Thursday, May 07, 2015

Bill C-51, Stephen Harper and Mr Handcuffs

Despite the best efforts and all the warnings Bill C-51 has now passed, and Canada is now on its way to becoming a police state. 

And although I regret that the Liberals voted for it, I understand why they did, so Stephen Harper wouldn't accuse Justin Trudeau of being soft on terrorism.

So I'm saving all the blame for the political pervert from whose diseased mind it sprung.

And this little video I made last night sums up how I feel about him...

And all I will say is that we will use that fascist bill against him in the election campaign.

The Bill will only be scrapped when the filthy Con regime is finally defeated.

Unite to make that happen. 

And set this country free...

Please click here to recommend this post at Progressive Bloggers.


Anonymous said...

trudy has once and for all AGAIN proven, along with his fascist-wannabe party, that he/they are in no way fit to rule Canada either. Pandering to the witless-ass platform of "fear-fear-fear" out of fear of being called "soft" just proves that very point -- that he is soft. Too weak and too soft to take a stance against the most heinous piece of "legislation" this and most other civilized countries have ever seen/heard of. I will never vote for a craven little puke like trudy or his party of corporate lapdogs and I think anybody that does or apologizes for their unbelievably cowardly behavior is just as big a traitor and just as much of a spineless coward as trudy and his so-called "progressive" party is.
We have a so-called "progressive" majority here in Ontario and already we are seeing the corporate endowments and privatization feeding frenzy starting with mcguilty's clone with tits, wynne.
Fuck the dirty cons and their sissy twins the libs!!!

Hugh said...

Bill C-51 and trade deals which allow foreign investors to sue Canada over our laws they don't like are two good election issues.

Mogs Moglio said...

Here is what I read into his statement "Do you like handcuffs"? Um it is hard to say but by the way he was smirking looking at her breasts he wanted to take her home and handcuff her to his bed. "Do you like handcuffs" "Do you like handcuffs" "Do you like handcuffs" well then come to my bedroom at 24 Sussex drive and when I am done with you my pretty my RCMP body guard will toss you into the driveway for me. I am sure Harper is a pervert his days are numbered.

e.a.f. said...

I just wonder who of us will be the first to be detained, arrested, questioned under this new law. Perhaps Steve will try to have some blogger arrested first or some commenter on a blog arrested. If that happens perhaps we can arrange to all be sent to the same jail.

The greatest terrorist in Canada these days, in my opinion, is steve harper and his cons. cutting $30 billion from our health care in 2017 will result in any number of deaths. Not wanting to deal with the murder/missing 1,200 First Nations women just says its o.k. to those murderers to keep on going. That is terrorizing. Then there is the warmongering. That is terrorizing. In my opinion, steve is a dangerous man and it would be best if he were un elected along with his travelling buddy, Jason. both are a waste of our tax $s.

Unknown said...

I agree with the police state nature and the horror of having this bill passed in to law. I do not agree with the Liberals supporting it. Harper and his CONs will accuse Trudeau and the Liberals of being soft on crime and terrorism. So what? Are they defined by what Harper says they are. They need to develop some courage and defend what they really think in principle. They have supported this bill for political reasons. I am really disappointed in them.

Anonymous said...

If it wasn't blatantly obvious this was written by someone from the left this would be textbook CPC hate-speech attack poison. Yet somehow it is the Libs who are the mirror image of the Harper CPC??? Look in the mirror and perhaps reflect on what you showed here in your language and perhaps be a bit less obviously aping of the Harper machine please. It is Dippers like you that underscore why for some the NDP is the true mirror of the Harper CPC, not so much for policy but approach to politics, especially while trying to claim only they are pure and trustworthy despite their own checkered history whenever power is entrusted to them. BTW, since when is it progressive to use gender as an insult as you are clearly doing with this "trudy" nonsense, that is pure quill CPC 101 poison. Yet further evidence that for all the pious mouthing you are doing your ability to practice it seems sorely lacking.


I get the anger towards the CPC and even towards the Libs within the left/progressive community, especially on C-51, but the fact that NO-ONE called this person on their abusive and sexist language I find a little sad, to be honest. This was pure anger and bile, and it uses one of the more disgusting tropes against Trudeau, feminizing him, and yet this is supposedly a progressive making this complaint judging by what they are complaining about, and the feminizing is ignored by all here? I'm sorry Simon, but that bothers me a bit, even given we are talking about an anonymous poster here.


Anonymous said...

It matters because the Libs and Trudeau need to not just pull support from the center left, but the center and soft right as well, and these are the voters that this issue actually carries weight with. I agree this has cost the Libs and Trudeau some from the left flank, but it may well be a major aid in the right flank come the next election, and given how large that right flank proved itself to be when it ran away from Ignatief and from Layton's Orange Wave in the 2011 election to help Harper make his majority this is no small consideration. This is what the Libs and Trudeau have to do, they need to try and reach the middle which means they are never going to always please anyone from either side of the spectrum, and in some things appear too much like the party farther away from the center, be we talking CPC or NDP.

This bill was in part a trap for Trudeau, and I agreed with Simon when he made this argument when the bill was first introduced. It also allows Trudeau and the Libs to stay opposed to the Iraq/Syria war without seeming to be totally irresponsible to those same center right voters I just mentioned, also an important point. Trudeau has already shown a few times now that he has courage and belief in principle, one example of which cost him 2 MPs and caused him a lot of cheap shots taken by those on his left flank within the NDP who in my view were absolutely disgusting in how they dealt with that issue. Indeed, it was watching my MP Megan Leslie during that period which cost her any chance at my vote next time out, and my wife's as well. The point being he does have principles and values that he believes in and shows courage with, to claim that because he is making a hard political choice here that he does not at all seems a bit unfair to me.

Please note btw I've always said C-51 is a POS across the board, and it is clearly being written primarily for electoral politics, not security policy overall. That said though it does have some useful bits within it, and as much as Harper has overstated the threat for Canada and Canadians for partisan purposes it isn't like it is non-existent either. That means for those unaligned centrist voters out there you need to show you take security seriously while not buying into the hysteria that Harper has been spewing all along. So while I agree that the Lib position here is more about political positioning than pure principle, to say it is without any is also unreasonable in my view. I do not believe a Lib government would have ever brought into being legislation that looked anything like this on their own, and I do believe they have been principled and consistent in what they see as the only feasible way to fix this bill into something that actually serves a purpose that actually has something to do with real security as opposed to electoral security as it clearly is intended for Harper.

I am not all that happy about their choice on this bill either, but I think they made the best of a bad lot balancing a lot of important factors, both those within the realm of security and within the realm of electability, and given the way the Harper regime has operated to date in every election against the Libs that is a fair concern I submit. I guess this means I am far less disappointed in them for this choice than you, and so many center left voters appear to be, and to be honest I find the utter lack of consideration given to the need of the Libs to consider not just the left but the right within the political dynamic a bit self serving. For Harper to go down the center right needs to feel they have somewhere else to go to, and that is a part of what has historically made the Libs succeed in winning government so much along the way. They at different points in their history lean more left or right but are always willing/open to both sides for ideas and policies instead of being ideologically rigid, and that gave us a very liberal progressive law abiding nation prior to the rise of the Harperium, which I think should not be discounted.