

Defying court rulings, the Conservative government refused to accord Omar Khadr basic rights such as access to media. Editorialists of right and left persuasion described the move as unbefitting a democratic government.
LikeReply2 hrsEdited
Julie Ali · 

Ken Howe It was the Conservative government that paid big bucks to redo the subs.
The four second-hand subs Jean Chrétien’s Liberal government bought from the British navy in 1998 for $750 million were portrayed at the time as the military bargain of the century.

Instead, they have spent almost all of their time in naval repair yards, submerging Canadian taxpayers in an ocean of bills now totalling more than $1 billion and counting.

National Defence said this week that one of the subs, the Victoria, could be back in service in 2012.

The other three would remain out of service until at least 2013. One may not be out of the repair shop until 2016.

By that time, the submarines will have cost taxpayers an estimated $3 billion, almost enough to have bought all new subs in the first place.
Liberals brought the subs; Conservatives wasted major money on the repairs.
LikeReply2 hrs
Louise Bonneau
Let's make sure he does not win this one..Keep it on Front Page until September.
LikeReply714 hrs
Terry Britton
How can any military family ever vote Liberal again. Disgusting. The guy planting mines on youtube gets 10 mil. Truly a Justin masterpiece.
LikeReply814 hrs
Harvey Bishop
Terry Britton I don't condone terrorism whatsoever. I also voted for a totally independent candidate in the last federal election. What led up to this Supreme Court of Canada ruling and payout originated from three former Canadian prime ministers of Canada. Jean Chretien, Paul Martin and Stephen Harper. I'm sure there are people who think that Mahar Arar was involved with terrorist activities. (Hope I got his name correct.) He was suspected of being involved with terrorist activities, detained and tortured. He got a big payout, when Stephen Harper was prime minister of Canada. It was bigger than what Omar Khadr got.
LikeReply9 hrs
Steve Clawson · 

Harvey Bishop There was no court ruling, the Liberal government decided to settle out of court.
LikeReply19 hrs
Steve Clawson · 

Harvey Bishop Also, Maher Arar did not confess to any murders and was not found guilty, unlike Khadr.
LikeReply29 hrs
Harvey Bishop
Steve Clawson Let's see what you will do to get out of being tortured. I do know that Omar Khadr was tortured into giving a confession, when he was detained at Gitmo. You will say anything to get out of there, if it was you. They payout to Omar Khadr came from a Supreme Court of Canada ruling. It's been established that Omar Khadr was subject to torture.
LikeReply9 hrs
Steve Clawson · 

Harvey Bishop He's on video making IEDs. Who knows how many others he was responsible for killing or maiming?

Think back to when you were just about to turn 16. Do you think you would be responsible enough to know what your actions would entail?

Where in the Charter Of Rights does it say that you can go to a foreign country and kill foreign soldiers, and when you get thrown in a harsh prison for being a murderer, you can come home to 10.5m?
LikeReply38 hrs
Cam Gall · 

If we would have lost in court I guess a payout was the practical financial decision, but it didn't have to be done in secret. Publicly do it and let the widow's lawsuit go forward before sneaking him the money. Shame Mr. Trudeau, Shame!
LikeReply1214 hrs
Harvey Bishop
Cam Gall Nothing about this payout was done in secret. If it was, how come the details of it are public knowledge?
LikeReply10 hrs
Steve Clawson · 

Harvey Bishop Try a Google News search "Khadr payout leaked".
LikeReply49 hrs
Brian W. Allan · 

"he thinks the government would have lost the case to Khadr if they had fought in court" And decided to pay $10 million taxpayer dollars to a terrorist without even a fight! Yup, Canada sure needs a PM like this; NOT! I'm ashamed of Canada's decision in this matter, totally ashamed!!
LikeReply914 hrs
Mike Slowsky
What about holding this so called Canadian terrorist accountable for killing American soldiers and where is the widows compensation since it was a Canadian who killed her husband shouldn't you man up and apologize to her and her family and all family's involved and give them a cheque after all it was a Canadian that killed and wounded thier loved ones.his responsibility to do so as a leader of a country.. in my humble opinion
LikeReply915 hrs
Shelley Cumberland · 

Okay so that means 3-4X the cost for each Canadian to stand tall for your values and what is right, I would have gladly paid that. This was just plain wrong.
LikeReply515 hrs
Donna Larsen · 

What he did was miss an opportunity to create a new precedent against terrorism and dealing with those families who breed terrorism. This case has created a whole new arena for terrorists to further subject youth into terrorism with political protection.
LikeReply2117 hrs
Harvey Bishop
Donna Larsen This was a a Supreme Court of Canada ruling. It would have happened even if Justin Trudeau was not the prime minister of Canada. It came from three former Canadian prime ministers. Jean Chretien, Paul Martin and Stephen Harper. Dont forget that a similar event and payout happened when Stephen Harper was prime minister of Canada. There was a person who was suspected of being involved with terrorist activities, detained and tortured. They also got a big payout, which was larger than what Omar Khadr got. I don't condone terrorism at all, but I do know that there is way more to this particular situation than we know about.
UnlikeReply210 hrs
Donna Larsen · 

Harvey Bishop my point is so not arguing anything you've written. My point is that there has to be a change toward how terrorism breeding is dealt with and the fact that with "this"protection for this youth being judged and awarded, the world may be dealing with a whole new can of worms in regard to child exploitation and young terrorists.
LikeReply27 hrs
Jim Cherewick · 

Staying safe within your own like minded community of jihadist supporters eh justin? Little man go away and stay away!
LikeReply1217 hrs
Julie Ali · 

This is a silly comment. Mr. Trudeau had the courage to speak up and do the right thing. Unlike Mr. Harper.
LikeReply215 hrs
Penny Russell Leman
Julie Ali You are wrong. The alleged abuses took place under the Cretien and Martin LIberal governments. Mr. Harper repatriated him, but would never have settled out of court because Mr Khdar's accusations of torture had never been proven in a Canadian court of law. The assertion by Mr. Trudeau that it would have cost 30 - 40 million dollars by all accounts has no basis in fact. His payout of 10.5 million was purely a political move that backfired because the very wealthy trust fund child that is our prime minister is woefully out of touch with the majority of Canadians on this issue.
LikeReply714 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Penny Russell Leman Again. Please read this article:
It was the Harper government’s decision to, from 2008 to 2015, ignore the Charter of Rights, the Supreme Court and Canada’s obligation to rehabilitate child soldiers.

This inaction resulted in the lion’s share of the $10.5 million paid to Khadr for being wrongfully imprisoned and mistreated. As I told my students in 2008, Khadr eventually would be entitled to a legal settlement from the Canadian government. The longer the government left him in Guantanamo, the larger the sum of money that would have to be paid out. In an entirely just world, that settlement would be paid out personally by Harper and his cabinet colleagues.
LikeReply113 hrs
Lorna Goodwin · 

Julie Ali everyone is silly if they don't agree with you. Typical liberal no one else is allowed to have an opinion
LikeReply212 hrs
Sean Henderson
Julie Ali Kahdr is not a Canadian he is a traitor & some one should have shot the POS in the temple on the battlefield!! GFYS Ali .
LikeReply112 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Lorna Goodwin Why fall for the Liberal name calling? I have never voted Liberal. But I did vote NDP to kick out the PCs in Alberta and I am glad I did. Voting PC decade after decade got us to this brainwashed state.
LikeReply11 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Sean Henderson This remark has been reported to FB.
LikeReply11 hrs
Brad Rohlin
Julie Ali - ooohhh I bet Sean Henderson is shaking in his boots-- perhaps someone should report you as it's not good at all having someone so dumb teaching anyone.
LikeReply310 hrs
Ken Howe
Julie Ali Using I politics to back up your case in not the best of ideas. It is well know what side of the political spectrum they lean to and it surely not the middle. There head editorial has never meet a conservative that she has never detested lol
LikeReply13 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Lorna Goodwin You can disagree with me and not be found silly. But in this case I think you are disagreeing and I do find you silly. Also I have never voted Liberal. This is Alberta remember? We don't vote Liberal.
LikeReply2 hrsEdited
Julie Ali · 

Brad Rohlin I guess this is true for all sources of information. But the facts remain.
LikeReply2 hrs
Gurpreet Bajwa · 

The most divisive PM ever who follows policy of appeasement for certain religions
LikeReply1417 hrs
Julie Ali · 

He did the right thing. I don't think it is divisive to do the right thing.
LikeReply115 hrs
Gurpreet Bajwa · 

Julie Ali with your this comment you have actually provided evidence in support of my factual statement. Just read the names of his commenters on his linked profile and you will see evidence of appeasement and dirty 3rd world politics on his part.
LikeReply314 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Gurpreet Bajwa Oh give me a break. This is ridiculous.
LikeReply213 hrs
Gurpreet Bajwa · 

Julie Ali you got your break with Trudeau as PM. Obviously, truth hurts.
LikeReply213 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Gurpreet Bajwa I did not vote for Mr. Trudeau. Just because I think he did the right thing doesn't make me a Liberal voter. I happen to have voted Conservative in the past until Mr. Harper went all anti-democratic. Folks should look beyond the Brand of Conservative and Liberal to performance. Both these ruling parties failed big time.
Truth never hurts;it heals.
LikeReply113 hrsEdited
Gurpreet Bajwa · 

Julie Ali question is not about who voted for who, divisive policies hurt everybody especially for a first generation immigrant like me, this is nothing but vote bank politics on your and mine dime. His father was a looser and so is he.
LikeReply412 hrs
Julie Ali · 

Gurpreet Bajwa Since his father was the PM and he is now the PM I doubt that they are losers. In my opinion. both of them are winners. I mean they got to the top of the pyramid of power didn't they?
LikeReply11 hrs
Gurpreet Bajwa · 

Julie Ali if winning an election defines winners and loosers,then Saddam Husseins, Gadaffis and all other loosers are also winners.
LikeReply511 hrs
Cat Gunther
Gurpreet Bajwa lol, nice
LikeReply11 hrs
Harvey Bishop
Gurpreet Bajwa I don't like terrorism at all. I know that it was a Supreme Court of Canada ruling that led up to this payment. A very similar situation and payout happened when Stephen Harper was prime minister of Canada. Someone was suspected of being involved with terrorist activities, detained and tortured. Their payout was more than Omar Khadr got. There has been more than one Canadian who was accused of committing a crime, imprisoned and they got a big payout after they were released from prison. They came from different backgrounds. The Supreme Court Of Canada is who makes the rulings. I only voted for a totally independent candidate in the last federal election.
LikeReply9 hrs
Steve Clawson · 

Harvey Bishop Stop posting things that are false. Maher Arar got slightly less than Khadr (10m for Arar and 10.5m for Khadr. There is also a huge difference between the two cases. The settlement with Khadr was not a court ruling, it was a settlement made by the current government.

You can't be taken seriously because you clearly don't know the facts.
LikeReply18 hrs
Ken Howe
Harvey Bishop , the only really similarity between the two cases is the both had their rights infringed upon by a Liberal government. Arab was detained by the Americans in NY, the RCMP provided information to the Americans and he sent to Syria where he is a dual national and was tortured. There were no factual evidence in his case to prove he was a terrorist unlike Khadr who was captured on video not only building IEDs but planting them. When he was repatriate to Canada he should of been tried for treason.
LikeReply3 hrs

No comments:

Post a Comment