A personal reply from MP Carrolyn Parrish

[andyrew_21]

I recently wrote Carrolyn Parrish with harsh criticism immediately following her comments regarding Gen. Rick Hillier, and the shifting of CF roles in Kandahar. If your remember correctly she said she would vote down the Gov't if CF members died in their new roles, and criticised Gen. Rick Hillier on his stance about the "scumbags". Here is her reply to me after I wrote her. This coming from her personal e-mail, not the one I wrote to :lol:

her reply....

The problem of terrorism absolutely does not solve itself. It is created by countries, such as the US, invading and occupying others that do not want their help. It is created by poverty, brutality and occupation of lands that do not want to be "helped." Major-General Andrew Leslie recently stated that for every angry young man we kill, fifteen more come after you. Brutality inspires brutality. Hillier may be a great general, but he should not be establishing Canadian defense policy - or should I say "offense" policy.

Carrolyn Parrish, MP.

My reply to her....

Dear Mrs. Parrish

Well if you want to talk Iraq then fine. Im not sure if you know this or not but the only information we as Canadians recieve about the Iraq or any other overseas conflict is that which the media choose to release. Whether you like to admit it or not, The United States is the greatest force for good this world has ever seen. Do you remember the video's from frontline journalists when the invasion began? The Iraqi people were praising and cheering the United States for releasing them from the oppression of an evil regime. And evil is the only word to describe it. As the soldiers rolled through the streets of iraqi cities, the people were screaming and cheering what the US was doing. The Soldiers along with Iraqi citizens soldiers ripped down the monument of Saddam and the cheering roared through the streets. Just because the cheering in the streets has stopped does not mean that the US is not wanted there. The only people who do not want the coalition there are the insurgents. The only information we get back here is "5 killed in roadside bombing", or "American citizen kidnapped and beheaded". Of course there is going to be violence, of course there is going to be resistance, its a war Carrolyn. But to say that The US presence is "unwanted" is clearly made with a lack of background, or in depth knowledge on the topic. Dont base your argument or your beliefs solely on what you see on Global news Carrolyn.

as to your reply about Major-General Andrew Leslie, being that this was a personal opinion, this comment is kind of irrelevant. The mindset of these terrorists are of violence, death and brutality. To eliminate them from the map does not just change others minds. For example, does arresting criminals back home here create more criminals? no it sure doesn't, it takes the problem off the street. I don't believe Andrew Leslie's statement was very accurate, and certainly isn't relevant. Again Carrolyn, the problem does not solve itself, regardless of what opposition we face.

And regarding your use of the word brutality, im not sure of your definition of that word, but the actual definition is "a ruthless or cruel act.". Rooting out terrorists who seek to ruin or way of lives because of their hatred for us by military involvement is not brutality, its justice. Brutality is the beating handed out to Rodney King on March 3, 1991. Brutality is the torture of human beings. Justified military involvement in another country is not brutality, its solving a problem. Whether or not its the approach we would idealy like to take to solving problems, its needs to be done. And about General Hillier, if he doesn't step up and take charge of our military the way it should be, who will? We all know your not a fan of the military but your opinions on various topics have proven themselves to be illogical and unknowledgable on many occasions. Your comments on military issues are no exception. I'd love to again hear back from you Mrs. Parrish

from a concerned Canadian,

Andy, Cambridge Ont.


Just thought you'd enjoy the read. ;)

[Silent 6]

good piece...wonder if she'll bother to reply further.

I'm a yank, so I'm not familiar with your MPs. I take it she's one that dislikes America?

[Yeoman]

good piece...wonder if she'll bother to reply further.

I'm a yank, so I'm not familiar with your MPs. I take it she's one that dislikes America?
she sure is.
to me the disgrace of an mp from this fine nation.
Greg

[ArmedPacifist]

I voted for her.

[Rammy]

I find her funny. Last time she stepped on a George Bush figure, I lauged :D

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

She replied to your email too? :lol: I should check mine

[ridenrain]

You voted for her? :bash:
I'd say she's well overdrawn on her 15 minutes of fame. It's time for her to loose the next election and go work for the CBC with the rest of the has-beens.

[Pirate_K]

She replied to your email too? :lol: I should check mine

I also penned a little email to this stupid ****... but alas i received nothing in return.... the same, i suspect as she gave to the people who voted for this misguided piece of trash.......

[ArmedPacifist]

You voted for her? :bash:
I'd say she's well overdrawn on her 15 minutes of fame. It's time for her to loose the next election and go work for the CBC with the rest of the has-beens.

She ran as an independent and she won, definitely not a has been in her riding.

I like her.

[hoganshero]

She ran as an independent and she won, definitely not a has been in her riding.

I like her.

She ran as a Liberal and when she made the following statement
She said she had "no loyalty to this team[Liberals] -- they can all go to hell." it was after this statement she was finally(she had made several anti-american statements at at time when Paul Martin was attempting to repair relations with the US) removed from the liberal caucus. She will run as an independent during the next election which she is likely to lose as many GTA ridings are strongly held Liberal seats and she is no longer a Liberal.


The problem with your statement is that you indicate you like her but your only reasoning (amongst being false) is not predicated on any politics or political issue. Too many people vote without bothering to even understand the issues or why they vote that way. It is this type of voting which gives rise to image consultants. It does not matter if you "like" a politician or if they have a "unique style" what matters is will they fairly represent your country and riding. Because of her smart mouth her riding lost much of it's research funding (now going to a liberal riding). Do you think that it is justified losing jobs and funding so that she gets to "be herself" or "keep it real"?

[hoganshero]

stupid back button

[ArmedPacifist]

She ran as an independent and she won, definitely not a has been in her riding.

I like her.

She ran as a Liberal and when she made the following statement
She said she had "no loyalty to this team[Liberals] -- they can all go to hell." it was after this statement she was finally(she had made several anti-american statements at at time when Paul Martin was attempting to repair relations with the US) removed from the liberal caucus. She will run as an independent during the next election which she is likely to lose as many GTA ridings are strongly held Liberal seats and she is no longer a Liberal.


The problem with your statement is that you indicate you like her but your only reasoning (amongst being false) is not predicated on any politics or political issue. Too many people vote without bothering to even understand the issues or why they vote that way. It is this type of voting which gives rise to image consultants. It does not matter if you "like" a politician or if they have a "unique style" what matters is will they fairly represent your country and riding. Because of her smart mouth her riding lost much of it's research funding (now going to a liberal riding). Do you think that it is justified losing jobs and funding so that she gets to "be herself" or "keep it real"?


So, by your reasoning, it's not okay to like her just based on her actions and nothing to do with her policies, but it's perfectly fine to hate her, not based on her policies but by a few things she said?

Hmmm....

[hoganshero]

So, by your reasoning, it's not okay to like her just based on her actions and nothing to do with her policies, but it's perfectly fine to hate her, not based on her policies but by a few things she said?

Hmmm....

No, I don't hate her. I don't know her. I think she is an ineffectual politician. Her policy is that her "right to speak her mind" trumps her ridings right to fair representation in the Parlimentary process or that her decisions have no affect on her riding( when attacking Gen Hillier she indicated "at least I only speak for myself.' apparently representing her riding is a secondary duty...). Not to mention you at no point mentioned that you "like her" based on her policies(civil unions over gay marriage, protection of consumer privacy and tight weapons control)or her actions but on the false assumption that she successfully ran as an independent. Your reply is a straw man... ie I did not argue for what you are arguing against. Perhaps the elaboration of what her political priorities are (ie her right to "speak for herself" comes before the welfare of her riding and economic wellbeing of her constituents.) might sway you?

[ArmedPacifist]

For starters, your probably right, she probably wasn't an actual independent until afer the election, but she was definitely in the limelight with her comments before the election from what I can remember.

Also, I didn't state a reason why I like her, nor do I have too, I simply do, my reasons are my own.

Odd that you haven't argued with anyone else that says they hate her guts, but only with me who voted for her.....and you say you don't like her? Why haven't you argued with anyone else that their judgement is based on a few things she said, not on her policies?

[MapleLeafInfantry]

Hey andyrew_21 (edit, used to say AP)

You're piece is well written, and I agree with it, but I don't think you should be writing her by her first name... although an independent, she's still the Honourable Member from Mississauga-Erindale. Using someones title is not just good conduct, but a standard. Don't presume the right to call them by their first name, that and misspelling her name is something that will always make your claims seem unprofessional.

My neighbour in Toronto is The Hon. Tony Ianno, P.C., M.P. He's the liberals Minister of State (Families and Caregivers) Now, it sounds like a lot to say, but aside from taking out the garbage in my undies on a late thurs night, if we have to talk buisness, if i have something to request of him, i give the man the credit/respect that his title accords, so i can recieve the service i demand.

my 02c
mapes

[ArmedPacifist]

I didn't write the e-mail.

[MapleLeafInfantry]

mybad. edit. changed.
mapes

[ArmedPacifist]

no worries brother.

[hoganshero]

For starters, your probably right, she probably wasn't an actual independent until afer the election, but she was definitely in the limelight with her comments before the election from what I can remember.

Also, I didn't state a reason why I like her, nor do I have too, I simply do, my reasons are my own.

Odd that you haven't argued with anyone else that says they hate her guts, but only with me who voted for her.....and you say you don't like her? Why haven't you argued with anyone else that their judgement is based on a few things she said, not on her policies?

She wan't an independent till after the election. (she had previously been in the limelight)

I'm not trying to start an argument with you personally... your initial comment about her running as an independent seemed to me to be saying that you like her because she ran as an independent. I'm mouthing off about people who vote based on shallow reasons. Yours was a convienent post to quote. To me your posts indicate that you voted for her becasue she was an independant (because she was made independent based on her failure to place anyone else's needs above her own it implied acceptance of this behaviour)

Also I'm not arguing with you. you and I are having a discussion. You needn't feel "backed into a corner" I'm simply inviting you to elucidate on your points and provide reasoning behind your judgement... if you reason well you may sway me to your side. Words like argument and hate imply a personal connection to both MS. Parrish and to yourself that just isn't there. 80% of communicatin is non verbal. Many flame wars are started on this board (and online in general) when peopl eread a malicious intent behind posts which aren't intended maliciously.

It is my assumption that anyone who posts to an internet discussion forum is open to the idea of a discussion.

I'm not "arguing" with other people on this thread mostly because they seem to have a similar mindset (although you are right they have not indicated their reasons for hating MP Parrish very eloquently in some cases) I chose your post to reply to because( as well as conviently encapsualting , to my mind, an action I had taken umbrage to) you had an opposing opinion to my own and it seemed more enriching to discuss with the opposing viewpoint than "preaching to the choir"

[ArmedPacifist]

My original post that you misintrepreted was not my justification for voting for her, what I remembered was that she was an independent at the time of the election (I'm taking your word for it that she was not at the time), and someone called her a has been, this is obviously not so since she won that same election when she was in the negative press quite a bit at that time. She has a lot of support in her riding where I live.

The most to the point answer I can give you for voting for Parrish is a vote against the alliance party.


P.S. Anyone who's a fan of Colonel Klink is cool in my books.

[MEGR]

Good stuff dude.

[EvanL]

this is the second person who i know she emailed back. why didnt she email me back?!

[andyrew_21]

Hey andyrew_21 (edit, used to say AP)

You're piece is well written, and I agree with it, but I don't think you should be writing her by her first name... although an independent, she's still the Honourable Member from Mississauga-Erindale. Using someones title is not just good conduct, but a standard. Don't presume the right to call them by their first name, that and misspelling her name is something that will always make your claims seem unprofessional.

My neighbour in Toronto is The Hon. Tony Ianno, P.C., M.P. He's the liberals Minister of State (Families and Caregivers) Now, it sounds like a lot to say, but aside from taking out the garbage in my undies on a late thurs night, if we have to talk buisness, if i have something to request of him, i give the man the credit/respect that his title accords, so i can recieve the service i demand.

my 02c
mapes


I suppose you are right. However in my personal opinion, no matter what title a person has, if their actions and their character is undeserving of that respect, than it shouldnt be handed to them. Respect is something that should be given to those who deserve it (ie. Police officers, Veterans, etc.). I guess it would seem more professional to address her in a politically correct fashion, but I dont believe Carolyn Parrish deserves that respect. Personally. I fully respect your opinion and understand why you have it.

[MapleLeafInfantry]

The fact that she has a riding is enough, she didn't just miracle herself there, trust me. Political authority. I have MANY disagreements with the elected officials of MANY other nations, however in correspondence to get a certain amount of respect, you must give it back.

It isn't a matter of political correctness, its a matter of respect, she didn't miracle her career in politics and nor her position as much as you may dislike that fact.

The fact that you compare the title given an elected and accountable public servant with a policeman are hilarious. One creates legislation, the other

Once again im not saying that you don't have a valid point here. But what you're doing is treating an elected representative with contempt, other then having a pissing match, if you really want to get your point accross you should be professional. Im just stating that it makes your correspondance look childish.

mapes

[EvanL]

The fact that she has a riding is enough, she didn't just miracle herself there, trust me. Political authority. I have MANY disagreements with the elected officials of MANY other nations, however in correspondence to get a certain amount of respect, you must give it back.

It isn't a matter of political correctness, its a matter of respect, she didn't miracle her career in politics and nor her position as much as you may dislike that fact.

The fact that you compare the title given an elected and accountable public servant with a policeman are hilarious. One creates legislation, the other

Once again im not saying that you don't have a valid point here. But what you're doing is treating an elected representative with contempt, other then having a pissing match, if you really want to get your point accross you should be professional. Im just stating that it makes your correspondance look childish.

mapes
go to bed man! you have to be at the armoury for 5am tommorow!
hit me up with a call when your in Pet!

[goldman]

this is the second person who i know she emailed back. why didnt she email me back?!

Oh evan. I told you not to ask her for *** at the end of u're comment but no you must continue.

[Kingswat]

We should send her fat ass to afghanistan or she could be the canadian contribution to Iraq..... she'd scare the insurgents away as they'd be wondering if it was just a really ugly cow or an actual person.

[andyrew_21]

The fact that she has a riding is enough, she didn't just miracle herself there, trust me. Political authority. I have MANY disagreements with the elected officials of MANY other nations, however in correspondence to get a certain amount of respect, you must give it back.

It isn't a matter of political correctness, its a matter of respect, she didn't miracle her career in politics and nor her position as much as you may dislike that fact.

The fact that you compare the title given an elected and accountable public servant with a policeman are hilarious. One creates legislation, the other

Once again im not saying that you don't have a valid point here. But what you're doing is treating an elected representative with contempt, other then having a pissing match, if you really want to get your point accross you should be professional. Im just stating that it makes your correspondance look childish.

mapes

whatever bud, whatever

[ßå$tĮТHÏ¿ð]

As a tax paying citizen, I dont pay taxes for individuals in the government go off on there own personal "crusade's" against whatever they think is right or wrong. You there to help lower my taxes, fix our weak ass health care system, and actually do something to make the lives for us Canadians better. Not give us a lesson in there "morals".

I'm sorry, Mrs Parish can get f*cked sideways with a chainsaw. Make room for someone else who's really willing to deal with the issues that Canadians need dealt with....because thats what we f*cking pay you for!

P.s. I'm just a "angry white and un-educated" in her words, I'll be in the garage filing my chain for my chainsaw if you need me....