Leafless

Ahem, cough, cough, I am glad to acknowledge that you have the ability and can predetermine and recognize that you only represent the GOOD innocent clients and not the BAD guilty clients.

Your links study is only based on 290 non-capital criminal trials with no reasons as to why mistakes were made by judges or jury. These 290 out of 100,000 criminal trials in the U.S. per year is not representative of the overall system. "Spencer hopes to find funding for a much larger study whose results could be representative of the overall system." http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=07...;show_article=1 There is no double standard. It is simply a matter of relying on facts and evidence to obtain a conviction on a suspect who like most other suspects in criminal cases SCREAM INNOCENT no matter if they are truly guilty. Not a very nice job to accomplish and the only thing I can tell you is to grow up, face the realities of the best criminal system society can provide and thank your lucky stars that you are not living in one of these countries where if you are merely considered a suspect, you are promptly eliminated.

If that is the case, it is not his fault the Ontarians backing Mc.Guinty are nuts. And why did you not cite the proof of your statement?

My concerns are the cost, as refugees are entitled while their claim is being considered to work permits, welfare payments, housing and health care and deportation orders are seldom carried out for those refugees whose claims are denied. No need to wonder why our taxes are so high on top of GST & PST and all other hidden taxes.

I don't think so. http://www.parapundit.com/archives/001970.html I agree but are you actually worried about a handful of Mexicans? I am not sure it really matters as we all have our own opinions about individuals like Omar khadr and Mahar Arar.

Totally unnecessary to describe Harper this way and you know it. August is using it in a condencending manner to emphasize two separate cultures politically different, as if Quebec can only be ruled by a Francophone PM. Imagine that, an influential WASP taking in the English-speaking world's language, culture, technology, wealth, influence, markets and economy ruling over poor little French Quebec. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Saxons

I would have used 'campaign' or 'crusade'. I remember in a previous post you already identified yourself as 'English speaking'. I never made an issue over 'Anglophones' a word that I despise, as its definition from one of my dictionaries defines it as: "1.-One who speaks English where other languages are usually spoken. This justifies use of the word Anglophone ONLY in the province of Quebec and justifies the use of Francophone all over the rest of English majority Canada and the entire U.S. since English is the only majority English language. It is definitely not a preference issue and like I said a fractured country will not survive our already fragile broken political system. That is not true. My sister lives in Toronto and she says you don't hear nothing about French anything and she is employed in a highly paid business organization. Try seriously implementing bilingualism in the largest English speaking majority city in Ontario and see what happens. We know for a fact, don't we, that Francophones basically wanted Ottawa where the government power is and capitalized on it, utilizing the help of French federal politicians, leaving the promoting of bilingualism to the feds. Bilingualism is a failure in Canada and the money and discriminatory tactics used to try to implement it, is shameful and disgraceful.

Because: Fear mongering is not the way to get to the bottom of a story. Simply quote the story and save yourself a lot of unnecessary frustration and speculation. http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/s...b0-e1a7afe6b805

Nevertheless it is an open invitation to terrorist and their supporters. And why should we waste resources hunting them down, while harbouring them a safe haven in Canada, when with the proper immigration this problem would not exist. It seems Canada refuses to take the proper action when they are identified, as proven recently as paying a suspected terrorist off with millions of dollars and playing up for the release of another to be returned to Canada.

Meaning what? Then you would prefer to have Ahmadinejad and Islamic countries serving as top world cops? Or would you prefer to allow nature to take its course in a 'dog eat dog fashion' resulting in total world chaos.

Ha-ha-ha, Harper a WASP. Can't wait for my next post to refer to the French as FROGS.

It seems it didn't take Iran long to hit back against the U.S. after the U.S. Senate did this: http://www.katu.com/news/national/10128321.html

Firstly, I suggest Canada put its cards on the table, on whether or not it has intentions of becoming a mirror image of of third world cultures and lifestyles. It really makes no sense what Canada is currently doing relating to immigration, breaking away from its status as a Western country with associated Western ideologies. CSIS has stated: "According to CSIS, countries from which terrorists originate are prolific. Terrorists from 50 different international terrorist organizations come to Canada masquerading as refugees. Nearly 300,000 immigrants are admitted each year to Canada. " Why would Canada allow so many immigrants into Canada from countries that harbour terrorist organizations which could put at risk its economy that is fully associated with the well being of the U.S. as well as endanger the lives of its own citizens? What I would do is immediately disallow any type of foreign immigration from third world countries that harbour terrorist and terrorist organizations.

Nice to see how FREE Canada really is. Why would Canada have any enemies, there all here. http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover092807.htm

I suppose there are different cultural and racial classifications relating to the word foreigner. What classification are you? Third world, European, American, British, etc. Makes a difference when you are talking about fitting into a modern, majority English speaking, Christian country, like Canada.

Are you saying Canada freely chooses its third world visible minority, incompatible immigrants to provide Canada with a level of degradation to form a basis for criminal activity. Is that the way you want to live? To condition yourself to accept high levels of criminal activity, mind your business and do your thing. I read a report where a girl was being raped on a crowded main street, in broad daylight, in New York whereas no one even bothered to look or intervene. This is not true and you know it. People come to Canada because it is the easiest country to get into, with plenty of fringe benefits and provides access to the U.S. and a Canadian Charter that over accomodates them. And there are plenty of hoards immigrant troublemakers who also segregate themselves from mainstream Canada and don't integrate, taking over previously White public housing complexes. Canada does not have to invite these types of problems upon itself and can wisely choose compatible immigrants and really question 'do we actually need this level of immigration' or is it simply all hype to feed the greedy ever complaining 'corporate Canada' and keeping their investors well padded.

I have two. The city of Toronto harbours 2.5 million residents. We are not talking GTA. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toronto ---------------------------------------------------------- So, Geoffrey for Toronto's population to be 50% foreign born we are talking roughly Toronto taking in 1.25 million immigrants. We know Montreal did not accept any large number nor B.C., so I think it is a reasonable calculation that out of 1.8 million immigrants between 1991 and 2001 and we are not including the number of immigrants from 2001 to 2007, that the majority settled in Toronto. This would prove Toronto's population to be close to 50% immigrants born outside of Canada or maybe even more but have to wait until the 2001-2007 stats are in to verify this. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2003/01/21/...ants030121.html

No system is 100%. Let's be clear. Lawyers primarily benefit by a very wide margin, criminals and work against the innocent victims of criminal acts.

I will say one thing. It is diverse and all the nice things associated with that diversity, including incompatible immoral lifestyles coupled with a high disregard for law and order, breeds a crime invested city. Glad you thought it was a nice city.

Innocent victims? Give me a break. The wrongful U.S. conviction rate is .00065% and obviously would would be similar in Canada under 1%. http://craigread.blogspot.com/2007/04/capi...ocent-myth.html

Obviously if some Canadian citizens cannot even feed their own children properly, yes by all means they need the government to hold their hand as they also can't have a clue what constitutes morals. Without morals, cities will rapidly decay similar to Toronto.

It was you who used 'fight' initially. You better find find better words to describe whatever you are trying to say as my Concise Oxford Dictionary tells me the primary definition of the word 'fight' is-1. contend or struggle in war,,battle, single combat, etc. And for the word 'struggle'-1. make forceful or violent efforts to get free of restraint or constriction. BTW- French separatist did use violence and this laid the groundwork to backup Quebec demands. Unfortunately the English CAN'T say the same about the French 'for the most part are in France' since we know Quebec and Francophones have gone to extreme lengths to continue to emulate the language of France in an effort not to linguistically integrate, even thigh they lost to the British and gain greatly through confederation. I don't know why these traitorous characteristics are tolerated by Canadian society. If you prefer fracturing Canadian society this way like natives and immigrants, go for it, as it will probably result in the downfall of Canada as these segregated groups become politically powerful, will for certain, totally politically cripple our already fragile dysfunctional political system. Never say never my friend. But NOT in a DEMOCRATIC fashion and to who's preferences. I am sorry to say that in Canada we not only have a very undemocratic government but also a Mafia style government that forcefully drives very divisive cultural issue's in the direction of their preference or liking. This is being done by one major federal party with virtually no objections raised by parliament or loud outcry by the Canadian public. This is absolutely unbelievable. We have a totalitarian and a destructive government now that totally leaves out Canadian citizens and their input to what Canadians want via a referendum.

A threat relating to terrorism via mass murders has the same impact whether written by a prankster or a genuine killer and no one at any specific point would not be able able to differentiate whether the threat is real or false which in fact could be to late, if that threat was genuine. I have totally no compassion for a prankster emulating the deadly characteristics of a mass murderer. No we don't. It is obvious we don' have laws that 'bite' when we should. What does dictatorship have to do with anything? Some third world countries are continually accused of this being undemocratic and barbaric relating to the way they handle there form of law and order with what we perceive as unacceptable barbaric actions. Only problem is they have huge populations to contend with and the lack of resources of all kinds but yet manage to control crime, the best they can with the little resources they harbour. Well, we also lack the resources as we should have triple or more the amount of prisons in Canada to properly deal with incarnating criminals but don't. Like it or not, this should open the doors to much harsher laws but amazingly DON'T, so as a result law and order in Canada goes soft and criminals do not pay for their criminal actions and innocent victims suffer. Incredible! Currently in this country, due to lack of resources, justice is not proportional as fairness is overextended to the criminals and NOT the victims. Ha, ha, ha. It is obvious the animals are running the zoo and if much harsher laws were to be incorporated this serious threat to shoot up the courthouse in Alberta would probably never be made if the perpetrator knew in advance when apprehended he would be dragged out like an animal and shot immediately, if not already killed during the shootout. Scared as nothing to do with it. The threat was a direct implication that this person was about to commit mass murders. If you feel this is frivolous and not to be taken seriously it simply indicates a extremely lax irresponsible attitude, IOW 'WTF can I do about it', it was only a joke. Not quite the same. A police officer works for the city or province as an employee, in the same manner as any other employee. You are self employed defending criminals in order NOT to properly pay their debt to society, IOW raping the rights away from innocent victims. I truly hope you feel very proud of yourself.

This is assuming the perpetrator is caught and admitted guilt or apprehended during his killing rampage. You are being silly and are disassociating threats relating to terrorism and mass murder.

You are poking fun at a very serious situation relating to terrorism. I guess you have forgotten the Air India bombing and how not taking these threats seriously resulted in the deaths of many people. You sound like one crappy lawyer and seems you don't really want any solution, in case it keeps the cash register from dingling away, defending these morons at tax payers expense.