You can’t put the word ‘if’ in front of such an inflammatory accusation and claim total innocence. When you have one single solitary shred of evidence that the NDP had any prior knowledge of, or hand in, this protest, I’ll gladly listen to such accusations. Until then, have better sense and don’t sink to that level. It’s the worst kind of intellectual dishonesty.

Given the negative reaction towards the NDP, maybe in fact the Conservatives were behind it. Notice I used the word ‘maybe’, so there must be nothing wrong with that.

Abattoir: Get over myself? This isn’t about me. This isn’t even about the protesters. If you read the question at the end:

So ultimately, IF the NDP are in fact to blame for this ruckus, can Ms. Davies truly stand up in the House of Commons any longer and preach about NDP desires for decorum with any credibility?

That’s a valid question bud. IF they are to blame….I haven’t declared them guilty and IF there is an inquiry and if if if…. My question stands. IF they are found to be at fault, can they continue to try and claim that moral high ground with any credibility?

What I have stated, is that regardless of whether or not the NDP had a hand in this, Jack Layton’s desire for better optics that prompted him to secure the facilities under his name in order to meet with more protesters than anyone else makes him a contributing factor to the series of events that led up to the disruption in the House of Commons. Even the protesters claimed that since they were there, and it was only about an hour before Question Period that they decided to take advantage of the situation. So they claim….

I stand by that. You may think it’s me finger-wagging (pointing?) but I believe it to be a valid question, and the actions that were taken are factual.

I mean, what if they were to secretly conspire with the Bloc to try and trap the Liberals into a Coalition to usurp the government when the time was right? Oh wait…..

Woodsworth: Had Jim Prentice booked a hall in Parliament in order to meet with a much larger group than his office could hold for optics, and then proceeded to provide them with passes to Question Period, then yes, this would also be directed at Jim Prentice.

Terrorists? Who said anything about terrorists? Protesters caused the disturbance in the House of Commons. Or are you maybe trying to turn this into something it isn’t with over the top rhetoric? This government and past governments (of all types) have never brought protesters with them to international events, and as far as I’ve been informed, the current government has no plans to break with that habit.

So everything you say here about Jack goes for Jim as well I guess right? What are tories doing meeting with dangerous terrorists on the hill? These questions have to be asked. Are they bringing the terrorists to Copenhagen to disrupt the meeting there?

Jack and Jim have a lot to answer for here.

In another post, I commented on the “throw-away” nature of our society these days, and how we seem to be throwing away some of our older traditions because they appear stuffy and restricting. In cases like this, the restrictive and “stuffy” nature of the tradition served a purpose and achieved a desirable outcome as far as order and respect are concerned.

These days, poor behaviour is far too acceptable and is excused for whatever reason they’re using now. Some people may not believe it, but it’s possible to restrict behaviour without restricting freedom of speech.

Charles: Yes, it was definitely sarcasm. His intended point being a defense that they wouldn’t stage a protest that would interrupt their own speech, obviously. I’m just saying that that denial is a classic stance in plausible deniability preparations.

Canadiansense: True, the circus we call Question Period will continue on as it always has, but then I’ve believed for years that QP is simply that. A theatre where nothing of substance is conducted other than a release valve for pressure that builds during the day and a chance to steal the spotlight for a time each day.

The theatre of the absurd will continue, led by the opposition in the fake outrage everyday on every question to get a sound bite replayed on tv.

Is it any shock fewer and fewer people are listening to our political leaders or watching the traditional news?

So even if the NDP wasn’t aware of the groups intentions, they should be more careful who they associate with, particularly if they’re going to act shocked when jackasses, like this group of protesters, act out publicly.