Before everyone goes to the woodshed with the NDP for kicking out a man with wardrobe issues, maybe we should look a little deeper into this story. After all, the lawyer now threatening to take the NDP to court has twice before taken other organizations to court on similar accounts and as much as everyone to the right of sanity would gleefully expose the NDP in yet another clearly hypocritical example of its loose interpretation of “tolerance”, I think that this time we have to wonder if it isn’t the ex-candidate that is taking the party for a ride. If anything, maybe the only crime that Quebec Dippers committed is allowing themselves to become associated with yet another depraved (,and some could add “deranged”) member of society, and in such a public way at that!
-
RSS Links
Recent Comments
- glacialgal commented on David Warren on the Democrat Seige of Palin
- Abattoir commented on RNC’s Most Important Line Yet
- Shane Edwards commented on RNC’s Most Important Line Yet
- Shane Edwards commented on David Warren on the Democrat Seige of Palin
- glacialgal commented on David Warren on the Democrat Seige of Palin
Charles Anthony wrote:
The point is well taken. However, it would reach (and possibly convince? jut maybe?) a wider audience if it was presented without any of the inflammatory rhetoric. Saying this guy has “wardrobe issues” or that the NDP has associated themselves with “yet another depraved (,and some could add “derangedâ€) member of society” is unnecessary.
It would be wise to stick to presenting the frightening facts. For example, an internet search of “Micheline Montreuil human rights tribunal” can quickly reveal that this same person has taken the Canadian Armed Forces and the national Bank of Canada to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal over similar complaints and won. Our tax bill went up.
Even more frightening is that the tribunal has a backlog of complaints. The tribunal demonstrates political bias every time the choice is made to hear a particular complaint — the tribunal chooses these issues in favor of other complaints.
This person can always run as an independent candidate. Does this person have a right to run under every party?
Do I run the risk of being hauled in front of a human rights tribunal if I do not let a trans-sexual (or a Jehovah’s Witness) into my house?
Posted on 17-Dec-07 at 4:51 am | Permalink
Roger daly wrote:
That’s nothin … Jack Layton endorsed a NDP candidate in the Ottawa area and it was a female Muslim who is Pro-Sharia Law / anti-gay / Pro-Life / and has been at Pro-Hamas rallies with Alexia McDonnough to rais funds for Terrorism …oops Freedom Fighters war materials to crush the zionist pig oppressors .
That’s right folks , while Maher Arar and the NDP were trying to Sue us Taxpayers for $400′000′000.00 based on “Alleged” harm by Syria to a Syrian Citizen , the NDP used Arar’s wife in Ottawa with the hope to cash in on the anti-Israel/USA hatred in the Muslim/Arab population in that riding .
But Alas……the Hijab wearing Candidate couldn’t find enough votes from the Misogenistic followers of Muhammad even though they liked her Jew-Bashing anti-USA NDP platform , but oddly enough , The Mississauga Muslims voted in a Female infidel for another term because her hatred for the USA and Bush was greater than their Misogeny plus she didn’t wear a Hijab that would have smeared Islams image and harm the peaceful teachings of Muhammad who raped a 9 year old based on the voices in his head telling him the virgin was a gift for being so kind and peaceful.
The NDP gave the boot to a female aboriginal christian MP just because she didn’t side with Taliban Jack over the same-gender marriage bill that conflicted with her values , but I guess being pro-Hezballah/Hamas and anti-Gay/Abortion is just fine when layton want to win a seat in Ottawa.
Posted on 17-Dec-07 at 9:36 am | Permalink
Matthew wrote:
CA, obviously the point reached you…
Posted on 17-Dec-07 at 7:00 pm | Permalink