Leafless

Nothing, except when in the hands of socialist it becomes politically dangerous, discriminatory and racist.

You throw out the 'policy' which unfortunately includes the 'Charter of rights and Freedoms'.

Oh, come on. It's true that he used to be funny with his racism, but these days he seems to be phoning it in. Or copying and pasting. His heart isn't in it anymore. The eating people comment was just silly. But really, I think if a civilization has been conquered, that doesn't necessarily reflect badly on them. There is no people who have failed or been conquered more than the Jews, and I wouldn't hold it against them. At least the Jews have developed a civilization unlike the ancient one you refer to as a civilization. Argus is see seen as a racist by mostly twisted vengeful Canadian minorities whose self-righteous hate for the White perpetually dominates the space normally reserved for the brain.

Twenty-four Canadians died in the 9/11 attack. So far we have lost I believe 33 Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan. The reason for our role in Afghanistan is controversial and am entitled to my opinion. Afghanistan is a country surrounded by the largest third world countries in the world that control and regulate their huge populations by ways we consider against human rights. Workable democratic government in that part of the world is highly questionable. Many European countries are not supporting this initiative in Afghanistan when it is basically happening in their own back yard. So why should we? In fact it should be European countries more involved than the U.S and Canada. As far as the 'hero label' goes Mr. Harper could be speaking prematurely as no one knows what the outcome of this conflict will be. Naturally I support our Canadian troops but simply believe they should not be involved until it is proven that European countries fully support and will fully participate in this initiative against terrorism and to also encourage and develop a freer more democratic government.

The 9/11 attack on America was indeed a black day in the U.S. The odds of terrorist pulling off this co-ordinated attack IMO is equivalent of winning a lottery. To escape the possibility of suspicion, detection including the possibility of at least the major portion of the attack being aborted by intervention of some sort is amazing to say the least. This primitive attack directly out of the pages of some comic book is a terrorist fantasy come true. Although I fully agree concerning the seriousness of this attack, I would be more inclined to write this off as a fluke and downplay terrorist actions rather than perpetuate their fluky success.

Your big mistake and I think the reason for your consistant hate of French Canada is that you believe your being forced to become bilingual. I don't think that's the policy or view of anyone in Canada. Speak what you wish, I see lots of people that don't even speak English or French here, I'm sure it doesn't matter. If you work for the federal government, you are forced in many cases to become bilingual and in most positions advancement is out of the question unless you are bilingual. If you live in Ottawa the spread of federal official bilingualism has spread to the private sector which in turn adopted bilingual hiring practices in turn forcing you to become fluently bilingual. Ottawa has implemented an official bilingual policy forcing it's employees to become bilingual and obviously hires francophone's as well. Many people think Ottawa is officially bilingual because of this but it isn't unless the premier of the province designates the city officially bilingual. This is something that has not happened to date although I believe it was a provincial Liberal campaign promise Premier Dalton Mc.Guinty originally made. Your mistake is assuming I dislike francophone's which is totally untrue. For all you know I could be part or fully francophone myself, my wife could be francophone. I admit I have a dislike for Quebec's political machine which pits the French against the English. I have a dislike for 'Official Languages of Canada' that was devised specifically to advance the interest of French Quebec by law which results in many cases concerning minority control of Canada's federal government, sectors of society with powers left unchecked or not controlled by any federal authority regarding the political interest of that minority concerning it's limits imposed on the majority. Under 'Official Languages of Canada' in our Charter item 16(3) states: "Nothing in this Charter limits the authority of Parliament or a legislature to advance the equality of status or use of English and French." This part is ill defined and allows unlimited pursuing of power for minority French (we know their not talking English status) and no mention whatsoever concerning controls or limits the advancement pertaining the equality status of French despite provinces are supposed to have the power to control language in their respective provinces in Canada. Quebec utilized their power of language control by making French the official language of Quebec. Do you suppose other provinces would be allowed to do the same as Quebec by declaring their province officially English? Funny thing, I have not heard of this request from any province in Canada, strange indeed. I believe the city of Windsor in Ontario once tried to make their city officially English but ran into many roadblocks and were denied the request. In the case of Ottawa I never remembered any referendum to decide the powers of a municipal government imposing an official bilingual policy on the residents of Ottawa. I don't remember provincial Premier Dalton Mc.Guinty promising Ottawa residents that he would hold a provincial referendum to establish whether or not to make Ottawa officially bilingual. Powers are being abused and no one is doing anything about the situation.

Granted. Governments can change laws. Now, please suggest a possible amendment that would work. The procedure for amending the Constitution is very complex. Not only that but amendment relating to multiculturalism in my view is next to impossible without totally rewriting the entire constitution as different sections affect the same issue. Rather than that I would suggest a return to human rights being handled by the federal and provincial government with the entire charter being scrapped as it is unworkable and discriminates. It appears there is no safety mechanism concerning the application of rights and freedoms, therefore it has become a dangerous document concerning the distribution of power and like previously mentioned discriminates.

What amendment would you suggest?? Please provide a new sample Charter text. Also, please provide how it would be implemented in practicality. Keep in mind: from the Charter quote Before giving you an example of of suggested Charter amendments does it not say under the heading: Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms 1. "The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to SUCH REASONABLE LIMITS prescribed by law as can be JUSTIFIED in a free and democratic society." "Reasonable limits prescribed by law that can be justified in a free and democratic society" I think or would appear to allow government to amend the constitution unilaterally as it is government that should have the power to define 'what is reasonable'. Society can demand Charter changes but if the government views this as 'unreasonable' would be initially denied or it would have to be put out to referendum. For instance the Charter was ratified by the premiers but rights that have been expanded since the original Charter was drawn up have never been contested by government or society. Also, we now have the Islamic terrorist problem. Who is to decide if the expansion of rights has not been abused by governments using the Charter to acquire expansion of rights for groups such as the rights pertaining to the administration and implementation of federal 'official bilingualism'? Who is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms federal watchdog??

The Charter can be amended and has been twice since 1982. http://www.canadianheritage.gc.ca/progs/pd.../overview_e.cfm

Prime Minister Harper is calling members of Canada's military in Afghanistan "heroes". I always assumed any Canadian who joins Canada's military is fully aware of the risk associated of placing ones life on the line in the event of war and really deserves no other special credit outside of the one day reserved to honour our fallen soldiers. To somehow justify the loss of 24 Canadians killed in the World Trade as part of the reason for Canada's role involvement in Afghanistan does not really make sense as this basically this was an isolated terror attack in the U.S. More people are killed on Canadian and U.S. highways or by killer diseases like SARS in which international air travel was not even banned to reduce the spread of this killer disease. There is no way the U.S. or Canada is going to stamp out world terror with partial intervention in source in third world countries as new terror organizations will rise out of the ground to replace the old. I usually fully believe in supporting U.S. led initiatives but not this one as our involvement is limited and does not lead to the same results as an all out war. Further more either the U.S. or Canada is directly threatened at the present time concerning any large scale attack. I think world countries will demand substantial retribution on countries that harbour terrorist concerning an all out assault when the situation becomes that acute and demanded by world countries. Until that time comes sit back and reserve our financial resources including rebuilding our badly decayed military and pay more attention to immigration concerns. Terror attacks have now become part of every day life. http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/s...27f&k=56748

Where are your statistics to verify your statement. Hearsay does not establish fact. Here are the results of an older survey that establishes 72% of francophone's are in bilingual positions. It would be understandable that the dominant language among these francophone's would be French in certain areas of government. It also states only 2.6% of francophone's use French in carrying out their duties. This survey is complex and confusing and does nothing to justify federal 'official bilingualism' but does show how problematic two languages are in government. http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pubs_pol/dcgpubs/...p#_Toc433436159

You are one weirdo sick puppy!

It seems some francophone's assume 'commercially obsolete French' is the 'official language' throughout Canada being on the same level as English the international language of the world and used commercially throughout the U.S. and Canada. CSIS could have valid linguistic complaints as proven by this type of linguistic animosity demonstrated by this particular member in this very thread.

If the Liberals are unable to promote bilingualism by example in actual practice, then how to you expect average Canadians ever to become bilingual? Even Stephane Dion was slipping into English. http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news...b34&k=63452

Please name me a multicultural country that is void of national values and the associated leadership required to maintain traditional and historical values which rather instead that chore being left totally to it's population to successfully socially intertwine it's societies many different values and believes and be successful doing so? Is english not your first language? Serioulsy, I'm trying to grope through the syntax here and I'm having difficulty...could I lend you a comma? Maybe it's the looming fallacy in your first sentence...... That being said.....ever heard of Switzerland? It's obvious English can't be YOUR first language as you can't even spell the word. English is my only language. I try to condense as efficiently as possible and use run on sentences. It's hard to imagine a seasoned member complaining about this. Are you MALE? If you don't understand my post don't reply. Another personal criticism in order to belittle me and I'll report you to the moderator. BTW--Switzerland has cultural problems. http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20041...2727r_page2.htm

This is especially true when the federal government works against it's own Canadian culture and defends and promotes others by force.

I'm not sure what that means. I don't know about the harbour but I would say ihe's been into the port Who did you say was into (iehe's) port? Assimilation is a BASIC requirement of any successful society. No society can be everything to everybody without major problems. These problems are beginning to surface in a substantial way pertaining to Canadian society. I'll ask you the same question: Name me a successful country that is void of traditional national values that incorporates Canada's type of official multicultural policy or any country that incorporates a multicultural policy that is not experiencing substantial problems. Your example of multiculturalism is laughable:"Multiculturalism is a fact of life...from the time the first gaelic and the french settlers met and exchanged fiddle tunes in Cape Breton to the thai restaurants run by Sri Lankans in Ottawa......" This is not representative of the serious problems induced on Canadian society by basically a Liberal government who has NO RESPECT for an already established society and who wished to dictate their own version.

Firstly there is no legal patent or form of ownership concerning the word marriage. But the fact is religions around the world have basically used this word to identify the spiritual union between a man and woman. Homosexuals have leeched this word especially pertaining to religious ceremonies in bad faith and was done to justify to somehow normalize the union of the same sex as equivalent to a normal heterosexual union especially to obtain heterosexual benefits and in their minds establish a level of normalcy. Artificial insemination was basically invented for the benefit of childless heterosexual couples...not lesbian couples. Again artificial insemination or embryo transplant has been leeched by a group intent to use it to justify and normalize this groups inability to function in a normal heterosexual manner. I am at a loss when you say " What about the cost to a society that does not allow equality for all of it's members?" This is totally nonsensical as you must be fully aware the same rights are available to homosexuals and lesbians simply if they follow society as a role matter rather than invent their own rules and leech essential components to equalize their diverse lifestyle. But granted homosexuals are not totally to blame as much as the Liberals are for not standing up for a regulated moralistic society.

Please name me a multicultural country that is void of national values and the associated leadership required to maintain traditional and historical values which rather instead that chore being left totally to it's population to successfully socially intertwine it's societies many different values and believes and be successful doing so?

Exactly what are "Canadian national values"? Our traditional basic Canadian values are freedom, peace, law and order support for Judeo-Christian intellectual and moral perspectives, strong support for democracy and associated democratic principles with a cultural traditions inspired by both Canadian and American sources including the arts, literature and sports. Included also would be an excellent understanding of Canadian history and our relationship with the Monarchy. But redefining the country based on three founding national identities coupled with our Charter of Rights and Freedoms has greatly diluted traditional Canadian values. Canadian identity and values are now dictated by the federal government as to what a Canadian is and means rather than supporting traditional national values. All of this coupled with globalization including the effects of NAFTA which is a social economic constitution that overrides government law and acts as a charter of rights and freedoms for corporations has hurt Canadians financially and their families contributing to further decline concerning national values. There appears to be little interest in this board regarding support to reintroduce or try to re-establish traditional values which if not pursued could guarantee an unstable, unorganized society possibly with another culture impressing majority control.

You demonstrate absolute contempt and total lack of respect against in most part the entire population of this planet who have traditonally used marriage as a major part of religious ceremonies regarding the heterosexual union of a man and a woman.

What do you suggest as an alternative? A return to normal provincial and federal control of minority concerns prior to the 'Charter of rights and Freedoms' along with a form of guaranteed assimilation dedicated to Canadian national values especially directed at any new immigrant but generally encouraged and promoted for all Canadians to harbour.

"In the shadow of Sept. 11, it is time to confront the unsettling truth that radical multiculturalism creates tribes that could destroy the society that produced it." I to am convinced that the Liberal concept of multiculturalism involving freedom, equality and tolerance has been distorted into their opposites. For instance it is acceptable under our definition of free speech to attack Christianity, but say anything critical of Islam and you could risk being charged with hate speech. By accepting this Liberal concept of multiculturalism as in the federal public service with it's twisted qualifications normally dependent on a variety of skills as been readjusted to include primary qualifications derived from an obsolete minority language that form the base of federal hiring practices. http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/s...;k=9844&p=1 Official Multiculturalism should be eliminated before it's to late.

Are you actually promoting the illusion male and male or female and female or homosexual and lesbian relationships are equally important concerning the importance pertaining to all levels of a functioning society as male and female heterosexual relationships. Are you that adamant concerning your twisted sexual analysis that there should be no special benefits available to heterosexual couples that form the cornerstone of society and are directly RESPONSIBLE for the CREATION of society itself?

That is an outright lie and you know it. Homosexuals wanted 'marriage'. They declined other options or alternatives. BTW- It's not over yet.