Leafless

Is Dancer having problems understanding that not only is GG Michaelle Jean a citizen of Haiti, she also was a citizen of France. But unlike Liberal leader Dion who is also a citizen of France, denounced her French citizenship. She speaks French and English, Jean is fluent in Spanish, Italian, and Haitian Creole and can read Portuguese. Just how divisive Michelle Jean is: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Politics/2008/...5488961-cp.html

Canada has a culture and always did. Like I said, "SOME Canadians", some members of this very board that claim Canada has no culture. It is also Quebec who claims their culture is so much different than the ROC using bits and pieces of a past culture that no longer forms the unilateral legal basis for Canada's original undoctored constitution.

http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/s...59-ee285c62eb42 And some Canadians wonder why Canada has no culture. Here is our governor general Michaelle Jean an Haitian French immigrant promoting a province that racially discriminates against other Canadian cultures. Our federal government refuses to set Quebec straight relating to honouring conditions relating to Canada's Charter of rights and Freedoms. In fact Canada imports and exports more to the the U.K rather then France which alone makes the U.K. a superior influence as an ally in talks aimed at creating closer economic ties between Canada and the EU. http://www.2ontario.com/welcome/coca_401.asp Canada it appears is purposely creating a cultural conflict to ensure Canada does not develop a cuture that is common to all Canadians. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franco-Canadian_relations Is this the purpose of multiculturalism, to divide and allow the winner take all?

Yes, by all means, when the food crunch becomes serious, exporting nations must look after their own. Surely, it is not expected successful food producing nations be responsible for the irresponsible nations of the world. And this is an old 1996 report. http://dieoff.org/page57.htm

Not in Canada. You are an OUTRIGHT LIAR and not citing proof, proves this. The Mexicans DID NOT cede the right to Canadian authorities when they turned Martin over and allow her to serve her term in Canada. Even Stockwell Day did not know how long Martin would have to serve. The parole board pulled the strings for Martin and shows how corrupt the Canadian system of law is, when the parole board can unilaterally decide the fate of a criminal in a case like Martin's. Like I said I doubt if Mexican authorities will ever again be making this kind of a deal for any two bit Canadian ever again. http://www.lawtimesnews.com/index.php?opti...iew&id=3652

Then why is a Canadian parole board applying Canadian law relating to her parole on Mexican jail sentence. Do they not have the common sense that now that she is in Canada, the least they can do is honour the Mexican jail sentence and force her to serve her full jail term here in Canada. What kind of arrogance are Canadian officials demonstrating towards another countries laws by allowing early release.

What kind of twisted parole board is this? And other interesting items on Martin. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National

If race car drivers only had airbags they would be forever inflating with all the inevitable bumping and would be a hazard on a race track. I never said seat belts are useless and are meant to be used in conjunction with the airbag.

I have personally witnessed the aftermath of an accident where this did happen, where the lower torso was completely severed by the seat belt. This negative result of violent car crashes is seldom reported, and I suspect for obvious reasons, primarily discouraging the use of seat belts. http://www.safetyforum.com/seatbelts/ Depending on circumstances, yes.

It is not my theory. You are the one who said: So again, show me what piece of legislation allows the federal government to impose and collect income tax on a permanent basis?

The only relatively new major safety feature that protects a driver from serious injury is the air-bag and that is what I originally wrote. In fact all the other items mostly provide drivers with a sense of 'over confidence' a major contributor to serious accidents. Even a seat belt can slice you in two and is primarily only effective in low speed collisions. My provided link backs my assertions that vehicle collisions are a major source of injury and death. Vehicles are not as 'safe' as you claim and never will be.

Then maybe you can tell me what piece of legislation allows the federal government to impose and collect income tax on a permanent basis? You must be a liberal and in favour of draconian, Nazi type oppression. If you were serious about the environment, you would be suggesting a law that allows a single vehicle per family. This would have an enormous positive effect on pollution. But this might affect your personal lifestyle and we can't have that, can we.

And that Mexican judge probably learned his lesson...don't ever deal with corrupt Canadians again.

Now it has the highest AIDS rate which could be a boon to return to White rule. http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=13875

Another post with no proof to back your statements not even the metal bit. Many of the safety features you quoted were available and used even back in the sixties. But let me assist you: But then again looking at this chart, safety features have not much to do with causes or the PREVENTION of accidents but is a result of driver error or plain neglegence. Here is a chart citing the most common causes of death but begs the question, how many other victims, although are not dead but are left permanently injured, paralyzed etc. for the rest of their lives and cannot no longer function in a normal manner. http://www.benbest.com/lifeext/causes.html

Yes, food processing companies and their SHAREHOLDERS know this. Nice little game isn't it?

I'm sick of her to. But I find it strange a Canadian tax payer would not object to abetting criminal activities and padding the Canadian legal profession with public tax dollars. She was found guilty in Mexico and that is where she should be serving her sentence. Why the hanky panky?

This proves your statements to date, relating to this thread are erroneous and FACTLESS.

The federal government does not even have the legal right to impose income tax much less tax gasoline. Scrap the gas tax entirely, until it can be proven that the total gasoline tax collected is put back into roadway maintenance and new roads. Canada's roadways in most parts of the country are a disgrace.

If your so sure of yourself, then quote you sources and share your information with the rest of your fellow members. This is a forum and not a guyser 'one way street'.

I hope you realize what you are saying . Manufacturers have realigned words to better suit safety. For instance to-day's vehicles, sheet metal is thinner, cheaper. But now when that metal is buckled by accident, they call it a planned crunch factor that slowly collapses rather than jar the occupants as what happens with heavier sheet metal. The only safety factor that really makes a difference, up to something UNDER common highway speeds is the air-bag. BTW- Better fuel efficiency is hampered by pollution devices.

Do you know the specifics of her case? I don't and I doubt not very many Canadians do. If you don't, then don't post insignificant, erroneous B.S. with citing proof.

And just where exactly would a Liberal Canada be without the U.S.? Answer: Just another THIRD WORLD COUNTRY.

Beats me why anyone would choose to live by a river. To those stupid enough to do so, potential flooding is done by your own hand. But you never hear these whiners complaining in the middle of a hot July month, while the rest of us sweat it out in congested cities.

Sure, PEOPLE who eat food. This thread has flown off the hinges.