Leafless

So bringing them to Canada is out, unless Dion wants to suggest warehousing them in Quebec somewhere. But there as already been a solution suggested being: ""It's very unlikely that the most practical way to do so is to bring them in Canada, but we cannot give them to the Afghan authorities, so I guess they will need to stay within our Kandahar facilities." http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/st...9b247c6&k=20125 End of story.

The other 50% of Quebec residents who are NOT separatist, (as proven by the past two referendums) are Quebec federalist nationalist, who still firmly believe, relating to loyalties, Quebec comes first and Canada second Complicated, I know, but if they did believe Canada comes first, they would be fully content in describing themselves as Canadians. No, that is not true. Rights are not in the same category as having a street repaved. Rights come under responsible democratic leadership in which the citizens of Ottawa were DENIED fair political representation (in their majority English city) by mayor Bob Chiralli (a federal Liberal supporter) and city council to be part of the process that determines if Ottawa should adopt a 'federal style bilingual policy'. And guess what.... Bob Chiralli is no longer mayor of Ottawa.

The only problem is their sincerity is fake, they are actors and actresses always on an ego trip, mainly to preserve their self image. They can turn on the crocodile tears at the push of a button. Personally, I always stay clear of that bunch. If you want to buy into that phony baloney, by all means go ahead.

Well then, what happened along the way? Why us the White guys, the king of the world and not Indians or the Chinese? Think about it Posit, just think about it. You Indian guys with steel cannon balls and Chinese gunpowder should have flattened the White guys.

All-capital-letters me didn't condone anything. You're projecting again. But what is savage about a peaceful demonstration, and what is not savage about something like, say, ScottSA's comments? Peaceful demonstration? Parking a school bus on the main line of Canada's national railway. Sounds like anarchy to me. ScottSA's comments appear to be ironic and were born out of frustration due to the inaction of the OPP and CN police over this serious matter.

I was thinking the same thing about the likes of you. Why is that? I'm not a savage. If I was, I'd probably be doing the same thing as YOU, condoning actions of savages.

22nd Battalion was from Quebec. Took astonishing casualties. Like Wilber was saying that usually there are only 1,000 troops in a Battalion. So what are you talking about here? Please post proof relating to actual number of killed and actual number wounded, relating to the 22 Battalion.

"They parked a converted school bus camper on the tracks and built a bonfire nearby as part of a rotating, escalating campaign to resolve a land claim issue the Indians say has been festering for 170 years." Why are Indians such savages. Why don't we ship the whole lot of them up to some isolated Northern location, where they can do whatever they want to do. http://www.thestar.com/article/205732

Maybe Chretien (probably because he is French) thinks its a big deal and smart thing turning over federal operational characteristics to a bunch of Francophone Quebec nationalist. I am like Harper and see virtually nothing to celebrate with this racist Charter that has created a form of Canadian made Apartheid. All cultural groups coming to Canada or aleady flourishing in Canada are now funded and promoted as being equal of every other ethnic, cultural or racial group in Canada. So much for cultural seniority in Canada as the law did not contemplate our existing English speaking Canadian culture as being anything different than that of the latest boatload of immigrants from wherever. I guess we must be thankful to Mr. Trudeau and Charter and the Liberals for the sinking of our historical birthright of individual rights and principles. This document (the Charter) deserves to burn in hell with all other legislated oppressive racist documents. And I will celebrate happy birthday to that wish, any day.

"Within the House of Commons Members of Parliament (or MPs) sit to debate federal legislation. Members are elected in individual ridings based on population to represent and make decisions on behalf of the people of that riding." http://www.thecanadapage.org/Government.htm Well the we need a new form of government, since as you know Canadians are being torn and divided by Quebec nationalist ideologies, traditionally pursued by the Liberals vs Canadian national ideologies, traditionally pursued by the Conservatives. The Liberals most always pursued social policies in order to win votes and that policy is now being pusued by the Conservatives to win votes. But nevertheless the original problem remains Quebec nationalist ideologies vs Canadian national policies. We need a new political system or a new country minus Quebec. No. And I would not get very far with the federal acceptance of the FALSE NOTION: " That Canada is a bilingual nation " with linguistic duality, and since the Quebec Act of 1774, both founding nations are equal partners" What BS.

Our form of government is both a Parliamentary Democracy and Constitutional Monarchy with the Queen still being Head of State. Our laws are based on the British inherited system. Does one performing an illegal action action against someone or something, not promote in return a possible illegal retributory action? I am simply being critical of the federal government, relating to implementing and forcing an undemocratic and racist Charter against the possible will of Canadian citizens, without offering legal representation to Canadians, concerning an implied constitutional right to oppose such a move by Mp representation. Our original 'Bill of Rights' protected Canadians human rights protection unlike the Charter that is BUILT INTO OUR CONSTUTUTION has the power to undemocratically manipulate society by parliament ,courts and judges, against the will of Canadians. BIG DIFFERENCE, which could encourage a backlash at some point. The Charter is relatively new, we will simply wait and see what the tolerance level is of Canadians at large. No politician knew at the time the Charter was implemented exactly how far or to what extent society will be manipulated by government. We know to-day how far rights can be pursued to override the rights and the political interest of the majority. The only problem is that there is no federal political party in Canada willing to commit political suicide by denouncing the Charter and doing something concrete about, with the predicable result as being blamed for the break up of Canada.

I know that, myself and all Canadians were not part of the process. This is the whole point. Canadians never never received proper MP representation (the creation of a national referendum) relating to the federal government proposing at the time to implement a racist Charter. You seem to be all for federal corrupt totalitarian rule. What nationality are you? Obviously you are very happy of the outcome. Certainly the Charter is responsible for that. Everyone knows Quebec is the BIG WINNER by default as a result of the Charter. Relating to Gay marriage many Canadians feel offended by government legalizing a union between perverts. I can detect a direct arrogance, that you have no respect concerning the society Canadians have developed over the years. The federal government obviously shares this same arrogance as you or they would NEVER have forced the Charter on Canadians without the prior approval of Canadians in the form of a national referendum. It extremely expensive to support in our case three societies ( Canada, Quebec and Aboriginals) when in fact there should only be one. The only reason Canada is able to afford this is that they don't have the financial commitments of a real country relating to its sovereignty thanks to the U.S. in the way of trade and defense. Infrastructure suffers also by the federal government ignoring this area. I mean continue to pump in the ethnic immigrants and let Joe Canadian suffer the consequences from having no place to put them, such as the case of Toronto where quality of life has plummeted because of this. Include Ottawa also, where residents are fleeing even to Quebec to escape the consequences of high priced housing, plummeting quality of life caused by congestion and the inability of immigrants to conform to Canada's customs, which by the way the Charter promotes. Talk about a condescending view against Canadians. Let's call a spade a spade and I will be perfectly honest that I don't have any respect for a person with a mentality like yours.

Is this obvious Liberal homo blogger a friend of yours?

Guyser what we are talking about here is undemocratic actions inspired by the Charter. Since the advent of the 'Charter of rights and Freedoms' in 1982, the courts also decide cases on the basis of personal views of what they think the Charter seems to mean in cases that have had few or no precedents set by prior court cases. Provincial judges and the judges of the Supreme Court of Canada have therefore become social activist by frequently overriding of our Provincial and Federal government, and thus the will of the people, as expressed through their elected MPPs, MLA's and MP's. Do you think rights are not lost when Quebec for instance, never signed the Charter, declares itself unilingual French, defies the Charter, defies the United Nations with the approval of our English speaking parliamentarians? What is this? One set of laws for some and not for others? The Charter is a fraud. Or how about 'Multicultural Act of Canada 1988 that destroyed the principle of equality of each and every citizen before and under the law because it divided society by ethnic, cultural, national, colour, and promotes as being equal of every other ethnic, cultural or racial group. What we have then is a form of Canadian made Apartheid. All cultural groups coming to Canada or are growing rapidly (no wonder) as they are now funded and promoted as being equal of every other ethnic, cultural or racial group. What the law forgot though was our existing English speaking Canadian culture as being anything different than that of the latest group of immigrants from wherever. This equates to a thousand years of our historical birthright of individual rights and principles, flushed down the drain. I bet you still don't get it.

Yes of course, I inadvertently left out an important word, and it should have read: "...Magna carta issued by King John on the field of Runneymede in 1215 AD was the beginning of the (LIMITATION) of the power of the King to rule as he saw fit." Anyways the point remains the same as Canadian citizens reserve the right to object to abuses of power, IMO, such as the unilateral implementation of the Charter by politicians ONLY, excluding the citizens of Canada to be part of the constitutional amendment process to refuse or accept the new Charter. You don't understand plain English, that I can object to whatever I choose, period. It is undermining my rights by I am ( and all Canadians) not being part of the process the government now uses to GRANT RIGHTS. I fully believe in something as important as the Charter to be excluded as part of the process to amend the thing into our primary Charter is a 'slap in the face' by abusive government who feels it is none of the business of the electorate. 1.- I might be speaking from a personal level but I feel for instance the federal government should not be full of Quebec nationalist as employees of the federal government. 2.- I feel immigrants must adapt to Canadian traditions and don't feel the federal government should cater to them via 'official multiculturalism'. 3.- Gay marriage rights should be a thing society at large either accepts or rejects and u8pt to the time of government interference in this area the majority of Canadians rejected homosexual unions, due to many reasons. 4. Aboriginal rights have been settled by treaties etc. There is no need to constitutionalize Aboriginal anything. I don't know if you understand that the Canadian people have a democratic right to be part of a national referendum concerning the amending of our constitution with the 'Charter of rights and Freedoms' and the federal government could have obliged if they wished, but refused in order to have things their own way. Now it is up to the Canadian people to do something about the undemocratic representation (if they wish to do so), in the same or similar manner riots and rebellions were used against Kings prior to the days of the Magna Carta. What option is left, when a government wishes to practice in a totalitarian manner, excluding the citizens of Canada?

This is not what the Fraser Institute says: "The federal government has provided provinces with an extra $36 billion in transfers for health care since 1997, yet Canada’s health care system is in worse shape now than it was 10 years ago, according to a new report from independent research organization The Fraser Institute. " http://www.fraserinstitute.ca/shared/readm...?sNav=nr&id=794

I will even make it easier for you to understand. French speaking Quebec residents are by nature 'Quebec nationalist', you know, Quebec comes FIRST mentality and Canada second, even if they are so called federalist. It is a simple fact to acknowledge that NOT All Quebec residents don't want to be identified by the word Quebecois. There is really nothing to argue about as you should readily see and understand the word 'Quebecois' is offensive to many Quebec residents and therefore should not be used to collectively describe the whole population of Quebec. Anglophone Quebecers are not compelled to contribute to the need of the French language. Actually the "need of the French language" is purely political and has nothing to do with the life and death realistic requirement of imposing an obsolete residential minority language on users of the majority commercial English language. Ottawa's 'official bilingualism policy' was unilaterally imposed by Ottawa city council and unilaterally approved by Ontario Liberal premier Dalton Mc.Guinty.

No, I mean what I said, "the beginning of the power of the King" or Queen. Who do you suppose our head of state is? All I am saying it is the commoner objected and fought for rights that more represented the people, rather than be totally oppressed by the Kings totalitarian rule. Any policy implemented originating from undemocratic 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms' and implemented by politicians and judicial rule is, bypassing the voice of the citizens of Canada is what I am talking about. Official multiculturalism, official bilingualism in the federal government and Gay marriage, Aboriginal rights are item I am talking about. Federal governments are elected by a PARTIALLY democratic system (FPTP), but failed to represent and include the citizens (by MP representation) of Canada relating to the implementation of the Charter itself resulting in allowing judicial rule to overtake the involvement of Canadian citizens relating to very important constitutional issue's and amendments of OUR CONSTITUITION. Driving Canadians back to the days of the Magna Carta and OPPRESSIVE RULE is not exactly the way to go. This could force Canadians to develop alternate ways to deal with these oppressive measures, just like in the days of the Magna Carta.

The battles I am referring to relate to the general belief that our English based law, the great Magna Carta issued by King John on the field of Runnymede in 1215 AD was the beginning of the power of the King to rule as he saw fit, and is the foundation of our Laws and Rights. The rights outlined in the Magna Carta caused generation after generation of all classes of people to fight to secure their own rights by reference to the Magna Carta. It took many revolts, wars (civil, religious and otherwise), and the progress of time to confirm the beginning of our 'Rights' history. Relating to our modern Canadian history we are currently confronted by totalitarian rule concerning the imposed 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms'. Currently the number of Canadians opposed to our Charter appear to be relatively small for the simple reason the majority of Canadians are not politically aware of the consequences of our Charter but ask any English speaking federal public servant and you will get a very different response. The Charter mocks democracy and allows judicial rule to replace it. The potential consequences relating to opposition to the Charter could involve bloodshed or could simply be thrown out into the waste paper basket, where it belongs. Provinces and the federal government have been protecting Canadians with 'human rights legislation' long before the implementation of the 'Charter of rights and Freedoms'. The Charter of 'Rights and Freedoms' provides fairy like undemocratic rights at the expense of of the majority English speaking population of Canada, being both fiscally extremely expensive and physiological damaging to English speaking Canadians who object being treated like fools by our federal government. Yes, the government acted illegally by abusing our inherited British system. The parliament of Canada represents our collective will as a people expressed through our elected representatives. Pertaining to the Charter Mr. Trudeau and a handful of politicians unilaterally implemented the 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms' ignoring the UNREPRESENTED collective will of Canadian citizens. Also the federal government broke its own Charter rules by implementing 'official bilingualism' in the federal public service, when the Charter states otherwise concerning use of the 'official languages'. The Charter simply states that there are two official languages in Canada, English and French and that 'EITHER' of these two languages may be used by any citizen in communicating with the federal government or 'WORKING' for it, or any of its institutions.

Relating to our society, I believe in the fundamental principles that underlie our laws. These rights, stem from numerous battles won by the people, against the absolute power exercised by the King and other autocratic authorities throughout the thousands of years of our English speaking history. This is why our Western society has become so successful. But to-day especially in Canada, and especially owing to Liberal rule as caused our society to implode and are going backwards in time, back to the days of when Kings and autocratic authorities ruled with absolute power over the commoner. This is dramatically illustrated by how the federal Liberals and their 'Charter of rights and Freedoms' have destroyed previously fought for 'Rights' and effectively wiping out our inherited inherited English rights. Strangely though, this very same Canadian federal government uses our inherited British system of government, to rule in a totalitarian fashion and is to COWARDLY to implement a new form of government that reflects their true political dictatorship identity as a 'banana republic' or a 'corrupt third world regime'.

How do you propose that when it seems it is your constitutional right to own firearms? "Do Canadians have the right to firearms ownership? The English Bill of Rights provided the right to English citizens. The preamble to the British North America Act extended that right to Canadians. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guaranteed the continuation of these rights." http://www.cufoa.ca/2.html This it appears, is a federal issue not provincial.

It's not hard to believe there is simple life out there, such as bacteria. Intelligent life that can, and has visited earth? naaaaah Even if there was life on other planets they would not resemble us in the least. Everything would be different about us and them. We probably would not be compatible in any way. For instance we would or could probably be minus our skeleton frame if it was not for the crushing pressures of our earthly atmospheric pressure. What would we look like? A blob of organs in some sort of casing propelled in a unknown or unfamiliar manner. For all practical purposes or reasons ....WE ARE ALONE in this universe.

How is it going to count under the proposed system. Are we talking about runoffs (one candidate must have 50% in order to win)? They do this in France, and the result is parties make deals not to run candidates in certain ridings etc., similar to what we just saw with Dion and the Green Party leader. I suggest visiting the 'Citizen's Assembly' website at: http://www.citizensassembly.gov.on.ca/splash.aspx

Leafless, there seems to be a fundamental disconnect in your view of rights and that of most people. While some "rights" are accorded by governmet decree, many are inherent and independant of government and don't require the holder to struggle to earn those rights. Inalienable Rights Talk about arrogance. Your accusing me of possessing a fundamental disconnect relating to my 'view of rights' and you don't have the courtesy to tell me what rights your talking about or provide or offer proof to support your unsubstantiated views relating to so called 'natural rights'.

And this is why using the word 'Quebecois' is wrong when commonly making reference to residents of Quebec as it has 'nationalistic sentiments' not every Quebecer wants to be associated with. It could mean Quebecois society, Quebecois nation, Quebecois people, Quebcois separatist, Quebecois country. This all started in post #238 when you said: "Quebecois wanting to work in Ottawa blah, blah blah." You were not being specific what Quebecois you are talking about and this is why the word Quebecer is much easier understood to include all Quebecers regardless of political affiliation, language or culture. Simple isn't it. Who's talking about advocating bilingualism? There are other Quebecers looking for work in Ottawa and all over Canada other than Francophone Quebecers. There are jobs in Ottawa that require the use of both English and French thanks to federal government interference in provincial concerns out of their jurisdiction and the fact the CITY of Ottawa UNILATERALLY IMPOSED an official bilingual policy on the city of Ottawa residents in the SAME FASHION the federal government IMPOSED 'federal official bilingualism' in the federal government totally BYPASSING and EXCLUDING the VOICE of the ELECTORATE. Commie country anyone?