SunnyWays

With all of the injustices that First Nations in Canada, American Indians in the US and Black Americans in the US have purportedly endured for centuries - why don't any of them kill and bomb innocent people, or lop off heads? Because their collective roots have a sense of humanity. The apologists for extremism are an embarrassment. Nothing can excuse what we are all witnessing. Nothing.

Thanks Slick.....it WAS worth watching. There's always collateral damage with political correctness - this serves as a good reminder.

I just asked the question.....and you've answered it very clearly - and that explains a lot of your posts. I find it puzzling that you said "We pay your salaries for THAT!?!??!!" What do you mean by using the term "your"?

Andrew Coyne hits many of the right notes in his analysis: Link: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/andrew-coyne-federal-budget-2016-is-one-from-the-1970s-to-address-problems-of-1980s

So just to be clear - you don't believe that Canada is at risk to Islamic terrorism - and you do not think that we should be spending money in providing protection against terrorist attacks. Is that accurate?

I wish it were that simple.....just reflect for a moment with how Islam aligns with the basic tenets that you've described. What percentage of Muslims world-wide do you think would accept our concept of those tenets - especially as it relates to women? Almost exclusively here in Canada, we see the most liberal, forward-thinking Muslims that Islam has to offer - yet we still find ourselves at odds from time to time. Just try and imagine how much trouble more traditional/conservative Muslims have in adapting to those tenets. Yes, if only it was that simple.

And I guess you've had your head in the sand - or are an irrational apologist for rampant terrorist murder....The US (and Canada) have spent billions upon billions of dollars to prevent another 9/11 from happening and so far - it's been pretty effective. It doesn't take much imagination to believe that if the US - and other Western countries - were not investing all that money - specifically to thwart Islamic terrorism before it occurs......that we'd have bombs going off all over North America and the KKK would look like Boy Scouts.

All that said, it doesn't take much imagination to believe that if the US - and other Western countries - were not investing billions upon billions of dollars specifically to thwart Islamic terrorism before it occurs......that we'd have bombs going off all over North America.

Hardly.......terrorism is a choice: A few Jews choose to be rabbis.....and a few Muslims choose to be terrorists. With the understanding that there are 100 times as many Muslims as Jews, what's your point? As for cancer - nobody chooses to get it.

Forgive me - but I have no idea what that comparison is supposed to show.........

I can't understand why you have such difficulty in grasping what defines terrorism and terrorists - especially in today's world......unless you somehow feel the need to be an apologist for their heinous crimes. One of the many dictionary definitions is : the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. ... the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization. ... Acts of violence committed by groups that view themselves as victimized by some notable historical wrong. And yet - you still deny this simple fact: only a microscopic number of Muslims are terrorists - but an overwhelming number of terrorists are Muslims. Put another way - it is not one's religion, politics or beliefs that determine whether they are a terrorist - it is their actions.

And that's why you think it's OK for Obama to brag about building the most pipelines of any US President - that it's OK to pump, drill and export to record extents - while Canada is held hostage by US-funded special interests? But yes, you are correct, "the largest solar production facility on the planet is in California". And in spite of that enormity - and the billions of dollars in subsidies - California only recently reached the capability of producing 5% of the State's power requirements. Smart money indeed.

Because Obama is the leader of a rich country? Because under his leadership, the US is pumping, drilling and exporting oil at record rates - in addition to still using coal for 30-40% of their power needs? Because Obama himself bragged that he's built enough pipelines to circle the world - more than any other President? And because you said, to quote: "If the rich countries of the world fail to show leadership on the issue, the poorer ones will simply thumb their noses and shovel more coal on the fire." So if you'll actually read the topic article - and reflect on the eco-activism that runs rampant in Canada - while providing token opposition in the US......and on how utterly impossible we've made it to get approvals for pipelines....then if you still do not understand how absolutely appropriate it is to use the term "self-flagellation", I cannot help you.

Did you not even read the article from the topic? By the way - Self-flagellation - "the act of hitting yourself with a whip as a way to punish yourself or as part of a religious ritual"......the religious ritual being the extremist element of the Climate Change orthodoxy. Given your position, you must really detest Obama for his unrelenting drilling, pumping and exporting oil. But do you?

Actually, if it comes to pass, it will be Canada 1, the eco-crowd 0.....finally.

You've been duped into thinking that by the eco crowd who wail at anything to do with Oil or pipelines. Truth is, all Harper tried to do was get a pipeline built to get Canada's product to markets other than the US. It may have eluded you but he also introduced accelerated capital write-offs for the manufacturing sector - and yes, gave a bail-out to GM for the auto industry. Listen, Harper did a lot of things wrong - and that's why he's no longer PM......but getting a couple of pipelines to move our Oil and Gas is crucial for Canada and to think otherwise is at best, soft-headed thinking.

You obviously do not understand the composition of the Canadian economy. We are not a one-trick pony and Oil and Gas is not the largest component - in fact it's fourth at about 8%. However, Oil and Gas face an obstacle that other industry segments don't - they can't get their product to markets other than the US - even though there are customers ready to buy. That's the reason that the Harper government had such a large focus on Oil & Gas pipelines - and why this Liberal government will very soon find themselves in the same boat, regardless of their ambiguous stance. Link: http://www.investorsfriend.com/canadian-gdp-canadian-imports-and-exports/

You're all missing the point. Canada is a glowing beacon to the rest of the world. We're showing them how to get serious about emissions. Keep that darn oil in the ground. My God - a tiny contributor to global emissions wrapping itself in self-flagellating "green" credentials....... Can you even begin to comprehend the hypocrisy of the Obama administration?

Don't really care about your interpretation of PIK's "flawed logic"......you seem to deny that......."only a microscopic number of Muslims are terrorists - but an overwhelming number of terrorists are Muslims". As I said, you seem to be adamant in accepting the first, but completely opposed to the second. Is that accurate?

And there are many more like them........but until they start working together to acknowledge why some work - and why many don't - they will just continue to be what they portray - 600 individual bands who really don't give much of a crap about the ones that we always seem to hear about. Remember all the publicity (the CBC especially) that Thief Spence of the Attawaspikat band got? How much did her fellow "nations" help when things were going sour?

There are supposedly over 600 "nations" out there. Some reservations are well run and some even prosper. Many, perhaps most live in poverty, if not squalor by any reasonable standard. Yet do we see the well to do nations helping the poor ones? Where does the help for Attapiskawak come from - other "nations"? No - it's left to the government. I'd feel a lot more engaged with the First Nations quagmire if they showed that they cared for their own more than they cared for handouts. Hey - I'm spitballing here - but why not have a roving First Nations "Best Practices" engineering corps - like the WWII Seebees - a hundred or more skilled First Nations people who can build quality housing and schools, who can implement clean water facilities......and yes, why don't the collective of First Nations transition the poorest, most destitute reservations to places where a decent life is more viable. Why have First Nations - after all these years - not taken control of their own destiny? When they start helping themselves, I'll be more engaged. Until then, we're perpetuating a losing proposition.

It's not nonsense......and other groups are called terrorists when it's appropriate. Most "terrorists" are labeled in a national sense - Chechen Terrorists, Basque Terrorists, etc. The scourge of Islamic Terrorism is a blatant and overt quest for a regional Caliphate and ultimate Global domination under the banner of Islam. You are a perfect example of what I posted previously: ......only a microscopic number of Muslims are terrorists - but an overwhelming number of terrorists are Muslims. Why is it continually necessary to acknowledge the first - while ignoring the second? I guess tripping over ourselves so we don't "offend" anyone is the Canadian way - but calling anyone who disagrees an "Islamophobe" is pretty juvenile.

Mocking is a bit harsh. Tongue-in-cheek is more what I had in mind. That said, I think it's reasonable to have SOME scepticism over this government's plan for the deficit and balanced budgets. As for not wanting this Prime Minister to achieve political success, that would be pretty dumb. I want Canada to succeed - to thrive - and if Justin Trudeau and the Liberal government are the custodians of that success, I'll be happy to give them credit. Give credit where credit is due - but when the measuring stick for Liberal competence is the Wynne government here in Ontario, forgive me for not jumping on the bandwagon just yet.

Yes it is.....how would you feel if revenues substantially increased (say by $5 or $10 billion) and they STILL created a real deficit of $30 billion. That's what I'm worried about. Would it not be appropriate to state exactly that in their budget - that any revenues in excess of their estimates will reduce their "planned" deficit? I'd feel a lot better about this government if they did that - especially based on an election promise of a $10 billion deficit - and a promised balanced budget by end of term. Make sense?

And as of this month, that baseline is rapidly changing....oil up over $40, Manufacturing starting to gain traction with the low dollar, stock markets responding. All without a "stimulus". With no sign of even aspiring to balance the budget as they promised, it's reasonable to fear that they'll blow through the $30 billion in spite of increasing revenues.