Oct 09 2009

Which Canadian Political Party Has the Hidden Agenda?

Canadian Liberals have been harping on a Tory “hidden agenda” for as many years as they’ve been out of power. It doesn’t seem to be doing them much good.

For instance, Loyal Grit pundit Warren Kinsella says the Defence Minister’s statement that Canadian troops may stay behind in Afghanistan after 2011 in a non-combat role (CBC) is proof that Canada will be in Afghanistan long after 2011 – and that Conservatives have been lying to Canadians.

Hidden agenda! Hidden agenda!

Kinsella should have attended the CKNW show on Afghanistan in Vancouver last month, where Liberal bigwig Ujjal Dosanjh said virtually the same thing thing as MacKay, that Canadian soldiers would most likely have to remain in Afghanistan, albeit in reduced numbers and primarily non-combat role.

The bigger question is why Kinsella appears to be salivating over the prospect of a speedy and total withdrawal, no matter what — meaning no troops for training Afghan soldiers or safeguarding our own aid workers from Taliban raiders — in 2011. Is this what the Liberals really intend for Afghanistan? If so, shouldn’t they make this completely clear to Canadians, and to the Afghan people?

Which party has the real hidden agenda?

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]

3 responses so far

3 Responses to “Which Canadian Political Party Has the Hidden Agenda?”

  1. Ronon 09 Oct 2009 at 9:06 am

    Warren strikes gain – being a Liberal he doesn’t observe the constraints of fact. The Conservative government, and many Liberals have said for the last several years, that the COMBAT MISSION would end in 2011 but Canadian troops would remain there in an advisory and re-construction role. That isn’t new. The fact that Warren pretends there is a hidden agenda here is because the man is fronting for a party that has no agenda. The number one error Ignatieff made was to bring this guy on board. Anyone who uses the net a lot (meaning most young people) are familiar with him and that can’t be good for Ignatieff.

  2. Durwardon 09 Oct 2009 at 9:39 am

    We know who has the real hidden agenda, the same people who bow to the UN before making any move, who gave over the control of our foreign policy to the corrupt UN, who stole our money to support their party, who’s ex leader once “promised” to make the provinces slaves to the Feds by removing the not withstanding clause from the Constitution, who raided EI of 54 billion dollars to fake fiscal management, who gave the supreme court the idea they can make laws as opposed to interpreting them.
    Funny I never saw any of this in the red book.
    If saying one thing then doing another is not working under a hidden agenda then what is?
    The Libs say Harper has a hidden agenda but have no proof of any kind, we however have plenty of prove the Liberals do, they always have had, why do you think they love Russia and China?

  3. Susanon 09 Oct 2009 at 9:40 am

    Warren claims that he´s only volunteering his time to Ignatieff and not getting paid this time around. Evident of his worth I suppose, but its helpful to Warren to once again get to hang around the Liberal water cooler. He gets to finally have an audience again and thats good because Warrens tired old punk band Trolling for Brains is down to just four or five hard core depletionist fans. Maybe he´ll add Iggy on hot air guitar. But really…
    Kinsella cares not a wit about a desperate yet hopeful Afghan people.
    He is just a old school angry Liberal partisan hack who will say absolutely anything to try to poison absolutely anything this government does. He fancies himself the master of the newspaper or TV gotcha comment. Truth is not a requirement, just the statement.
    He has lost any prior relevance and has fallen so very far since his Web of Hate booklet.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS

Leave a Reply