Leafless

Eureka You wrote- " The degeneration does not invalidate the possibility of a democracy. It merely shows that a one Party democracy can slide into something that democracies have also experienced." Can you name me one other country in the world in modern times that Canada is expericing without the propect of a revolution??

Kliege You wrote- " Canada is hopeless and has been for decades." I agree Canada is on a socialist downward slide and will be without any hope of ever recovering to a country dominated by Conservative ideologies. What ruined this country I beleive is Pierre Trudeau's Charter making it easy picking for socialist based policies and has created a non-friendly Conservative enviroment. I fully believe the country is headed for a break up because of this. Even Mr. Trudeau's former wife Margaret just beat a drunk driving charge directly using her late husbands Charter. Let's hear more personal views on the subject of this post rather than continually comment on someone elses thoughts with quotes.

Yaro You wrote- " May you live in interesting times"...(old Chinese curse) For sure--Globalization is destroying the American and Canadian dream--and who is to blame for that--well companies themselves and -- SHAREHOLDERS.

PocketRocket You wrote- " But locking people away who have a disease which can only be communicated by having sex is way over the top. Really? I thought HIV can be contracted not only by sex but by saliva to blood and blood to blood and depending on conditons that includes many different scenario's. In effect also this as destroyed priviously realtively safe heterosexual sex in which heterosexuals must now take the same precautions as homosexuals and suffer the same consequences as homosexuals if contracted as a result of officials sweeping this 'killer disease under the rug.' Your term 'locked up' does not reflect the reality of the situation. If you refer to be confined to a treatment center locked up ---then fine , we understand each other.

Lawyer You wrote- " Within the legal definition of aggravated assault" Aggravated assault causing possibly death. I know what you are saying but at the same time could be viewed as ludicrous. Sexual assault with a 'disease' does not sit well in my mind concerning the definiton of 'aggravated assault'. All Iam saying is that federal authorities failed to protect the general public from the transmission of a killer disease and could of done more to stop this spread by banning certain sexual practices mainly common to many homosexuals.- I know it is not only the homosexual population that spreads HIV but they significantly contribute to it. Ambulance crews and health care workers now protect themselves with gloves and mask especially when exposed to body fluids and we all know why. I will not pursue this post any futher due to lack of interest and denial of the obvious dangers. This post was not designed as an attack on any particular group but simply outlying important HIV concerns.

PocketRocket Institionalize in a hospital or similar not a prison. The point of this post is to show how the system FAILED to protect the population against HIV. HIV again is a killer disease and cannot be compared to 'assault with a deadly weapon'. If that is the case every time someone coughs in the direction of your face could be considered a form of assault. In effect what the system does with HIV is ALLOWS the spread of that disease period.

August1991 There is a smaller following for Toyota products and to that I say 'so what'. Our domestic automobile manufactures need everyone's support to stay viable. There is not much profit in 'run of the mill' vehicles like the Sunfire or Neon and not a lot of consumers are interested in RAV4 SUV's. Ive seen a few articles on this subject and the suggestion was if consumers don't support domestic auto makers there will no longer be a lower priced line of domestic vehicles to choose from.

Tawasakm "How is putting emphasis on protected sex putting eliminating any responsibilty to the carrier." It does not put any responsibility on the carrier that's the federal governments job and that's where it failed to protect Canadians from what can be seen as a killer epidemic where there is NO CURE. There are 40-million cases world wide. Of course it puts emphasis on protected sex as how else can someone defend themselves against possible death especially when knowing there are HIV people all over. HIV is not like walking around with your fist clenched for whatever or even like a serial killer who leaves in many cases ample evidence to locate this person and who is eventually caught if not immediately. A HIV carrier can go on for years without detection who can in fact infect and kill thousands of people including members of the medical profession, dentist etc. The point of the matter is in this issue we know who the 'killers' are after they are initially diagnosed - and this is when action should be taken- not after the fact or after many facts and even then in many cases the penality does not fit the crime.

Melanie_ You wrote- " Are you really advocating locking up everyone who as HIV." I am advocating 'institutionalize' them the same way they have for SARS carriers or AVIAN flu carriers as HIV is deadly with no cure and there are other ways this disease can be spread without having sex. If in fact IF they can not do this because of the large numbers then the system has FAILED and our federal government in our civilized country must assume reponsibility for not taking the proper steps to halt this killer disease.

August1991 You wrote- " How many of the 30,000 jobs will be in Ontario." That question is totally inconsequential. The fact of the matter is people are not buying cars because they are afraid of high gas cost. What do you expect???

fleabag Why attempt to educate ignorant people who have no idea or concern regarding the word 'consequences' or simply choose to ignore all rationale concerning this matter. It astounds me how any Quebecer can support the likes of Mr.Boisclairs twisted strategy. Even the prospect of France jumping into bed with Quebec after a referendum would show how wrong the federal government was for spending untold billions of tax payers dollars in that province only to make it an attractive place to possibly harbour Quebec after abandoning all concern for Quebec and it's population after it's defeat to the British.

August1991 I think the point concerning municpalities having their own referendum is that Quebec does not have the power to force a municipality that does not want part of separation and if push comes to shove their could be bloodshed. The Supreme Court of Canada has already ruled Quebec cannot separate unilaterally. All this separation talk is soley coming out of Quebec with no federal input. As far as Iam concerned it was a mistake allowing a Quebec separatist Party to be part of federal politics and anyone being part of a Quebec separatist movement should be charged with sediton.

Re: "Andre makes it pretty clear" I think Mr. Boisclair is immature and sees things through 'rose coloure glasses' if he thinks Quebec can simply politically separate from Canada. How ludricous and naive!

fleabag You wrote- " Man or woman if they have unprotected sex with someone while knowing they are carring a lethal virus...they must be punished. Preferably removed from the general populace as well, if they have no idea if they have the ability to cease or exhibit responsibility." This is moral issue and the emphasis is on carrier ...'be a good person and don't have unprotected sex' is what society says, which in my view eliminates any responsibility on the carriers part and strictly makes it a matter of personal judgement as there is no legal mechanism preventing a person with HIV to invect 1-1000 people or more. Why is the carrier of such a lethal disease be allowed to walk the streets of cities throughout the country and in fact be allowed to kill someone by having unprotected sex. The emphasis should be on society after detirmining an individual has HIV there should be NO other recourse than to legally institutonalize people with HIV. Would society allow a deranged person with a gun to walk the streets and say 'just don't shoot anyone' or there is a good possibility you will be punished or will be punished. In the case of killer sexual diseases to-day the onus is on the individual to make certain his or her partner is risk free and the word intentional is a word I think is improperly used in these types of cases as the seriousness of this disease is to easily readily dismissed by authorties and could be seen by anyone who chooses as trivial Iam really free to do what I want. The sad 'after the fact' ramafacations of the spread of HIV possibly infecting a large number of people is the systems fault initially by allowing HIV carriers to walk the streets. So I actually agree with you in the reverse sense that it is the carrier that should be removed from the general populace.

Sparhawk You wrote- " The idea Quebec is a conquered nation like the former SSR's is nothing more than separatist propagana." Actually there never was any French nation in Canada that played a part in the founding of Canada -what we had in additon to the English nation, the Indians and Eskimos (each comprised of several tribes) -(old terminology)-and the Scots, Irish and French Canadians-all of them forming British a British Nation in the founding of canada --not a French Nation. This is because after the French defeat on the Plains of Abraham in 1759 the French ceeded to Britain by France in the 1763 Treaty of Paris, all French North America except for St.Pierre and Miquelon two small islands of the south shore of Newfounland. This left nothing but a British Nation dominating Canada.

Kyoto is a joke and unless all the world's major pollutors sign on a lot of Canadian tax dollars are going to be going down the drain. Jean Chretien pursued Kyoto for nothing more than a legacy and did this on "a gut feeling". http://www.freedominion.ca/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=8330

I think society is entitled to know especially in a mult- cultural society who the official chronic offenders are and what risk they represent to society. I certainly believe certain cultures are more prone to crime and believe this is due mainly to early marriage, a lax or immature and irresponsible parenting or raised by dysfunctional parents. I think something must be done in our society to 'stop' unwanted children or couples who cannot afford to properly raise children or do not posess the necessary degree of intelligence to do the job properly.

plusgood You wrote- " Shouldn't a country that's officially bilingual strive to have a civil service that represents that ideal. This is a FALSE statement to say Canada is 'officially bilingual' as it is NOT 'officially bilingual. Canada has TWO official languages namely majority English language and the minority French language in a country comprised of ten provinces with only ONE that is officially bilingual being New Brunswick. The federal government is the other enitity that provides a 'officially bilingual' policy thast many see as 'outright discrimination' as it does not satisfy official provincial linguistic representation of Canada and only that of 'officially bilingual' New Brunswick. There is an old song 'Breaking up is hard to do' when our federal government actually advocates this by fractionizing the country into little cultural groups that will sooner or later present a potential problem similar to what it is happening in France but multiplied by the number of smaller cultural groups Canada is broken down into. We already have laws protecting individuals from discrimination but become meaningless when overidden by federal government authority who see themslves as the knight in shining armour but fail to see themselves as a major contributor to potential cultural unrest and discriminatory practices. I really fear anyone voting Liberal.

Pocketrocket You wrote- " The times the are a'changin'. You got that right! And so are our resources. How are we going to be able to afford CHEAP Chinese manufactured products when in a few years the price of a loaf of bread will probably be $99.99??

tml12 You wrote- " Can you believe this" Short answer -YES Do I believe it's 'RIGHT' NO. How to alleviate this--Re-write the Charter of 'Rights and Freedoms' to ensure majority concerns are properly addressed. Iam sure GLAD the democratically chosen Liberals are running this country and not it's red neck citizen's.

Here we go again with another round of HIV media sexual assault stories that most people are aware of. The whole point in this matter is the intentional spread of HIV and should it be considered a crime. Or is it intentional as anyone in that positon could argue -things just got out of control and we just happened to have sex or come up with a string of similar excuses. Driving down the road separated by a single white line as the only defense to avoid a head on collission yet millions of people assume that risk every day and as a result some do die with many times charges layed but seldom viewed 'as intentional'. The only sure way to avoid the possibility of this type of tradegy is 'don't drive period'. There are many job related risk or recreational risk that can result in injury or death with no intentional blame or responsibility attached to anyone. It seems many women throw all common sense out the window when it comes to procuring a perpective husband or 'I know for sure this relationship is the one for me' or 'this guy has the bucks or looks or whatever that I want'. Women have a direct responsibility to insure the protection of their health in which the same responsibility is applied to males who also must be aware of the transmission of infectious diseases and of course other important concerns but not related to this topic. If your not sure about the health or lifestyles of your partner -don't have sex-period. What's your take on this issue?

Vets opnion is an opinion derived from a time when there were no benefits and every one had to work for a living and mostly every one loyal to our system of government for if you did not contribute to the system and appreciate the country for what it is you were not considered a true Canadian. This is hard for some Canadians to understand that self worth comes from yourself and not a governments silver spoon loaded with tax payers money especially from the Trudeau era making everyone equal. But all this accomplished was to forcefully remove the self worth from some Canadians and giving that self worth in the form of cold cash to individuals unworthy of the sweat and hard labour off of someone elses back to actually work against this country and to actually create groups more worthy than other Canadians. I would not fight for this country either.

Black Dog You have come up with nothing more than personal opinion as to why you don't support the Queen of Canada and supplied no factual information as to why you wish to support a republic. It is a funny thing considering what you said about wide spread apathy concerning the monarchy when polls indicate Canadians are pretty well split 47%-47% with most opposition coming from Quebec against the Queen but a high approval of acceptance for our new Governor General from Quebec. It's evident you have nothing to say in support of your republic so there is no sense carry on a debate consisting of nothing more than unfounded crtiticizm of the Monarchy and to rebute everthing I say. If there was a vote to-moorrow I would vote to retain the Monarchy.

Black Dog You wrote- " The Queen is ceremonial a relic of our past as a colony." I gave you reasons why the Queen is significant and meaningful besides giving Canada a identity. You replied- " Don't confuse what is to what should be." Whatever that is suppose to mean as in that post their were direct reasons why the Queen is very significant in Canada and made reference Canada DOES have a choice to become a republic. Then in the following post the one you don't know "what the hell Iam talking about" as I suggested that there are Canadians in Canada who think like you 'that the Queen is meaningless' including many Liberals who don't have the political guts or will to do anything about that situation and that is to transform Canada into a republic. Now that I have given you proof that the Queen is significant and you still think she is useless even though Canada is NOT a republic. If you think dumping the Queen is the answer to many of Canada's problems then I'd say you would be REALLY opening a can of worms.

Black Dog You wrote- " Don't confuse what is with what should be." This type of diatribe does not enhance your argument. I am simply offering a suggestion to what many people believe to be the situation as described by yourself including many Liberals but do not have the political guts to prescribe the necessary politcal action to do anything about it.