Apparently, Stephen and his Harpertards do not consider fallen Canadian soldiers to be worthy of parliamentary commemoration. The message seems to be, "Yeah, people are dropping like flies in Afghanistan, but, really...who gives a damn? Let's focus on the good news, people".
Fortunately for the CPC, they have a report to back up their disgraceful ingratitude. That's right: Harper is "standing up for Canada" by parroting the findings of a CPC-commissioned panel larded with faceless technocrats (a panel that also recommended that the flag no longer be lowered in annual commemoration of fallen police officers).
Leadership by report; leadership by poll; leadership by hack-ridden panel, brought to you by "Canada's New Government". Pathetic.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
This is nothing but a Conservative attack site. Forgive me if I fall asleep.
Better an attack site, than an attack dog. Go lie down and sleep now.
Forgive me if I fall asleep.
Forgive you? I would be grateful. It is time for beddie-byes, after all.
Now, don't wolf those cookies down. Eat them one at a time. Daddy will be up with the milk in a minute...
(Kids. Aren't they cute?)
By the way, thanks for acknowledging that my blog is a conservative attack site and not an anti-conservative attack site. Oh, I know that's not what you meant; I'm just rubbing it in.
It's called "editing", my boy.
SF:
I am not sure that lowering the Flag after every battle death is within the Canadian tradition, which has been bastardised over the last three or so decades.
I think lowering the Flag should be done in the case of state observances. Having said that, lowering the Flag for the murder of civilians and constables has muddied the waters.
I think leaving Remebrance Day as a full day for such observances in the best and most poignant thing we could do.
However, I would agree that BOTH parties have served to confuse the issue over the years. Shame on both of them.
By the way, I have been having a running and quite pointless debate with "Hugh" over the issue of Privatised Education over at his site. Why do I bother?
DBT wrote:
"This is nothing but a Conservative attack site."
Gee, I wonder when that dawned on him?
What a poltroon ...
SF:
I have posted this over at DBT's site with regard to the United North American saga ...
-----------------------------------
In 2005 I applied to be included on the BT aggregator (before I realised what they were comprised of ...). I was rejected.
Could it have been because my first post was my policy statement - which was to oppose Stephen Harper and "The Calgary School" in their attempt to conflate their US-style "conservatism" with Canadian Conservatism & Traditional Toryism?
None of my values or statements are without root in the basic Canadian Conservative tradition, as it has been practised since 1796.
I am a loyal servant of my Queen and Country. In fact, as well as in practise. My ancestors served the Crown in coming to Canada after losing their fortunes in the aftermath of the American Revolution. My ancestors served Queen & Country during the War of 1812, the Fenian Raids, and the Metis Rebellions. Three of my Great Uncles perished in the Great War serving Canada and lay buried in Flanders. (I have made the pilgrimage to their final resting places ...) Another Uncle perished over the North Sea with the RCAF when his Stirling Bomber was brought down.
I was an active PC Party Member from 1978 to 1990. I was a Youth Delegate at the 1983 National Convention, and an Alternate Full Delegate at the 1985 Ontario Party Convention. I was President of my Campus PC Assocation for two straight terms.
And yet. And YET, they have the temerity and basic lack of respect for the Tory Tradition in Canada to reject me from the Blogroll (presumably because I oppose the current leader and his minions ...), and INCLUDE "UNITED NORTH AMERICA" on their aggregator! Oh irony, where is thy sting?
And You - Chris, or DBT or whatever you style yourself these days - see nothing irregular about this?! In fact, you avoid addressing the incongruity - other than to blather on about the "conservative spectrum."
And you wonder why no one with half-a-brain takes your partisan prattle seriously?
I have been having a running and quite pointless debate with "Hugh" over the issue of Privatised Education over at his site.
I went over there shortly after he left his first comment. The blog seemed inactive. "Hugh" would appear to be just a typically dreary Utilitarian/libertarian--part of DBT's "conservative spectrum", naturally...
I agree with Aeneas on this. This is a practice that is only a decade old. There is no tradition involved, and the more you lower the flag the less meaning it has.
I don't know why you bother. Nothing I say can penetrate your closed mind. Why involve yourself in debate?
And good job nitpicking trusty tory. I'm sure you are very satisfied by how clever you think you are.
(by the way why do you keep writing Hugh in quotations. I use my real name)
I happen to think this flag-lowering stuff is complete nonsense and it's kind of disgusting that anyone would exploit it for political gain or some presumed moral advantage.
...the more you lower the flag the less meaning it has.
Only for those with infantile attention spans.
Nothing I say can penetrate your closed mind.
Nothing you say has enough force to emerge intelligibly from the fog of your own historical illiteracy. Why do you bother?
I want Canadian casualties to imprint themselves on the nation's collective consciousness. These men and women are dying on behalf of a disapproving electorate, at the behest of a party that would love the deaths to remain hidden and unmourned. These deaths need to scar this country, and a lowered flag is one way of providing that scar.
Is it traditional? No, but then again, neither is it "traditional" for the Canadian Forces to become the military arm of an Islamist state. Since when do our élites give two shits about "tradition"? What is traditional is the tendency for Canadians to value life and to want to grieve its loss when such loss occurs in the pursuit of state aims--and the more absurd the aims, the more tragic the loss.
Post a Comment