Leafless

This state of emergency is based on dual concerns: http://news.monstersandcritics.com/southas...istan__Roundup_ Sort of sounds like what would happen in Canada if a Canadian PM revoked our constitution as being discriminatory and unconstitutional.

You did not show me, you told me. So show me. You would not know the meaning of democracy if your life depended on it. It is evident you possibly are a Quebecer that is used to being fed with a silver spoon. Our system is corrupt, plain a simple. Since all parties are tied into this corrupt system it will mean NOTHING less than a revolution to create a real constitution and real representation or a different form of government entirely. The Charter is a statute and the BNA Act is a statute and it was NOT ratified by the people of Canada. It is totally fraudulent to suggest a premiers of a province represent the voices of individual Canadains within those province. Legislative rule=DICTATORSHIP, a banana republic. That is the point. Canada is next to a communist state in my book. In multi-party liberal democracies, the system of government (executive, legislative and judicial) operates independently of any political party, with each party competing for a right to control the system of government for a specific tenure. This of course is not true in Canada as they are in reality all lackey's to one another feeding common political ideologies. In a communist system best described for Canada as Marxist-Leninists, the state and the Communist Party claim to act in accordance with the wishes of the industrial working class. Let's wait and see while Canada crumbles. Yes, majority rules. I have no use for slackers or the disadvantaged that refuse to evolve. If Trudeau was the statesman he let on to rather than dictate authority to the provinces to ratify the constitution, he would have insisted on a national referendum in accordance with common law tradition. BTW-By Common Law is meant the Law of all the people, based upon our history, values, customs — our social mores or culture — and upon precedent, the decisions over countless generations of learned judges on every facet of our stream of history’s experience. And you cannot prove they are not corrupt and hope no one notices. Why do you suppose very few bother to vote anymore? There is nothing to answer in a country like Canada that opts to ignore (by Charter) majority concerns. Dictatorship it is. Only if the majority agrees, or in a country like Canada ruled by a lackey socialist dictatorship.

And do what? Create a socialist country without the power and authority to do that. Only a corrupt Quebec PM would do that. The Constitution is a statute not ratified by the people of Canada. No PM to this date has had the political fortitude to stand up for the majority and declare the constitution a fraudulent, discriminatory piece of garbage and revoke it on the basis of being a legislated document denying Canadians the basic freedom of ratifying their own Charter. You say this cannot be done. Why? Because it was, so far, never attempted. So what! This has no bearing whatsoever on creating a successful, self-sustaining country built on majority concerns. Trudeau would not be promoting this B.S. if were not for the prosperity of certain provinces the socialist Liberal federal government can steal from under various social initiatives. Minority rule vs. majority rule or viewed as both being equal has destructive qualities and removes the incentive for a country to excel and sours the political atmosphere. Obviously he favoured: Code Napoleonic embodies a heritage of state dictatorship, the route Trudeau choose for Canada rather than Common Law which embodies a heritage of freedom. There is political unrest in Canada relating to the interplay between party politics and the electoral system, electoral reforms such as switching to proportional representation, electoral participation and the new voter registration regime, the media's role in the growing public distaste for politics and politicians, the rules and regulations surrounding provincial electoral democracy, and the usefulness of referendums as a decision-making tool for important policy issues. Don't feel left out BK, inform yourself. Is this the joke of the year? The courts are packed with Liberal appointed Supreme Court justices and the Liberal dominated Senate. Smells dictatorship all around. Or for that matter, minority rights as they are part of the population and participate in the referendum. Rights determined by national referendum. Most modern societies provide for their handicapped.

Blame Trudeau and gutless Canadians that have allowed minorities to rule on the basis of culture.

It is obvious you believe in Canada ruled by a dictatorship. The amending formula is fraudulent and so is the Charter as it is based "Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law." Whose law? Trudeau's law, that by all men are created equal. Natural rights vs. majority rule. The principle of natural equality essentially means that no person (or group of persons) is so inher­ently superior as to rule others without their consent. This banishes the traditional claims of priests, kings, and nobles to rule on the basis of their alleged natural superiority, and replaces it with government by consent of the governed. In practice, this has meant some form of "majority rule" democracy. Face it. Dictator Trudeau has created a constitution amended by a discriminatory Charter that was never ratified by Canadians, that favours natural rights over majority rights without the will of Canadians. Trudeau reneged on Magna Carta marked the beginning of the "rule of law" tradition. The 'rule of law' in Canada discriminates even further. The application of the body of law to the government, does not restrict the government in any way since any desired government privilege can be made by the government into a legal provision. The rule of law should be seen as a bureaucratic hoop for the government to jump through, rather than as a material restriction on government power. The current constitution is totally discriminatory and any PM with integrity would revoke this constitution as 'unconstitutional' as not only being discriminatory but constitutes the grounds for a revolution. That is majority rights. Majority beliefs built the country. Any change in the constitution (that should have been ratified by Canadians initially but was not) would require verification of that change incorporating a national referendum. We are one mixed up country and do not even qualify for the dictionary definition of country, thanks to Trudeau and his gang of cultural misfits.

Those rights were dictated rights and form part of a constitution never ratified in the 'Common Law, tradition by dictator Trudeau. The entire Charter can be revoked by any PM of the day as unconstitutional if he or she so wishes. Section 15(2) does not allow you to discriminate against others. It does not relegate people to second class status. But it does clarify that the government is allowed to help disadvantaged people. This is your view not mine. That is not the business of government to include in the Charter 'social rights' for a select few and again was imposed by a PM dictator. Remember the Constitution of Canada does not belong to Parliament or the Legislatures. It belongs to the country, and it is there that the citizens of our country will find the protection of their rights. And, our Constitution is to assist our governments and citizens in the maintenance of Law, Order and Justice, and in the preservation, expression and transmittal to succeeding generations of our nation’s culture and heritage.

Common Law embodies a heritage of freedom. Code Napoleonic embodies a heritage of state dictatorship, the route Trudeau choose for Canada.

Our current constitution was revised and based on the BNA Act, an act of the Imperial Parliament and never ratified has being accepted by the people of Canada. Today’s problems (federal invasion of provincial jurisdiction) are largely the result of the central government’s violation and disregard of the BNA Act as our Constitution, and the widespread ignorance of our provincial governments and our citizenry at large regarding our rights, our powers and responsibilities outlined in the Act. The only real constitution Canada has is the Magna Carta and our 'associated common law heritage' and even beyond to the days of the Bible. The rights and freedoms the Charter claims to give Canadians are rights and freedoms we’ve enjoyed for centuries before Mr. Trudeau and his Charter came along. We enjoyed them as part of our English Common-Law heritage, secured by long practise and precedent of our forefathers for countless generations. However, the Trudeau charter claims to give these rights from the state, a system generally known as the Napoleonic Code, under which the only rights a citizen enjoys are those dispensed by the state. But what the state gives, the state can take away! Thus, such a ‘right’ is little more than a ‘license,’ held at the state’s pleasure, rather than an inalienable fundamental, non-revocable human right. The Charter undermines the fundamental right of Equality before the Law. Its Section 15(2) says, in effect, all are equal before the law, but some are more equal, than others! By institutionalizing special ‘affirmative action’ status and ‘rights’ for certain minority groups, the Charter thereby relegates all other Canadians to second-class status and negates the great principle of Equality before the Law. That’s not acceptable in a free and responsible Common-Law country. It is obvious we are not a country based on 'Common Law ' and are an oppressed people controlled by the elite and corrupt politicians forming a dictatorship.

People like Arar are considered anathema by many and who is biased against the success of Western civilization. Most Arabs it appears, judging from media photos mostly have neatly trimmed beards and expensive suits when on the make for extraordinary national windfalls.

Unfortunately, no one objected to the corrupt politicians ratifying the Constitution Act. The Constitution Act is not even a constitution, it is a statute.

The provinces, all but Quebec, relinquished freedom and sovereignty by agreeing to ratify the Constitution Act 1982.

Point is, Canada was warned by China. Anyways not all Canadians agree with the way our federal government is handling the separatist situation here in Canada especially with Harper flaunting his gravy train Quebeconomics as a solution.

In Eastern Ontario I understand that there are already low water ground levels affecting many wells as a result of bottled water companies depleting the supply.

I don't know why you are trying to drag Alberta into the Quebec separation issue. The main reason Alberta was miffed and initially suggested separation was the preferential undemocratic treatment Quebec was receiving from the federal government over the years while Alberta interest were basically being ignored. the oil issue is relatively new and just adds more ammo to Alberta's potential separation arsenal. Anyways back to the Dalai Lama issue, 'Beijing blast conniving Canada': http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...PStory/National It is hard to understand why the Harper government would want to get itself mixed up with another countries separatist problems when ii is incapable of solving its own separatist issues and at the same time financially breaking the backbone of the country and ignoring other major concerns like infrastructure.

Obviously China wishes to retain sovereign control of Tibet, unlike Canada allowing the country to be driven into an unmanageable state of political affairs lacking leadership and direction.

Then why aren't bilingual Francophones leaving the province of Quebec in search of better job opportunities they are supposedly so qualified for? According to an article in a Gatineau, Quebec paper 'The Bulletin, Wed. Oct. 27/2007', 42% of Quebecers do not pay taxes. It seems to me Quebec needs all the minorities it can get a hold of working and staying in Quebec for its own survival and prosperity. Nothing like shooting yourself in the foot, is there?

And here is more: http://www.languagefairness.org/Quotes.php

No, you are wrong. http://worldunited-stewart.blogspot.com/20...-no-rights.html

Quebec took advantage of Canadian federalism destroying its original concept by utilizing traitorous Quebec politicians who were basically continuing the battle of 'The Plains of Abraham' from the time of the 'Quiet Revolution' onward into Trudeau's era. Trudeau was never serious in fighting Qubebec nationalism but actually strongly contributed to Quebec nationalism by promoting the Liberal brand of federalism resulting in the repatriation of Canada's constitution to be amended in part with totally undemocratic content favourable to Quebec, 'official languages', 'official multiculturalism' 'official bilingualism in Canada's public service with the promotion of bilingualism into provinces, who supposedly have control of their own language rights, but don't as they can be overridden federally, but left Quebec culture unaffected. You ask what higher power I think Canada is still dependent on? At the time of the 'Quiet Revolution' onward, none. But this is the time English Canada refused to to stand up for federalism the way it was suppose to work and not to be taken advantage of Quebec's traitorous, aggressive ways to promote its nationalism and ideologies through the efforts of its provincial politicians e.g. Bill-101 and French Quebec PM's, IMO, especially Trudeau. The only option English Canada had at that time was a revolution and it failed to take that stance to protect the rest of our Canadian federation from Quebec aggression. You seem to not recognize the dysfunctional aspect at that time of our federal government. Liberals= Quebec by abnormally and undemocratically catering to Quebec's nationalistic ideologies. It is of course questionable to what form of constitution English Canada would have assumed after this revolution but I believe it would have been in line to the type the U.S. has implemented due to its success with that type of constitution as provinces would not want to chance Canadian type federalism any further.

How did you determine that out of this: I am pro-U.S. type constitution for Canada and do not agree with Quebec's traitorous ways to force Canada to retain Canadian type federalism for the sole reason to advance Quebec's nationalistic ideologies at the expense of English Canada.

I consider my opinion more politically valuable than Wikipedia's quote but that one quote I happen to agree with. Still it is better than what you quote---ZILCH. Regardless queenslave, you are not a slave to the Queen, but in reality a slave to corrupt, traitorous politicians stemming from Quebec, that voided any possibility of Canada gaining its true independence with the help unfortunately of English Canada who obviously lacked the desire to fight for the independence of Canada.

Canada wanted it seems a constitution similar to the British model and the repatriation method was used by traitorous politicians who were basically continuing the war of 'the Plains of Abraham' for political power and dominance of Canada basically involving English and French Canada, under the guise of: And to avoid possible conflict. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federalism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_Act,_1867

What we have here are remmants of genetically predisposed loyalist, who are accustomed to be beaten down, oppressed and loyal to British rule and passed on to your typical Canadian who have evolved into politically correct morons, loyal to minority rule and the interest of foreign cultures. Go to hell, Higgly, you Arab sympathizer.

Arar was not like any other vacationer. In fact Syria said this about Arar: http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/ Syria's political problems are highlighted in an interview with Muslim Brotherhood Leader Ali Bayanouni who in part says: Read it all about the contempt for the U.S. and Israeli. http://www.jamestown.org/terrorism/news/ar...ticleid=2369769

Why, do you actually think terrorist are incapable of blowing up air-liners if they shave their bodies and are bilingual. Your bias against the English language is unbelievable.