Wednesday, April 29, 2009

Did someone not like the answers?

I was reading the BloggingTories blogroll today when I came across Steve Jenke's post about providing feedback to the Liberal party's 10 percenter that went out.

So I clicked the link and tried to do just that. Too bad that link didn't work. I tried Steve's link, I took the link directly from the 10 percenter, etc. None of them worked. Did the Liberal party of Canada not like the feedback they were getting? Did they decide to take it down since they were not getting the response they thought?

I wonder if anyone will ask them :)

Sunday, April 26, 2009

A body blow to the justice system

Greg Weston has an interesting column in the Sun today.

(emphasis mine)

As the inquiry into the shameful RCMP stun-gun death of Robert Dziekanski at Vancouver airport increasingly becomes a parade of Mounties up to their tunics in horse manure, at issue is far more than shocks, lies and videotape.

It is about just how badly broken the federal force has become, and the lasting damage to both our justice system and the public's faith in law and order.

For most Canadians, the Dziekanski inquiry long ago stopped being about what four Mounties armed with 250,000 volts did to a hapless Polish traveller who arrived at Vancouver Airport on Oct. 14, 2007, to visit his mom.

All those sickening details of his final seconds with the RCMP welcoming party are on the now famous amateur video shot by a private citizen who thankfully happened on the scene.

Instead, the inquiry is all about the Mounties trying to explain why they repeatedly zapped a confused man holding a stapler, and writhing on the floor.

And when it was all over and Dziekanski was dead, how was it the national police force, sworn to uphold the truth, "misinformed" the public about the deadly encounter?

Last month, the inquiry heard RCMP testimony so at odds with the video of Dziekanski's death that most ordinary folk must have wondered, just how stupid do they think the public is?

This past week, the force finally admitted what has been apparent since the video was first pried from RCMP clutches (under the threat of legal action) weeks after the tragedy.

"We found that there was some information that was provided and made public that was not accurate," RCMP Sgt. Tim Shields told reporters outside the inquiry room last week.

"For those inaccuracies, we apologize and we are sorry." Talk about too little too late.

Some of those "inaccuracies" included such minor issues as depicting Dziekanski as a raging crazy person who had been struggling with three police officers, swinging an object over his head, when he was downed by two jolts from the Taser.

Turns out he had a stapler at his side (not overhead), and his only contact with the Mounties was after he was on the floor in pain from the first of five (not two) 50,000-volt hits, and four (not three) burly cops piled on him, one on his neck.

So much misinformation from police involved in the incident might have explained how the RCMP media relations officers came to feed the same crock to reporters and the public.

But last week, one of those officers admitted he and a colleague from the PR department had watched the video before briefing the media.


They were later ordered by a superior officer not to correct the record, supposedly to protect potential evidence, including the video.

RCMP Commissioner William Elliott recently asked the public not to jump to any conclusions, and to have sympathy for his position.

All of which can only damage the image and morale of a force already in the dumps after years of misguided management from the commissioner's office down.

Imagine how embarrassing and demoralizing the flimflam from the Dziekanski inquiry must be for all the devoted men and women who serve with distinction on the national force.

But the effects of this sordid affair go far beyond the RCMP.

Every day in courtrooms across the country, citizens accused of all manner of wrongdoing have their fates decided in large part by the word of the cops.

Police being truthful is obviously a cornerstone of our legal system, essential to keep the scales of justice balanced and fair to accused, victims and society alike.

It is equally important that the cops be seen to be telling the truth -- a society that loses trust in the police, quickly loses respect for the law.

Unfortunately, no matter how the Dziekanski inquiry ends, it is unlikely most Canadians will take away a lasting impression of cops telling the whole truth and nothing but.

Let's face it: Were it not for the amateur video, there is a good chance Dziekanski's death would have been quietly filed as another routine case of police using a Taser to defend themselves in the line of duty.

Last fall, on the eve of the inquiry, Commissioner Elliott said his force was "anxious to participate to the fullest extent possible.

"We cannot provide effective policing services to communities without the support of those communities ... We have to be held accountable."

A good place to start might be a shower of pink slips, or one obvious resignation.

Isn't police planting evidence, framing a suspect, not telling the truth, or just a plain mistake one of the greatest fears of the left when it comes to harsher sentences or even the death penalty?

How can we advocate for the death penalty when our national force is so incredibly incompetent that they can't tell the truth even when their is video evidence disputing their version of events.

On track for budget a surplus

Good news indeed!

The NDP and Liberals must be annoyed at this news, after all they are trying very hard to paint the Conservatives as poor economic managers, but we all know they would have gone into deficit as well. A higher deficit, with higher taxes to boot.

The polls are not good for the Conservatives right now (not a big surprise), and Iggy is going to go into a MSM lovefest with the upcoming Liberal Leadership Convention. Hopefully the MSM will pick up on this bit of positive news. Regardless of partisan politics, Canadians could use some.

As an aside, why are they still calling it a leadership convention? There are no contenders, it is nothing but a coronation. A parachuted Liberal leader, just as he was parachuted into his riding.

Saturday, April 25, 2009

What is it with people from Arizona?

Arizona Senator, and former Republican Presidential candidate John McCain has also come out and stated that he believes some of the 9/11 hijackers entered the United States through Canada.


This uniformed punditry must end. I am very glad that the Government is taking aggressive action to counter the lies and smears. From the Ambassador to the Finance Minister, and even if necessary, the Prime Minister. Perhaps another US media tour is needed to publicly smack down these fools.

I hope the Conservative Government is listening here, do not allow these lies to stand. Aggressively counter them, and set the record straight.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Obama's great judgment?

President Barrack Obama's choice for Secretary of Homeland Security is a complete waste of time. Janet Napolitano is completely knowledgeable about border issues.

What makes me so sure about this assertion?

Ms. Napolitano has claimed that 9/11 terrorists has entered the United States via Canada. Bravo Ms. Napolitano, bravo. Thank you for once again raising the old, debunked specter. I guess I should be glad it was on CBC and not CBS or some other US network. As once again we would be fighting this misconception.

In an interview broadcast Monday on the CBC, Ms. Napolitano attempted to justify her call for stricter border security on the premise that "suspected or known terrorists" have entered the U. S. across the Canadian border, including the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack.

This is an example of Obama's judgment? An example of the vaunted left's braintrust that will save us all from the horrors of capitalism and free markets?

I supposed it is hard for President Obama to get qualified cabinet members that are both knowledgeable in their portfolios and have paid their taxes!

Friday, April 17, 2009

McCallum the Liar

Former Liberal cabinet minister was caught in a big, fat, stupid lie.

Iggy should ask for his resignation, but I won't hold my breath. If Iggy did ask for McCallum's resignation it would only be for a day until Iggy flipflops yet again.

Seriously stupid blunder from McCallum.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

But I thought Harper only talked to Fox News?!

Harper is like a new man in the last few months. He is talking to the media all the time now. And despite the Left's protests to the contrary, he is talking to Canadian media as well.

The pundits on the left say the Prime Minister is ignoring the Canadian press, and yet here is another interview.

The left say that the Prime Minister is/was Bush's/American's lap dog. And yet a again, a clear, pragmatic, and distinctively Canadian position on something that is a major policy concern in the US.

It is simply a myth that Harper is a parrot of Washington, he states his beliefs, no matter who is in the White House.

Maybe we will get lucky and the Prime Minister will punch out Hugo Chavez. Smack him right in the mouth, that would be an international incident worth the press coverage :)

Sunday, April 12, 2009

Troofers on BT?

How the heck did this happen?

A 16 year old troofer who can't write, nor spell is on the BT blogroll? The signal-to-noise ratio just got a little lower.

Take for example this paragraph from one of his posts:
Take for example Adolf Hitler, a name that is easily matched with Evil and attrocities. No one ever looks at the harships he faced as a boy, or what he actually did to help the german people.

He then goes on to talk about Jesus, I am sure he is trying to make a point, but its hard to get to it.

In a post about Atheism being immoral and wrong:
In my opinion, atheism already contradicts itself for not believing in faith. They believe that science does not rely on faith. Completely wrong...Science does rely on faith. A scientific inquiry or theory that has been developed must be accepted by others. They must have FAITH in that theory so they can BELIEVE it is true.

Err what? No, they believe it is true not because of blind faith, but because they can prove it to be true through demonstration or observation.

Hmmm, hope he doesn't post too much. The other guys will have fun beating him to a pulp.