[Zipperfish]

Bill C-51 is turning out to be quite interesting. Early polling indicated that some 80% of Canadians supported this bill. I was quite surprised at that number, at the time, because I was under the impression that Canadians placed a higher value on their fundamental freedoms. Then again, this would have been soon after the Ottawa shootings.

However, those numbers have since slid, and the bill is now quite unpopular. It's a huge issue for the Liberals, whose decision to support the bill is costing them, to the benefit of the NDP, mostly.

I just wonder how out of touch this government has become to use a law aimed at curbing terrorism to instead crush political dissent. And I wonder who this "base" is that would support this.

[andyt]

One reason I think I'm voting NDP vs Liberal, unless my vote for a Liberal will unseat a conservative. The Libs voted for C51.

The other thing that changed my mind is listening to cross country checkup, where it was pointed out that the Libs are much closer to the Cons than the Dips, and that a Con/Lib coalition is much more likely than a Lib/NDP one. (Trudeau would use this coalition, or just propping up a minority Con govt to strengthen his party, give him more experience in the hope of getting a majority for himself down the road. He should take a look at what happened to Clegg.)

An NDP federal govt would rock Canada the way it rocked Alberta. I think we could use some of that.

[DrCaleb]

andyt andyt:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

You don't know the context?

viewtopic.php?t=111851

And Albertans recently showed Prentice exactly what happens when the Government does the exact opposite of what the people elected them to do. Harper forgets what province elected him and many of his cabinet.

Guess we'll get spanked for going off topic, but: What I meant about not knowing the context is that I don't understand what got Albertans so riled up about somebody speaking the truth. I know it's dirty pool for a politician to do so, but we all say it's what we want. As I said, keep electing the same government, it means you agree with their policies. The ones that got you into the mess in the first place.

He didn't speak the truth thought. We elected them to live up to their campaign promises, which they mostly did. But we also wanted them to do other things that would make Alberta stronger. Which they didn't.

Harper is following in his footsteps. Harper ran on a 'free, open and fiscally responsible' government. Something it has not been. It's been closed, secretive and fiscally dubious.

andyt andyt:

Not sure what Albertans elected him to do that he didn't, or not do that he did. Either way it was going to be a brutal budget, with lots of pain. Notley will have to do same unless she's willing to run a huge deficit - then people will say they didn't elect her to do that, while gladly taking the goodies that the deficit brings. Alberta isn't any different than voters in other provinces here, just a more extreme example.

That's the kicker - we didn't elect Prentice. We elected Redford because, "How bad could she be?" She talked the good talk, but became the most outrageous example of croneyism ever.

The first time Prentice ran for election, he got his party turned into a smoking hole in the ground. Makes me feel that every time I distrusted and disliked him was justified by Prentice saying "I quit", dropping the mic and walking offstage before the votes showing he won his riding were even counted. That's what kind of a man I thought he was.

[Freakinoldguy]

If this is true it may be the dumbest thing I've heard in months. Well, almost.

But, on the odd chance this isn't just some misprint or misquote there is one simple solution that should satisfy everyone. Allow Israel to sue these people, companies or corporations for discrimination in Canadian courts because if there's one thing the Canadian Justice System knows it's discrimination.

[Zipperfish]

Harper has been a wonderful friend to Israel. Now if he'd just do something for Canada...

[Zipperfish]

They changed the title of the story at CBC news. Must have felt some heat from somewhere.
Old Title: Ottawa considering hate charges against those who boycott Israel
New title: Ottawa cites hate crime laws when asked about its 'zero tolerance' for Israel boycotters

[DrCaleb]

And that's why I like the CBC. If they aren't pissing someone off, they aren't reporting correctly.

[raydan]

So we can boycott any country we want, as long as it's not Israel.

[BartSimpson]

raydan raydan:

So we can boycott any country we want, as long as it's not Israel.

This is the kind of thing that illustrates the failure of an authoritarian state.

Now you have a conservative government that you'd expect to philosophically oppose an act of censorship like this and here they are exercising a power that leftists brought about.

Your government simply has too much power when an idea like this can be brought forth and given serious consideration.

What's next? Arresting people who don't like gun control or global warming?

Or maybe arresting people who DO like gun control or global warming.

A quote comes to mind...

Abraham Lincoln Abraham Lincoln:

Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power

.

[andyt]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

They changed the title of the story at CBC news. Must have felt some heat from somewhere.
Old Title: Ottawa considering hate charges against those who boycott Israel
New title: Ottawa cites hate crime laws when asked about its 'zero tolerance' for Israel boycotters

The body of the article is not changed. They are considering hate charges against Israel boycotts. How else would you interpret the new title? What else could it mean except they plan to charge the boycotters with hate crimes?

[N_Fiddledog]

HonestReporting.CA offers a response to the Neil MacDonald, CBC piece in the OP.

Government Calls Neil Macdonald Israel Boycott Story a “Bizarre Conspiracy Theory”

$1:

Writing on the CBC’s website today, Neil Macdonald, a reporter whose animus against Israel is well known (see his top 10 journalistic transgressions here, and more here, here, & here) published an article with the following inflammatory and inaccurate headline:



In an HRC complaint sent this morning to Marissa Nelson, Managing Director of CBC.ca, we asked if CBC can prove that the Federal Government has “threatened” hate crimes charges against boycott Israel advocates? Can the CBC even cite one such example? The article itself does not contain anything to substantiate this charge except conjecture and Mr. Macdonald’s deductive reasoning, along with his forming conclusions based on some statements made by senior officials like Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney and his spokespersons.
In fact, Mr. Macdonald only says that “The Harper government is signalling its intention to use hate crime laws against Canadian advocacy groups that encourage boycotts of Israel.” This may or may not be the case, but there’s a marked difference between signalling intentions and claiming outright that the government has already “threatened” those who boycott Israel.
Global News reports that “The federal public safety minister’s office flatly denied a report that it has intentions to apply hate crime laws against Canadian groups encouraging Israeli boycotts. ‘This story is inaccurate and ridiculous. These laws have been on the books for many years and have not changed,’ said the spokesman for Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney. ‘We won’t dignify this bizarre conspiracy theory with further comment.’”
Global notes that: “The reporter cited emails between him and a civil servant at Public Safety Canada as evidence” that were published by Glenn Greenwald at The Intercept. The question that remains: Did Macdonald and/or the CBC leak these emails?
Subsequent to HRC’s complaint and the government’s statement of denial, CBC amended the article’s headline which now reads:



Meanwhile, another CBC article’s headline related to this report was amended from: “McMaster students who boycott Israel among those who could face hate crime charges” to “Are McMaster’s Israel boycott advocates among those who could face hate crime charges?” CBC adroitly changed the headline from a claim to a question and never did publicly disclose that the headline had been amended, a violation of CBC standards. The same violation occurred in the CBC’s failure to publicly acknowledge it edited its original inflammatory headline to Macdonald’s article. As well, contrary to CBC standards this report likely should have been identified as “analysis” but was not.
Canadian journalist Warren Kinsella described Macdonald’s CBC story as “recklessly false”...

More at Link

So basically...and once more...the CBC headline should read - "Neil MacDonald has another feeling. Film at 11."

[DrCaleb]

N_Fiddledog N_Fiddledog:

So basically...and once more..."Neil MacDonald has another feeling. Film at 11."

Here's the film.

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/ID/2666967771/

I notice no one is denying anything he says, and they specifically cite hate crime legislation in response. Basically, they support his report.

So, 'feelings' is irrelevant. 'Facts' is more correct.

[Zipperfish]

This just in "Right wing website sez left wing website is wrong. Film at 11."

[N_Fiddledog]

I'm kind of surprised Neil found the time to go off in private and have one of his little feelings.

I expected him to be off with the rest of the flock giving Omar Khadr his celebratory tongue bath.

[Thanos]

I don't know what future good is going to come there for Canada by tying ourselves closer to Israel. I don't even know if we're tying ourselves to Israel-the-nation at all or are mere getting entangled in the narrative created by Likud. Watching the twit politicians in the US going out of their way to see who can genuflect the most towards Binyamin Netanyahu or who is willing to launch the most devastating war on Israel's behalf is bad enough. Having the same phenomenon occurring in Canada will be just that much worse. Just because at any given time I feel that most of the Muslims everywhere can go straight to hell doesn't automatically mean that I'm in a rush to see my own country get embroiled in the stupidity of the Middle East on Israel's behalf. If there's an abattoir on this planet that Canada should scrupulously avoid altogether it's definitely the one that's centred around Israel.