cannuck

But, that is EXACTLY what every politically correct, globalist Liberal wants to do - CHANGE this country. It happens to be that the majority really IS of Judeo-Christian CULTURE, if not religion. That culture may be loosely based on those religions, but in most of the country, religion is really no longer relevant to daily life. Bending every rule under the sun to accommodate those who DO adhere to religious dogma really does destroy out culture as it stands.

I don't think I am the only Canadian who believes in the rule of law within a democratic institution. I don't really consider myself part of any particular religious identity or culture, nor am I all that fussy about defining myself by race (although what my ancestry is remains a fact). My only concern is that Canadians have a choice in defining what they want Canada to look like and BE like - and that at this point in time is very much dependent upon immigration policy. I can see you actually DID spend time in Japan, as only one with first hand experience would appreciate that the most offensive thing there is to Japanese is an individual (which is why one of my personal heroes is Soichiro Honda). Unlike you, and most Westerners, I am completely at home and ease within MENA, particularly KSA. I can fit in very well there, but the last thing I would EVER expect to do or have them recognize is changing their culture to accomodate mine. So why would I want to change my country to suit them???

I don't live in WWII Germany under the National Socialist Party, and I have no interest in ANY religious BS of any sort.

Who in their right mind? The majority, that is who. I don't remember in my entire life of taking part in ANY "genocide" (I should add: my children are eligible for status but outrightly reject anything as racist as accepting it). Morality has nothing to do with it, plurality does.

I would like to introduce you to a novel concept: democracy. If the majority of Canadians want this to remain a Judeo-Christian, predominantly white county, than that IS very much OUR choice to make. What puzzles me is why it is not alright for us to wish to maintain our cultural identity, whereas virtually EVERY other country is fiercely protective of theirs. Worse than that, we are the "racists" when we won't bend over and take it up the hoop to accommodate foreign cultures and religions within OUR country. Go and spend some time in Saudi Arabia or Japan, THEN come back here and tell me what you think racism is and what is or is not acceptable behaviour here.

I guess that makes me a cynic.

I am still on the fence about most immigration issues, but when it comes to the economic side, I see some distinctly different values related to country/region of origin. Europeans obviously constitute the core of business in this country, and due to the culture and educational standards, Euro immigrants can arrive one day and be paying taxes the next. I think back to the Vietnamese refugees who came maybe 30 years ago. The parents seldom spoke any English, and few "went to work", but their children assimilated economically very quickly and successfully - while still clinging to their culture within their communities. India seems to provide us with immigrants who - let's just be charitable and say they behave here pretty much as they did at home. Again, though, second generation at least around here pretty much just blend in and get on with life. Strangely, I find Central and South American immigrants from arrival seem to do pretty well here (would love to hear other's experience and opinions on that one). I would like to cut some slack to the ACTUAL refugees coming here from Syria (and other conflict zones) and can just hope that their second generation will do what the first is very unlikely EVER to do (i.e. contribute to Canada economically in any useful or meaningful way). BUT: I have absolutely no tolerance for economic "refugees" who seem to be bringing not much of anything except criminal records to our country (I understand that over 50% of those now crossing from the US have criminal records). It is hard to ignore the clear ethnicity of certain criminal groups related to drugs and violence in places such as Toronto. It was mentioned earlier in this thread that this is mostly a "barren land". Uh, you COULD say that about the North, but the South is pretty much all arable and potentially very productive. What I do NOT see is a wave of immigrants flooding to those vast open spaces, but instead clustering around the social services of the second most expensive places in Canada to live (big cities - the far North is by far the most expensive). If there is any one thing I could say about the difference between Canada and the US is that rural USA is FULL of a completely diverse range of business and industry, whereas in rural Canada, we have pretty much nothing but services to the ag and resource industries outside of the a-hole factories...er...I mean major urban centers.

Yes. Our closest ally was attacked by a force that seemed to be located there (and elsewhere). The Cretin was wise to bow out on Iraq but I think showed a measured response in doing Afganistan. Yes, we went to war with horrible equipment, and that can be traced right back to Paul Hellyer and PET when they decided to destroy our military as a military force and use it as one of their social engineering projects. Plays right back into the party card PET carried while studying at the Sorbonne and make "frequent walking trips in Eastern Europe". Fortunately, the next version of government did a fair job of listening to returned vets and amending equipment aquisitions to give more support to the troops and less to Bombardier and Quebec,

Two tiered problem. On the bureaucratic side, we employ tens of thousands of wildly overpaid people to give away the taxpayer's money. Their job is to waste it, and their culture is to look to the biggest bang for what is NOT their buck. Not just government bureaucrats, big banking does much of the same thing. Within their culture, the paycheque comes whether you give out bux to to good or bad, but the badge of nonour is in doing the least amount of actual work to give out the greatest amount of $$$$. Now, turn to the politicians and their back rooms. Joe nitwit was let's say, oh...a high school drama teacher one day, and a politician the next. He (or she) has to rely on the political and bureaucracy staff to advise him on what should or can be done. Having struggled with no more than how to get some pot smoking teeney bopper how to sound like John Wayne being the top of his (or her) intellectual challenge, the politico will simply go with the flow. Of course, since the back room is also encouraging the endless flow of our grand children's money toward the party faithful, those sum up the things by which a decision is made, not some foolishness about pissing away billions that you and I don't and will never have.

As is the case with most issues, the status quo is worried about how to do more stupid things to maintain the status quo. Banning internal combustion private transport is yet another half-baked idealistic page from the tree-hugger's mantra. If they had ANY idea of just what is at stake, they would instead try to understand and plan for how to stop making endless, useless trips - many for the purpose of doing endless, useless jobs that create no wealth. That and breading like rabbits. The morons are focused on swatting flies while a Great White is about to eat their ass.

I doubt the CIC planned the attack, but definitely would have to authorize it. Rare opportunity to deliver a message to daesh with no civvies around (as this seems to be a command center), and as Rue had mentioned earlier, put Russia, Assad and Kim DUNG heap on notice as well. I would seriously doubt the actual cost of one MOAB is $800mm, as that is probably related to the programme costs including a mess of R&D and the usual very large chunk of pork thrown in to feed the trough.

American resentment of NAFTA is a result of it morphing from the Canada/US FTA - where two countries of similar culture, language and economic development - as well as two long-time military allies - just formalized what everyone knew made good sense. Canada needed into NAFTA as it superceded the previous agreement. At that time, 90% of all Canada/US trade was actually Ontario/US trade, and 80% of that was in the automotive sector (where brands were mostly owned, controlled or operated by US parents). I don't think either of the original partners had any idea what it would be like to open the border to trade with a developing nation that had dead easy transportation links into the US. Not only did Chretien campaign against NAFTA, so did Clinton. They had little regard for each other to begin with, but working through the NAFTA deal made them good friends, and both realized with the information they had before them that it would be in keeping with their globalistic ideals to put it through. We have always done well when we had personally friendly relations across the 49th - but we have never had that with a Trudeau in office. Wait a minute, guess that's not true. Fidel was South of the 49th, wasn't he?

Shit, I backed off already. I was going for Archbishop or Pope. You see (I guess you don't) when you have lived to personally witness the damage done to Canada by PET first hand, as a Canadian it kind of sticks in your craw. But, I guess once we elected a person still clutching his communist party card tight (from his Sorbonne years), the royal "we" pretty much deserve what we got.

That makes me a Bishop, I suppose?

Had a conversation with a business acquaintance who is a long time friend of someone who is...well let's just leave it as VERY close to JT. In a candid moment, he was informed that in all of his decades dealing with such individuals, JT is the least intelligent and capable he has ever encountered. There were some pretty rude and crude comments applied that I need not repeat, but you get the gist. Now, that was no big surprise at all, but what DID catch my attention was that apparently, the whole cabinet has not only abandoned the people of Canada (also, no big surprise) but are now going back on word given or implied to the Party Faithful of the Liberal establishment. Seems as if there is a high concentration of arrogant morons in power now (or should I say AGAIN?) Pretty much answered the question of this thread right on the button for me.

your posted: "When Hitler came to power he attempted to dismantle trade unions and the shell that remained loyal to him; he supported the actions of leading industrialists, actions far removed from socialism which tends to want the opposite. Hitler used the fear of socialism and communism as a way of terrifying middle and upper class Germans into supporting him. Workers were targeted with slightly different propaganda, but these were promises simply to earn support, to get into power, and then to remake the workers along with everyone else into a racial state. There was to be no dictatorship of the proletariat as in socialism; there was just to be the dictatorship of the Fuhrer." Are you trying to tell me that in the Union of SOCIALIST Soviet Republic, Stalin was a "dictator of the proletariat"????? Or in Chaiman Mao's workers' utopia (who, BTW, gladly starved 100 MILLION people just for the hell of it) this was the case? You don't seem to realize that whether we are talking about religion or politics, all of the fooking "isms" are just a plain crock of shyte to get fools to fall in line to the very small band of leaders' hands. YOU are the perfect foil for such crap.

Uh...Hitler lead the National SOCIALIST party, and was anything BUT a "conservative". He belongs with the rest of the Heros of the Left - Mao, Stalin, etc. Look, the US is far from perfect, but without them, the counterpoint to communism (a GENUINE threat to democracy) would not have existed post WWII. I agree, Islam itself is not the problem (any more than the US itself is a "problem") but the radical elements within. Problem is: Islam seems to have no mechanism and no desire to reign in their extremists, whereas the West eventually can and will deal with these things out in the open. - just as we are free to do right here and right now. Care to share which caliphate welcomes such discussion?

Sadly, very little of any cash you send to Africa will likely end up feeding a starving kid...more like a fat soldier or politician. Giving aid simply creates a culture of dependence, resulting in larger families to collect more aid. Something really beneficial is to give out sterilization to those with one or two children. Then give them toolls and materials to become self sufficient

I would not really get too excited over a Chinese takeover of the laser maker. They will have long ago stolen the technology, so might as well just get on with business.

If you want a Chong, Michael would not be my choice. Rae Dawn Chong...now I could get behind HER for sure. We could hire Tommy for an advisor, since Canada is now officially Up In Smoke.

IMHO, one of the key setbacks to German nuclear research was the loss of the world's entire supply of deuterium. This was the work of several clandestine operations by Norwegian expats, resistance and Brits that destroyed the production equipment, and later the facilities at Norsk Hydro. The remaining equipment at the end could not produce enough quantity or quality to sustain supplies adequate for a reactor to produce weapons grade Pu. Norsk Hydro first gave their existing inventory of high purity D2O to France before the Nazis moved in, and that material was removed from the Curie institute by Brits and move through Dunkirk as the Germans invaded Paris and swept West. That was in turn moved to the most secure location the Allies could imagine - a new plant built in Warfield BC to support atomic bomb development over here. The Americans DID bomb the Hydro Norsk facilities once they entered the war, but by then the bulk of the work to remove material and destroy the equipment was already done, and it was a Brit/Norwegian commando raid that finally destroyed the facilities with hand placed demolition charges. The final blow to the Nazi atomic weapons programme was sinking of the ferry with the last of the poor quality D2O stocks - again nothing to do with the Yanks at all. Project Manhattan was far, far more the result of American initiative than any other country, but that was in making the Allied bomb, not stopping the Axis one.

I am not an historian, but I did spend some time in the boardroom with one of the people who were instrumental in breaking the Japanese Imperial Navy code, and who remained a top advisor on all things Japanese throughout and even long after the war. I wasn't there. I wasn't borne yet, but unlike the "scholars" that some chose to cherry pick to support their agenda, he was. It is true that SOME people in Japan wanted to negotiate a surrender before Hiroshima, but they were NOT the ruling group, nor empowered by them to do so. And, as I recall what was told to me, it would have been a conditional surrender when the Allies had all agreed that only unconditional surrender was acceptable. That is how I understand it from an impeccable source. Now let's stir in some obvious facts. What Japanese did as occupying forces was so incredibly disgusting that they really didn't have much moral high ground or any real friends on the other side. They certainly defined the very nature of war crimes in treatment of captives and occupied nations. The ruling group had been aware of the conditions required to surrender for months. They did not surrender. Nagasaki got nuked - they still did not surrender. IT WAS THEIR CHOICE TO REMAIN AT WAR. The Allies had paid dearly to reign in, and yes, save the rest of the world from the Japanese (and the Germans), and the US had one more weapon to use in a war that was still not over. They used it. Don't you EVER doubt that if the Japanese had it available, they would not have hesitated to use it either. The number of civilian casualties from Hiroshima and Nagasaki were miniscule compared with those inflicted on occupied territories by Japan. It was war, and a dirty one at that, not some academic exercise.

It is in the USA. In no other G7 nation is sick care considered a business, it is a social service. That is why the costs in the US are more than double North of 49, and the results are no where near as good. Canadians DO have the opportunity to jump the lineup for imaging services. Alberta has had private diagnostic imaging for years, and those services are now available in Quebec and Saskatchewan. Where Canada is slow off of the mark is how private delivery of "insured" services co-exist with state owned or quasi-state delivery. I frequently saw the Government of SK send worker's comp patients to AB to get MRIs that would take much longer to get in the old days before private clinics. When it comes to wealth and privilege, wealthy Canadians are no different from wealthy people anywhere else on earth - they can and do seek the best and travel to engage at will.

You/we can call any tax anything you/we want. There are no dedicated taxes in Canada - everything goes into the same general revenue fund to be pissed away by the same morons who have run our grand children a trillion dollars into debt.

And you think standing on a hilltop and pissing into the wind is going to change that?