Who on earth would dream Stephen Harper would now choose to ‘retire’, and why would the Conservatives want to subject themselves to a leadership review? Is anybody paying attention out there?
In spite of the Conservative spins the new Liberal leader really cannot be seen as another identical indecisive weakling as Stephane Dion was, he was all talk but not action, therefore the new Liberal leader with quite certainly will next kick Stephen Harper OUT OF OFFICE and be forced to go along with the coalition
Harper and the Conservatives are overwhelmingly popular compared to any other party in Canada but only in the mid west and Quebec, not in the East , so he Harper can never hope to have a majority government without the Quebec support, which for sure he never will get as an Anglophone, and that province also next cannot be purchased at any time for any relatively small outlay. Three strikes and you are out anyway..
So who is it that wants’ Harper to go? Not the Conservatives Party, certainly.. but likely Stephen Harper himself and the coalition, and Harper does not want to be an opposition leader after he has been a Prime Minister. Harper he knows the chance of him next being reelected as Prime Minister once he has been removed is non existent as well
I have to admit I am surprised as to how many persons have not seen from the start what a bad person, unacceptable one, an unacceptable bully Stephen Harper really is. Surely they cannot all be that dumb, inexperienced?
Hey Stephen Harper he is just classical psychology study now too of an abuser, including his rivalry, abuse, and likely violence next. If you notice the following warning signs in a person over a period of time, the potential for increased unacceptable physical violence by them next also exists:
The Classical symptoms :
a history of aggressive, abnormal, offensive behavior
serious drug or alcohol abuse
gang membership or strong desire to be accepted by the gang, to be in a gang
threatening others regularly
trouble controlling feelings like anger
withdrawal from good friends and from the normal, usual, acceptable activities
visibly feeling rejected or alone
having been a victim of bullying, or now being a bully themselves
poor school or job performance
history of discipline problems or frequent run-ins with authority
feeling constantly disrespected
failing to acknowledge the feelings rights of others
or failing to acknowledge the abuse of others
access to or fascination with weapons, especially guns
When you recognize these unacceptable future increased violence warning signs in someone else deal with it. Hoping that someone else will deal with the situation is still false way out.
So the still mostly useless Albertan Prime Minister Stephen Harper and federal Justice Minister Rob Nicholson MP want to get tough on the young offenders, instead of on the parents, show to us all how ignorantly they are and very poor parents now too.. They clearly themselves firstly need to be educated.
If you are being verbally, physically, sexually abused do not hesitate to bring the matter into the open, tell your colleagues, friends and neighbors about it, your church pastors, elders too, congregation members, ands even do call the police. Public exposure and prosecution of the guilty persons always serves everyone’s best interests.
Get educated now, and know more on how to effectively deal with abuses, Bullies and abusive persons today.
What the bad guys still do not like the honest, decent guys to use their own right of free speech to all too?
and what are you going to come after me next too again?
“MP’s mailout proves he’s just being muzzled
Our Conservative MP has sent to all households, at taxpayers’ expense, a so-called newsletter (trimmed in the Conservative colour of choice, blue), which mentions virtually nothing about Brant, the riding he represents.
Like all Harper MPs, he is told what to say and write and, as the message from Conservative Party headquarters must be applicable to all parts of Canada, little mention is made of an MP’s riding or the MP’s constituents.
The content of the newsletter, apart from a generic piece about Remembrance Day, is simply Conservative Party propaganda with, most oddly, no mention at all of the Prime Minister’s decision to prorogue Parliament after sitting only 12 days.
A shaky start for an MP who said he wouldn’t be muzzled — all Conservative MPs are muzzled by Stephen Harper and our MP is clearly no exception.
Andrew Hunter Brantford ” http://www.brantfordexpositor.ca/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1372571
We the citizens still do have our right of free speech to complain even in writing about all perversity, injustice and have the rightful expectations to insure all of our elected members act immediately, properly on it too. Even in Canada the right of free speech is a myth.. and this really is not a funny joke..
Public exposure and persecution of the guilty persons serves everyone’s best interest still too..
- I have often been wrongfully abused on Alberta’s immoral conservative blogs too.. as I have detailed on the net fully too now.
- I have had even Conservative MPS trying to shut me up, falsely telling me not even to write to them anymore such as Moore and Kenney as I next detailed and posted on the net too.
and while some others may write about the supposed virtues of Hon. Rob Nicholson, M.P. as the new POSSIBLE PM replacement still when Richard Johnson Parliamentary Assistant to Hon. Rob Nicholson, M.P. Minister of Justice & Attorney General of Canada he writes back to me for the first you know I have struck a key chord.. or it is campaign time?
Since he has been in the federal office in Ottawa this is the first time Rob Nicholson MP that he has acknowledged any letter of mine ,, you can tell it’s re-election time thus?
Canada’s too often bad cops, for real actions speak louder to me than any words.
When even the police chiefs, police personnel even are also known to play dirty politics, who can you trust then?
” CP TORONTO – Accusations of high-level political interference, petty vindictiveness and tarnished reputations will be on public display this week as Ontario’s top cop heads to court to force an adjudicator he accuses of bias to step down from a police disciplinary hearing. The Divisional Court case Thursday that has entangled Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Julian Fantino comes years after an act of domestic violence that, at most, would have been a media footnote. Instead, a years-long process was set in motion that has raised troubling questions about the politics of justice in Ontario. A dust storm of allegations – witness tampering, personal reprisals, professional wrongdoing, legal chess games and judicial intimidation and judicial bias – still swirls. Court files and hearing documents show it all began when a frightened Susan Cole called 911 one evening in April 2004. She said her estranged husband, provincial police Const. Robert Alaire, had taken a baseball bat to her car at their home in Gananoque, Ont. Det.-Sgt. Mark Zulinski and other officers responded. They asked her to leave her home. They did not arrest Alaire. Cole complained. Her husband, she said, should have been arrested. “It should have been a slam dunk,” Cole said in an interview. “(Instead) it’s a nightmare. It’s just not right.” Cole’s complaint reached the civilian agency that oversees the province’s police. It asked for an investigation. Two senior officers in the Ontario Provincial Police’s professional standards bureau – Supt. Ken MacDonald and Insp. Alison Jevons – eventually concluded proper procedure had not been followed. They recommended “education” rather than sanctions. The union that represents provincial police officers was outraged. “We may have the ammo to take down MacDonald,” the union’s lawyer, Gavin May, wrote in an email to Karl Walsh, the president of the Ontario Provincial Police Association, in August 2006. “We may get two for the price of one.” The association formally complained about the two officers two weeks later. The complaint landed on the desk of Ontario’s top cop – freshly appointed Commissioner Julian Fantino. Fantino was also dealing with fallout from his plans to restructure the 6,000-member police force he now headed. Someone was leaking the plans to town council in Caledon, northwest of Toronto, and some local politicians didn’t like what they were hearing. Fantino concluded the leak must have come from MacDonald, witnesses testified. In a parking lot on March 1, 2007, Fantino said to another senior officer: “Will you execute the disloyal one, or should I?” Fantino later explained the comment as humour, or “appropriate” police speak, a way of saying he wanted the leak stopped and an end to the distractions it was causing. What he didn’t know was that Chief Supt. Bill Grodzinski made notes of the conversation. Fantino charged MacDonald and Jevons, both of whom he transferred out of the professional standards unit without speaking to them or their supervisors, under the Police Services Act. The two officers stood accused of misconduct and deceit related to their investigation of the response to Cole’s 911 call. Any suggestion he laid the charges to appease the police union or to get back at MacDonald for the leak were “hysterical nonsense,” Fantino has said. The first two associates Fantino appointed to preside over the hearing against MacDonald and Jevons both stepped down over issues of potential bias. Months passed before Leonard Montgomery, a retired Superior Court justice with 33 years on the bench, would step into the increasingly mucky swamp as adjudicator. Called to testify, Grodzinski produced his notes, including those of Fantino asking about executing the “disloyal one.” The next morning, the officer found out he was being transferred. Fantino later said he thought he was doing Grodzinski a favour, although he expressed disdain about the “cheat notes.” “People who know me do not hold onto these notes for later retribution,” he said. Grodzinski was blunt. “I viewed the transfer . . . as an immediate punishment, sanction, reprisal – use what word you wish,” Grodzinski said. Intervention from Deb Newman, deputy minister with the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services, undid the forced transfer. Julian Falconer, acting for Jevons and MacDonald, denounces the transfer threat as nothing short of witness tampering. The hearings against MacDonald and Jevons proceeded amid increasing acrimony between the prosecution led by Brian Gover, a well regarded, experienced former Crown lawyer acting for Fantino, and the defence. The defence argued to have the case thrown out as an abuse of process. During hearings in October in which Fantino insulted Falconer and tensions ran high, Fantino changed some of his testimony. The notion that someone had tipped him off during a lunch break led Montgomery to remark that he was “upset.” Gover filed a motion – Fantino was in the middle of being cross-examined – asking Montgomery to step down as biased. He would take the matter to court if Montgomery refused, Gover said, adding the attorney general backed his position. Within a few hours, the ministry disavowed any such backing and said Attorney General Chris Bentley had not been involved. A stunned Montgomery branded Gover’s comments as attempted judicial intimidation and refused to step down. If the ministry had indeed said it wanted him off the case, the political interference was astounding and the conflicts of interest “endless,” Montgomery wrote. Gover remained adamant the attorney general wanted Montgomery gone and had pledged its support. Falconer, in the interim, demanded his interrupted cross-examination of Fantino go ahead. Fantino’s new lawyer, Tom Curry, asked Divisional Court to stay the proceedings until the recusal motion was decided. The court refused to interfere. Montgomery was perhaps just “calling a spade a spade,” the judge said. Fantino appealed. A three-judge panel split in his favour, staying his cross-examination until after the recusal motion is dealt with on Thursday. In the interim, MacDonald and Jevons sit quietly through hours of hearings, seemingly no closer to having their case decided. Cole, who said the two officers were the only ones who ever helped her, said she was dumbfounded at what her complaint unleashed almost five years ago. All she ever wanted, she said, was for provincial police to implement a sensible policy when officers are involved in domestic violence. “It’s gone on to actually hurt some really good people. Like it’s just endless.”" Nasty Fantino battle started with baseball bat, winds through courts
Here are other interesting blogs about the bad police in Ottawa and in Ontario you can look into more further too.
OPP Commissioner Julian Fantino has lost an attempt to remove a retired judge presiding over a high-profile disciplinary hearing. The Ontario Divisional Court ruled yesterday that Justice Leonard Montgomery did not show bias against Commissioner Fantino in comments made as the adjudicator of a sometimes fractious hearing. “The matters complained of do not give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias,” said the Divisional Court panel in a 3-0 decision. The court ordered the disciplinary hearing to resume in front of Judge Montgomery and indicated that it would be “conjecture” to suggest he would not act properly in the future, given the removal attempt by Commissioner Fantino. Otherwise, any side unhappy with a judge “could attempt to remove an unwanted judicial officer simply by bringing a complaint of bias against the officer,” the court said. “That would be inimical to the proper working of the justice system.” Julian Falconer, who represents Supt. MacDonald and Insp. Jevons, said his clients want to resume the hearing and the cross-examination of Commissioner Fantino as soon as possible. “This has been hanging over their heads for years. Apparently limitless (taxpayer’s) resources have been poured into delaying this matter,” Mr. Falconer said, noting that there have been three separate court hearings related to the attempt to remove Judge Montgomery.http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=1375420