Leafless

Although the title of this article is a bit deceiving as it is called " Peace rally draws 15,000 in Montreal". How can it be called a peace rally when Sayed Nabil Abbas, a representative of the Islamic Shiite Council in Canada said: " We don't have any problem against Jews, our problem is with Zionists, said Abbas". I guess Canadian Lebanese communities have nothing intelligent to say or contribute towards a peace effort concerning the Israel/Hezbollah Mid-East conflict and continue to fuel the fire. http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentSe...epath=News/News

But Quebec was the only province that didn't agree to it. All others, representing Conservative, Liberal, NDP, and Social Credit governments, supported it. To say that they wouldn't support it now or that they didn't know what they were getting into is nothing more than unsubstantiated speculation. I haven't heard one of these former premiers express regret for bringing forth the Charter or the Constitution. I have however heard some express regret for the notwithstanding clause, which could undermine it. And why did they not sign it? Because the wanted special treatment as a 'distinct society'. Well, to-day they are a distinct society on the same level as a separate country thanks initially to Quebecer Trudeau for repatriating our Constitution and the continual manipulation and invented interpretations of the 'Charter of Rights and Freedoms' by mainly the federal Liberal party who traditionally have heavy representation from Quebec. Maybe all provinces would like to enjoy the SAME STATUS. The reason you will never hear provincial premiers say they wouldn't support it now because they would never admit initially that they were fools to be duped by Trudeau into supporting repatriation the Constitution without knowing the full effects of what could be done with the modified Constitution and what we know to-day that has resulted from it. The second reason you won't hear premiers complain about it including the NWC is of COURSE 'it would be bad for national unity'. This of course is total BS as exactly how far is Quebec suppose to be assisted federally in it's quest for 'distinctiveness'. I think it's time to have a referendum to see if CANADIANS want to retain Quebec in confederation as Canada is no longer a country but in fact TWO under a single federal government with Quebec being supported federally by ALL Canadian taxpayers.

He did go to all the provinces though to get their seal of approval before going to the London to repatriate the Constitution. He never did it completely unilaterally. It really was an all party work. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriation I really don't know what point your trying to impress. Repatriation of our Constitution was a Liberal idea mainly for the benefit of Quebec. I suspect provincial premiers had no idea what they were getting into at that time and am certain if the premiers had to do it all over again they would not be as obliging. What kind of Constitution have we got when it can be twisted and manipulated over the years mainly by the Liberals to suit their political agenda. Nothing is clearly spelled out and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms has turned out to be a cultural politcal tool tailored made for one specific culture and for the discriminatory advancement of that culture.

The Constitution could not be repatriated until it was signed by the Queen. And it wasn't signed until after the provinces worked on the Charter of Rights together with the federal government. Trudeau had written his OWN amending formula and would have receved the Queen's approval. It was provincial squabling and the fact the provinces took him to court over the matter and Trudeau despite having the LEGAL power to repatriate the Constitution unilaterally agreed the provinces SHOULD be invoved in the process. Eventually all provinces but Quebec signed on.

How about the history books, which clearly explain in Grade 10 language the whole process of constitutional reform and how you need the agreement of nearly all the provinces to make any changes. That's how dumb your grade 10 history books are. The Constitution firstly has to repatriated in order to make changes to it. BTW Trudeau initially could have repatriated the Constitution legally WITHOUT the agreement of the provinces. It was only after provincial squabling that the Supreme Court got involved and it was decided that that the federal government SHOULD have the agreement of the provinces in which Trudeau obliged.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms In its decision in the Patriation Reference (1981), the Supreme Court of Canada had ruled there was a tradition that some provincial approval should be sought for constitutional reform. As the provinces still had doubts about the Charter's merits, Trudeau was forced to accept the notwithstanding clause to allow governments to opt out of certain obligations. The notwithstanding clause was accepted as part of a deal called the Kitchen Accord, negotiated by the federal Attorney General Jean Chrétien, Ontario's justice minister Roy McMurtry and Saskatchewan's justice minister Roy Romanow. Pressure from provincial governments (which in Canada have jurisdiction over property) and from the country's left-wing, especially the New Democratic Party, also prevented Trudeau from including any rights protecting private property. *** That's all three parties there adding and subtracting things from the patriated constitution. The PQ was involved earlier but didn't approve the Constitution. The rest of the provinces did. The "kitchen accord" between the provinces and the federal government sealed the deal. The "kitchen accord" did NOT repatriate Canad's Constitution. The initial question was WHO repatriated the Constitution, not the process leading up to it's repatriation. And that was Pierre Trudeau and his Liberal government who repatriated our Constitution from England. Besides Trudeau could have legally repatriated our Constitution WITHOUT the consent of the provinces but the Supreme Court decided it Should have the agreement of the provinces and Trudeau obliged. It was only AFTER the Constitution was repatriated to Canada that the NWC (notwithstanding clause) was added to allow provinces to opt out of certain sections of the Constitution. To date it was only Quebec (who uses it on a regular basis)and Saskatchewan to take advantage of the NWC. Again it is ludicrous that Quebec who never signed our Constitution initially be allowed to use this NWC as repatriating the Constitution was basically done for the benefit of Quebec in which the Charter of Rights was imbedded into the Constitution for their benefit and cannot be easily removed by any change of government.

It seems to me that there were a lot of parties responsible for bringing home the Constitution. There were Liberals, Conservatives and NDP and for a while, the Parti Quebecois. I think you have your facts wrong. It was the Liberals Pierre Trudeau who repatriated the Constituiton. Please provide links to back up your absurd claims.

What you are saying is ludicrous. The preamble regarding the Constitution Act 1982 says " Whereas Canada is founded upon the principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law." It was the Liberals who have created laws including the doctoring of our Constitution to the standards associated with the Liberal party of Canada excluding the input of Canadians 'who pay the taxes'. The laws of this primarily Christian country should be created with the interest of the majority and not by the Liberals who emulate God with their misguided wisdom concerning their cultural beliefs imposed on the majority. All Canadians should think twice before even considering giving your vote to the Liberals who are quickly becoming an extremely poor excuse for a federal party.

You could be using the wrong word pertaining to anti-semitism. Sem·ite ( P ) Pronunciation Key (smt) n. 1.-A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians. The question that should be asked are racist actions against Canadian Christians and Jews increasing by Canadian Muzlims especially those who greatly adhere to Islam. According to the Koran I beleive Muslims would prefer ALL none followers of their religion killed. According to Muslims Islam is a religion of peace. How then does this explain since 9.11.2001 there have been 3,192 terrorist attacks. http://www.hitechcj.com/homelandsecurity/

I'm not sure what all that means. Normally the 'majority interest' in a democratic country concerning a multitude of issues dictates the route a federal government would take to address these issues. Liberals 'pecking order' simply describes mainly the Liberals (a heavily influnced Quebec federal political party) controlling the country, utilizing minority cultures as a tool for the advancement of certain cultures or nationalities according to their preference in an effort to offset the interest of the cultural majority to appease the interest of a minority pertaining to many issues. This could sound noble concerning 'equality', but can be destructive when a government uses minority cultures and minority groups in an accumalitve way to beat down majority cultural interest. More dangerous though is a federal government who promotes minority cultures for no other reason than for that parties own self perservation for votes and promoting minority cultures for the sole benefit of certain cultures or culture for the advancement of that culture concerning dominating power and control could be seen as politically culturally biased and destructive to the country and a definite 'racist action'.

White English speaking Christians or Jews have become part of the Liberals manufactured 'culture club' backed by the Liberals doctored Constitution and have been designated no longer the majority of Canada but now simply part of a Liberals 'pecking order'. Now of course this 'pecking order' in my book constitutes racism. Laws in Canada are no longer detirmined or influenced by traditon, customs or the whishes or other methods of the majority but now by the Liberals and their 'culture club' and their stacked Liberal courts. Proof of the destructive methods the Liberal are utilizing to remove previous or existing rights from the majority is the Liberals preference to secularize Canadian institutions and to promote the interest of French Quebec while allowing that province not to adhere to Charter obligations and treat that province including federal official bilingualism to an array of various sorts of federal political favourtism. I don't know what media you read, watch or listen to but from what I see there are all kinds of anti-semetic attacks including fire bombing jewish libraries, sraying swastika's on doors of private residences, having tombstones overturned and a multitude of more subtle ways of anti-semetic behavior. http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/m/mock-k...-on-racism.html http://www.cbc.ca/worldview/wvarchives/20040410.html

The Libs are also anti-Christian support homosexuals and support Muslims and Islam. It's evident the Liberals are a cultural polical party with their own special preferred cultural preferences with the NDP not far behind. It's a hell of a way to run a country when mainly English speaking White Christians and Jews are politically despised. Is this what 'equality' has done for Canada, racism under the guise of equality??

Here is the Top 10 List of Gomery Hypocrisy: http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/wajsman110205.htm

No doubt this is a solution but a very radical solution bordering (or is the definition) of insanity. Maybe as well as being president if Iran he should be nominated as KING OF BIGOTS.

I think many Canadians don't have a clue that to maintain your countries current freedoms and democracy comes at a PRICE. While it is true IMO that Canada's interest in Afghanistan should possibly be limited to a peace keeping role but world pressures demand otherwise. These pressures dictate Canada take a more active (combat) role in maintaining Western ideologies and standards especially when asked to do so as an ally. I have no problem understanding this as a Canadian and also realize that perhaps we should have been in Iraq right from the start. If you don't wish to support and possibly die for your country, I really don't know why you want to live in a country like Canada.

This only PROVES Canada is politically ungovernable and the fact some Canadians never did know who their allies are.

This only PROVES Canada is politically ungovernable and the fact some Canadians never did know who their allies are.

Argus "Why the world hates Israel" Could it be Jews are indifferent similar to Muslims- that is they keep to themselves and many of them don't freely intigrate with different mainstream societies of the world but continue to lead successful lives on the most part concerning their tight knitted relatively secret community with it's properous buisness ventures. Arabs are Arabs and I suspect Muzlims resent the success of Jews especially with relations with America but fail to realize their Muzlim faith is no competion for organized democratic capitalistic countries.

Don't say that it's clear - prove it. What do we do about it ? What we already do: engage in law enforcement and intelligence projects to root it out. What else do you propose ? Reports clearly identify Canada as a major base for terrorist fundraising activities. While the Anti-Terrorism Act itself operates as a deterrent to those who might have supported banned organizations and a number of suspect organizations have been identified, the lack of successful prosecutions under the Act, and the limited action on the part of Canadian officials to date, raises great concerns that suspect organizations continue to operate here, using such designations as charities as cover. There are serious grounds to believe that at least one banned organization in Canada continues to operate with a different name but at the same address. Increased funding to government bodies such as the Revenue Canada - Charities branch is crucial if Canada is to effectively address this problem. In particular, it is ourrecommendation that a special investigative team be formed which would develop the expertise necessary to track suspect organizations. http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:oCg13r...=clnk&cd=21 http://www.conservativejoe.com/ It is clear Arab Muzlims support terrorist organizations. Our Canadian government is proving it. And what do I propose? Changes in our Constitution. Banning all immigration originating from Muslim countries along with the elimination of dual citizenships. Existing Arab Muzlims in Canada would be required to take an oath of allegiance to Canada including denouncing Muzlim terrorist organizations in written form or face deportation if unwilling to do so.

Your missing the point. As a hollywood celebrity perhaps he was tring to establish a Jewish hate precedent amoung hollywood celebrities. The hollywood entertainment industry harbours a lot of jews. To say what Mel gibson said could be seen to entice an open revolt against a constituted authority (jews) in hollywood. This is serious.

I tend to agree with Mr. Hardner on this one...a lone whackjob doesn't really make me want to debate his motivations. Mind you, for some reason, a group of them will... And I disagree with you. Imported extreme 'Arab religious hate' in the U.S. and Canada is a relatively new phenomenon. It's clear that in fact many Arabs Muzlim Arabs now openly support banned terrorist organizations like Hezbollah in the U.S. and Canada. This raises a very complex issue and that is, what exactlly do we do about it?

What is this JehovasWrath post about anyways? He's jumping from missles killing babies to the Holocaust, Syrian, Iran, little Hitler, David's star and basically drumming up pure hate against democratic capitalist Israel, who has been a long standing ally of the U.S. --THANK GOD. It's a damn good thing Israel stands at the gates to the Middle East rather than an Arab Muzlim country and a country that will defend itself and jump at the oppurtunity to try to obliterate the Hezbollah, something Hezbollah would love to do to Israel if given half the chance. Your post is reflective of the way you think and obviously it's all about 'hate' and disrepect for the 'West's' and other parts of the world's Christian God and not simply expressing a legitimate critical view which no doubt you are unable to do.

Again you are including only transfer payments in general. The U.S. it seems has nothing that even closely resembles 'equalization payments' which is as you know is a separate item from transfer payments. Equalization payments puts Canada in a 'social class' by itself unless you can provide proof some other country is doing likewise. In other words that $10-billion dollars plus (equalization) would really give our military the boost it deserves.

One example: The gas tax is suppose to build and maintain roadways. No, the gas tax is not doing what it was designed to do. http://www.taxpayer.com/main/news.php?news_id=2295

You'll have to name a country that doesn't have some form of transfer payments. I can't think of one including the United States. We are all nations of socialists. I am talking equalization payments. Perhaps you can name me one other country where as 31% of federal spending is on transfer payments of which 46% is equalization payments to spend in whatever area they wish restricted to no specific area, which is plain dumb. The logic behind equalization payments is subzidizing in our case a province who in effect cannot raise it's revenues to an established standard in comparison to more successful provinces receives equalization payments to be equal to that standard. I fully beleive this is total nonsense and a huge strain on federal resources and amounts to nothing more than national welfare on a perpetual basis and only strains other areas in need of federal aid. http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/aia/default.asp?L...=19970226_e.htm http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/domino/reports.ns...FNW9F.CNDJQE.M9