Signals.Cpl

Just not when it comes to the jews right?

Yeah because killing civilians through suicide bombing sure makes the Arabs the cuddly bunch.

By saying that the US and all western nations should abandon Israel to the Arabs who have vowed to destroy Israel? What are you trying to accomplish? If yours was the only vote that counted and you voted against assisting Israel what do you think would happen? US stops support and the arabs start passing around the peace pipe? You don't seem to know or care what the consequences are if the west does not help Israel. Tell me what are your goals in this thread? Vent about the big bad jew? How we are wasting our money in the west supporting them?

Because the UN is irrelevant and on its way out, it will not last much longer it has outlived all of its potential and needs to die and hopefully be reborn in to something more useful.

Seems to me you are advocating genocide against the Jews in Israel.

Oh and read this. http://zionism-israel.com/his/Palestine_Nakba.htm

http://www.mideastweb.org/Middle-East-Encyclopedia/co/palestine.htm Im not going to spoon feed you. If you don't want to read thats fine by me.

I never said anything about expulsion, to me there are easy solutions but unacceptable to both sides. Both groups are at this moment well established that moving one or the other in great numbers would be nearly impossible. If the arabs drop the insane desire to destroy Israel I believe they would be more receptive of a deal acceptable to both sides. What happened 60 years ago is at this point irrelevant as the arabs did the same thing a few hundred years prior... Using the excuse that Israel did something 60 years ago and thats why Arabs are pissed while ignoring what Arabs did 120 years ago is not exactly balanced.

Exactly I don't want my name and face in a newspaper about how somebody somewhere hates the military and wants to twist everything I say. If someone asks questions I can answer without issue sure I can be polite and answer but should they start going in with questions I feel uncomfortable answering I inform them that if they have any further questions they can direct them to the Unit PR officer who will then direct them to Brigade PR officer who will happily answer any and all questions they may have.

So? Is that some kind of new measure in our justice system? Innocent until proven guilty, she was proven innocent thereby you should be satisfied with the judgement especially since none of us were there or know how detailed the investigation was. There could be witnesses to what happened or video or the kid could have finally admitted he lied. If we use OJ as a measuring unit then everyone who is acquitted must be guilty and on the flip side we can start questioning wether a guilty verdict means guilty. I have no doubt Michael Rafferty was responsible in one way or another for the little girl's death, nor do I have any doubt that Russell Williams was responsible for at least 2 murders and I don't remember how many rapes and break ins.When considering if someone is innocent or guilty we look at the facts directly related to the case rather then what happened to a guy in a different case with different circumstances.

Thats the same old song and dance, if a riot starts in Chicago during the summit then it is because of police provoking it, without any evidence to back up the accusation they will present Montebello as the proof.

Speaking one of the Official languages is part of the standard. What my issue is that you seem to feel that if all else is equal a person from England is a better candidate then a person from India. My argument is that a high standard should be required without nationality being a factor in the consideration. The more important aspect would be the ability to remove persons who have shown that they are ill-suited for life in Canada. By this I mean if someone regardless of their nationality comes to Canada 6 months after landing applies for welfare and then lives on welfare for the next 2-3 years they should be denied citizenship and promptly informed that they should "get their act together or leave the country". With the aging population Canada needs immigrants willing to work rather then more mouths to feed with dwindling resources. Most immigrants come to Canada for a better life, but that means that they should be willing to pull their weight. There should always be the consideration that you came to Canada for the better life so you should pay Canada back with hard work and dedication.

C) Those with dual citizenship who hold office might be beneficial in some cases as long as its not too high up on the food chain. Once you reach a certain level then decision has to be made I agree with that. As for the rest of that point I am with you 100% D) Use the same method of taxation as the Americans, you are Canadian you pay taxes regardless wether you live in Canada or Australia or Zimbabwe. If Canada is to pay for their evacuation should the need arise might as well pay taxes to the country.

Can the family of the American soldier take him to court? If we have to pay this animal might as well get the money to someone who could use it for something other then killing Canadians and Americans.

Neither can Canada, or any other western power. That was clearly shown in 1956 and repeatedly since. When it comes to war most western countries have limited ability to conduct even a limited war and today even England has lost the ability to wage the kind of war in the South Atlantic that they fought in 1982. In a major natural disaster Canada would be heavily dependant on the goodwill of the US since our abilities have been cut down due to decades of budget cuts.

Comment #37 check it out. Comment #37 Comment #37 To be fair they were the victims of ethnic cleansing since the Crusades. I was not there in person, couldn't tell you the minute and second... Its historical ownership not biblical ownership. I don't know about that, but to me the jews have as much if not more right to the land then the Arabs mainly because they were forced out of the area first. The arabs are for all intents and purposes squatters in the Israel. Just because they were at one time stronger and expelled the owners from the land does not give them rights to that land.

10 people work 3 make 100k a year 1 makes 70k a year and 6 make 50k a year the 3 richest people get taxed by 20k to support the rest. That would be 60k, splitting up the 60k to the 6 people that needed most is ideal but what happens in Canada is we give the guy that makes 70k half of the equalization payments and the other 6 people 5k each. So at the end it comes out like this: 3 people that support the rest make 80k a year 1 person that gets the most equalization makes 100k a year and then the 6 poorest people get 55k a year Now this is very simplified and rough explanation. Think about it, if Quebec were to separate from Canada would they be able to maintain their standard of living? Or would they have to drop to the level of the rest of us?

Ok does it matter if Ontario is getting equalization payments? The point is if we are paying equalization to provinces, it should be to bring the standard in line with the REST OF CANADA not bring them well above the rest of Canada. Ontario has paid for the equalization and will pay again in the future while Quebec has no chance of EVER getting away from equalization payments because their standard of living will have to drop to the level of the Rest of Canada. It is easy to say Quebec's child care policy pays for itself, but who will pay for Ontario's child care policy in the mean time? You know the time between starting the program and the point in time it starts paying for itself? Now by the looks of it the article states that it took about what 10-11 years to get to that point, now imagine if we in Ontario get this policy? Can we afford the admittedly rough estimate of 2.6billion dollars a year for 10 years before it begins to repay itself? Equalization should make sure that any province that is a have not should get assistance when needed rather then a one province getting what it wants and the rest getting stuck with the bill.

So your position is that if the job is not the same or better as your last job its not worth having? The social safety net is great and should be increased but it should be temporary. Having people repeatedly turn down low paying jobs because those jobs don't meet their standard is not a reason to remain in EI. Expecting that you can get a high paying job in a slow economy means you might be on EI and /or welfare for a very long time.

Why should Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia pay equalization to Quebec so that Quebec could take that money and provide better services to its people then either of those 3 provinces can? Why should the rest of us have to pay 2 or 3 times the tuition and then when we go to work we pay for the Subsidized Education of Quebec? Why make Quebec's daycare affordable while taxpayers in Ontario are barely able to afford to pay daycare? Equalization payments are meant to bring the 7 poorer provinces to the standard of the 3 better-off provinces, it was not meant to make the 3 better-off provinces pay for Quebec's social programs and make them world class while the rest of the provinces struggle to provide the basics. This is the same as one person is working and a portion of his income is given to a less fortunate friend who lives considerably better then the person providing aid and consistently demands more. I think that the other 6 have not provinces might want some more federal assistance to be able to afford a better standard of living, rather then watching Quebec with envy while Quebec consistently spits in our collective faces and demands more because they are so hard done by the rest of Canada.

Yeah forced, because the teacher tied his hands and force-fed him. Its called a suggestion take it or leave it but its a suggestion.

I would stay and debate all night, but I have to go to work tomorrow, you know someone has to work to pay for your welfare after all...

How exactly did that burst my bubble? And forget what? You are wrong on all issues and the only reason people let you win a discussion is because you are so obnoxious that everyone gets tired of you. That and arguing with you is about as much fun as talking to a wall...actually much less fun.

Under the Ottoman Empire, jews were under severe restrictions when it came to immigration or purchasing land while at the same time the Ottoman Empire's government flooded the area with Arabs from all four corners of the empire in order to outnumber the jewish settlers. After the Ottoman Empire lost World War One the British Empire took over the region while the french took over Syria. The British made the offer in 1937 less then 20 years after they captured the territory from the ottomans. Once the Ottomans were pushed out and the Ottoman Empire collapsed to form the Turkish Republic the British occupied the area lifting many if not all of the restrictions faced by the Jews in the area of immigration and land ownership. The Arabs had in most cases been there for a short time 30-60 years and they outnumbered the Jews because of the restrictions the Ottomans placed. The case could be made that the Israeli people were in the area much earlier then the Arabs and the only reason they were so few in number was due to the frequent occupation and reoccupation of the area by multiple empires and the constant persecution of the Jews by pretty much every body and their mother. You are stating that the Jews stole the land from the Arabs, while I challenge that because the Jews were on the land well before the arabs and were forcibly removed in many cases.Being kicked out of their land 500-800 years prior does not negate their ownership as a people, and favourable policies by the occupying regime towards the arabs does not grant them ownership either. This was mishandled by both sides and the major powers after world war 1 and world war 2 but by no means are the Israelis 100% guilty or even 50% guilty. At this point they are fighting for their national survival and I have nothing but respect and support for them.

I don't think you have the mental capacity to keep up but sure...