PrimeNumber

Please provide one shred of evidence that proves Harper supports a Palestinian State as well as an Israeli State

Maybe you should revise that old post to include yourself, Bush and now Rue.

You and you're buddy Bush have that covered without our help.

Perron from what I hear was wanting to go, players like that drag down a team. This is possibly one of the deepest drafts we've had in a long time so maybe they can get a decent late round defencemen to help in the future. They need get rid of Eberle and Yakupov and I think they are in line for a better year next year. Ever since Paul Maurice moved Buff from RW back to D because of all the injuries hes been playing like he wants to stay there. Buff is an all around Defencemen but he's only an okay Winger. I hope once our D-core gets healthy again and we have surplus we can maybe see a trade for a top 6 winger and as long as Hutchinson can continue being a beast bewteen the pipes, I think we're set for a solid playoff run. For the last few seasons Boston has typically been the team with the toughest players in the NHL but this year I think the Jets take the cake which can really help come playoff time.

There's been a few "better" trades coming out of Edmonton recently. If they can make one more big move mostly regarding Eberle or Yakupov and snag a new goalie at the deadline or offseason then gear up for McDavid. They can come out next year with a fairly decent team. If that exact situation doesn't work out then I think a repeat may be in order. I just hope they don't ruin McDavids career if they get him. But in other news how about Big Buff and my Jets raking some Leafs tonight? 5-1 ouch, looks like all those home games are catching up to the leafs, this road trip has proved what the underlying metrics have been all along. Regression.

Witches are evil, we should abstain from whitches. Because everyone knows they're real, just like demons, wizards and dragons!

So does this mean that Christians can't be foolish either? Because then, I'm pretty sure no one in the history of Christianity has ever been a Christian.

If "Christians" cannot be prideful in any way, I think we could cut the population of "Christians" in this country in half very easily.

Well it's about time someone is finally paying attention! You have commanded my respect. You will notice though that my 1st shortened definition, which would still apply, has a key word within that definition separated by the comma, "especially" which in its most simplistic terms means 2. to a great extent; very much. Is not an absolute term, therefore the usage of the term "Terrorism" as 1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce Would to a lesser extent, still apply to any definition of the word. You will also notice my 2nd definition comes from the definition of the word "Terrorist" rather than "Terrorism" 2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others. The key word in that definition being "Terrorizes", which you will notice as it's 2nd definition means; 2, to dominate or coerce by intimidation. Which, in fact directly applies to my 1st definition. /Prime

hahaha you're the one who should be embarrassed those are definitions of Terroism. Try picking up a dictionary sometime, you might learn something.

hahaha no but I'mmmm suuuuuuuure Murica' and their guns will lead the west to peace and social justice /sarcasm

So a robber with a gun is a criminal, but a different man with a gun who is killing people is a terrorist? So then anyone who using a gun to do anything other than to rob people is a terrorist? What happens when the robber kills someone, but fails to rob anything? Is he then a terrorist?

Well to be fair the definition of Terrorism extends to anyone who 1. uses violence and threats to intimidate or coerce others. 2. a person who terrorizes or frightens others. So technically one could argue that anyone who frightens them in any way can be a Terrorist. The word is entirely subjective and in my opinion is used far to often. Let's just call them all criminals and be done with that stupid word.

Yeah because Bush and the Republicans did such a good job on the first go around... It's crazy people are willing to give them another crack at the middle east. Let's see how many more violent factions the Republicans and their military can create this time around.

Yes because Harper has any more original thoughts than either of them.. He's a regular Paulius Zabotkiene I find it funny how right-wingers in Canada's main talking point is opposing party leaders haricuts, like it means anything. Yet fail to mention anything about old Stevie and the ridiculous amount of hairspray and products it takes to comb over that "just-for-men" cowlick of his.. Here's a fun fact, Mr. Harper is the first prime minister in this countries history to employ a personal stylist, Michelle Muntean, whose duties range from co-ordinating his clothing to preparing his hair and makeup for all speeches and television appearances. While formerly on public payroll, that's right at one point in time you the taxpayers were paying for Mr. Harpers eyeliner and mascara touch-ups in between attack ads and fund-raising spots, she is now paid for directly by the Conservative Party. Be happy your fund-raising dollars go into keeping that comb over nice and slick!

A centralized government like structure is like the European Parliament. What I meant was the organization of the member states themselves really. The government like structure acts as the forum for which discussion and debate take place. Sovereignty is not lost, it is retained.

As are the majority of 1st world countries. Agricultural, energy, forestry and mining exports accounted for about 58% of Canada's total exports. Without resources to export we have nothing to offer the outside world, which means no investment from the outside world, which means a failing dollar and we are far to big of a country to rely entirely on tourism. Also many, if not most towns in northern Canada, where agriculture is virtually nonexistent, exist because of a nearby mine or source of timber. Then there are industries linked almost entirely to resource extraction such as Canada's largest manufacturing industry the pulp and paper sector, is directly linked to the logging industry. Without resources Canada would not have anywhere close to the Economy it does now and the service industry would suffer because of it.

Not sure why the tin foil hat people would be for a North American Union?

How is doing any of that surrendering sovereignty? I never said anything about surrendering sovereignty in that paragraph, not sure what you're reading?

This is true I stand corrected. Places like Texas and California could manage very well without any outside help, others may need a Union but might want to retain sovereignty as their own country.

Without resources people wouldn't have settled this land to begin with.

None, except the EU, have done all three but almost all of them have done at least one of the three things I mentioned. Which are a common currency, open border agreements and the harmonizing of business', industrial and trades regulations. Others have done even more. These Unions often work very slowly, many of them have been considering common currencies for 20+ years.

I don't know who because it's impossible to tell who may be in power in each of these countries in the next 20 years. If you know please do share. The why is to advance each others economies. With something like the Amero it is estimated that Canadian business' would save upwards of $3 billion a year in currency transactions alone. Other why's are to harmonize regulations between the countries benefiting cross border trade, as well as things like trades and manufacturing regulations. Which can have a whole slew of benefits and consequences for all member states. Individuals and corporations will always "do well". There are individuals and corporations in 3rd world countries that "do well" But the aim is for a lot of individuals and business' to "do well."

Well you have the African Union, the Arab League, the Asian Co-op Dialogue, Association of Caribbean States, ASEAN, The Caribbean Community, Central American Integration System, The Commonwealth, Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, European Union, G.U.A.M, Gulf Cooperation Council, Latin American Parliament, Melanesian Spearhead Group, MERCOSUR, NATO, Pacific Islands Forum, Polynesian Leaders Group. R.E.O.P, Shanghai Cooperation Organization, South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation, The Union of South American Nations. Almost all of these Unions strive to create prosperous trade within their member states, some have harmonized regulations and the movement of people within them, almost all of the larger ones have tossed around the idea of a common currency to improve their economies as well.

I could see that too. But the fractured pieces will be weak on their own, even just a loose Union may still occur. It may not have much power rather than to unite the pieces for common goals.