Signals.Cpl

I missed that one.

I was under the impression he was referring to other incidents that were not proven...

So you were blaming the Conservatives without a proper trial? Wow you sure provide the evidence for me... Keep dancing, your opinions have zero value as you have yourself proven, you slain someone or a group of people are guilty while at the same time accusing a member for a similar infraction without regard to the fact that he committed none. I guess you are not one for facts...or logic...or common sense for that matter.

As many times as required, your point therefore you provide the proof... as many times as required

Look who is making accusations about avoiding questions... Really waldo, avoiding the question like the plague... tisk..tisk..

Trying to ignore the hard questions aren't we?

Can you use specific cases of how he broke the law?

In the news does not equal guilty. The guilt you speak of is just your personal opinion not fact.

And the irrefutable proof of that is? Did the investigation end was someone found guilty? Or are you talking out of your behind?

Lol, we are not the dutch...

Please explain in CLEAR terms why and how the law is unjust and anti democratic. While you are at it, please explain in detail how the students are like the civil rights movement in the US a few decades back. I really want to know the similarities of the 2 groups, because some think that they are comparable, just like they are comparable to the arabs who have fought for the much lesser freedoms then those enjoyed by the students in Quebec.

So you agree that Iran is a terrorist state then?

They want to kill Israel in the name of Islam, many other Arabs want to destroy Israel once again in the name of Islam, you do the math.

IF the muslims knock off with the promise of Genocide then the rest of us can stop referring to it. You are saying we should stop talking about about it but you have no issue wit the people who are preaching it...

Who would be caught red handed? If parliament passed such a law, I can see the government quickly cutting social programs to get a surplus.

If both are true, then they both are illegal thats all, I have no intention to deceive myself that they could ever possibly be equal in any other way except that they both would be illegal.

It does not necessarily need to be greater then or equal to any other potential crimes. If both are true, then they are not equal BUT that would not make one bit of difference as both are illegal and thus are wrong.

I'm trying to determine if these are your core values beliefs as a person, or if they are your values and beliefs just for today. If you argue that something is wrong, and then engage in the same activity you just denounced what does that make you? My issue is not to argue innocence or guilt for the government, I just want to know if you believe what you say or if you switch your values depending on the person you are arguing against and the topic at hand.

State Sponsored terrorism ✓ Repeatedly threatening to annihilate Israel ✓ Pursuing Nukes with intent on use✓ Using children to clear mines during the Iran-Iraq War ✓ They sure sound like a sweet and cuddly bunch.

Is everyone, including political parties innocent until proven guilty or is this just for your select causes?

Did you use Iran and moderate muslims in the same though?

Mr. Husbands is violent isn't he? I mean he proved that a few days ago or did you miss the whole thread?

More body parts send out, this time to elementary schools. http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/TopStories/20120605/luka-rocco-magnotta-berlin-court-120605/

So your problem is with the legit gun owners? I will use clear examples next time, I guess I have to spell everything out for you. What?

Please tell me why you want to legalize drugs. Now apply the same reasons to guns, if governments cannot control the flow of illegal drugs what makes you think that severely restricting access to guns will be any different? I never said rifles, I was saying to the same level of weapons. The US had overwhelming airpower, and armour as the insurgents did not posses the same level of sophistication weapon wise. You accuse me of making black and white arguments but you do the exact same thing, If I restrict your access to certain weapons then you will find a way to get your hands on something of equal or greater power. Guns are easier and safer to the person who uses them, less volatile but if you can't get your hands on a gun you will use the more dangerous means.