sharkman

All central nervous system depressants reduce brain activity and distort judgment. This includes alcohol, tranquilizers, both prescription and nonprescription sleeping pills, and a long list of other legal substances. None of these substances, whether used in moderation or used in excess, result in a lifetime criminal record and a 5% chance of jail time for possessing less than 30 grams. But Stephen Harper thinks it's rational to jail people for possession of less than 30 grams. Perhaps he's using some pharmaceutical substance to arrive at this irrational conclusion or even worse, his brain, in a nonmedicated state, actually perceives this position as rational. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hey Normie, hows it going? Still campaigning hard I see. Good zingers on Harper, but I recommend the occasional happy or confused face to further make your points. Keep up the good work!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm afraid all those call and email logs were destroyed long ago. The Liberals wrote the book on covering your tracks, remember the envelopes of cash in Quebec? The good news is when there is so much scandal, sooner or later a mistake will be made and blow the cover off.

On Martin dropping everything for a photo op with Bill Clinton, Harper quipped," He's one president behind." TV coverage of the event was kind of funny, showing both at seperate podiums with Bill on his cell phone while Martin tried to keep things rolling. As has been reported, the U.S. gov. actually summoned the Canadian Ambas. to tell him they found this quite objectionable. As has been mentioned elsewhere on this board, Canada's emissions have actually grown by 24% since 1990, while the U.S. has been much more successful(while staying out of Kyoto), growing by only 13%. Obviously Martin doesn't bother with things like facts when he's trying to score points with anti-american voters. At any rate, expect at least 3 more years of being on the wrong end of trade with the U.S. regarding things like lumber tarrifs and mad cow restrictions, now making way for brand new issues the U.S. can show their displeasure with.

Dear Hasan, You have introduced a very interesting topic and most of us here have strong feelings on it as you can see. I have to acknowledge that the great majority of Muslims are no doubt peace loving and wanting to help their people. It is unfortunate there are extremists who use any religion to manipulate the simple and attack their enemies.

One thing I've noticed about you Blackdog is that although I usaully disagree with you, your thoughts are usually substantial. I still tend to think the far left is worse, but you've given me cause for thought on the right fringe nutbars.

This conference in Montreal where Martin took another swipe at the U.S. and Bush was a perfect example of the Martin strategy. Canada is actually doing much worse than the U.S. in this area and yet Martin chides the U.S. since they are not a part of Kyoto. Merely a cheap attempt at the anti-American vote and keeping attention on them, not his poor performance in this area. It is something that deserves more than lip service at election time.

Thank you Argus for refuting this idea of comparing muslim extremism to christian extremism. They are simply not the same. Newbie, no doubt those are the best quotes you can find, and they do not contain the calling for the torture of immoral women, or the extermination of other religions, or the murder of homosexuals. And I wouldn't spend too much time listening to Hank H., he's kind of extreme in the other direction and has totally twisted the organization he works for since the founder died.

Eueka, hasn't Canada's greenhouse gases increased by over 20% since the nineties while the U.S. has kept theirs to 13%? They are doing better than us and they aren't even signing up for kyoto. By using per capita emissions on China, it skews their numbers downward, since they have 1.something billion people. They won't curtail their emissions when kyoto directs them to, have they left Tibet because of pressure brought to bear, or stopped manufacturing pirated goods because other countries or international courts say they should? How about listening to world organizations like the UN on human rights. They will do as they please and pollute freely as their economy dictates, not as Kyoto may eventually dictate.

Yes, Canadians are too timid for change, and our government has too much power once elected. And because of it and hence the inevitable scandals that power brings, Quebec may leave Canada. That is something Mr. Dithers doesn't have the cajones to deal with.

One of the weaknesses of our Federal government in general is the ruling party has too much power. That's why people are so scared of a change in power. Canadians are pretty nonrisky people and aren't sure of what a new party might do, but if they had less power once voted in, it would curtail the excesses, like the ones we have heard regarding the Liberals.

This article is right on, the Liberals have done way more negative campaigning than positive and I think with this extra long campaign, people will tire of the same old scaremongering. Give it time to sink in. Meanwhile, the Liberal scandals are not going away.

I can't believe that a place like Australia will bend their human rights so a minority can beat their wives. Pretty sick. Do you really think the Liberals would go that direction? I gotta tell you right now a lot of families from India and Pakistan treat women as second class citizens in B.C. We've had more than a couple murders even of Indian women who ran afoul of the men in their lives here.

One wacko killing one doctor is not the same as osama masterminding 9/11...stop this...there is no substitute for the breeze of love...I give you a cup of water...the sand blows on the just and unjust...babys crying and lovers dying...the truth is always in grasp...is there a speck in your eye..adam was a garden master...if hate needs trying...seven is the perfect number, death is conquered though you slumber...(I had a sudden urge to do a Jonah post) Show me where nutbar christians are blowing themselves up to kill as many Jews or whomever as possible and I will believe you. Unless you can, you are being intellectually bankrupt.

In Virginia they relaxed gun laws and found that there was no difference in gun crimes.

Okay, so what about 9/11, the USS Coal, the multiple U.S. Embassy attacks, I could go on and on. It seems you hate the U.S. The war on terrorism is a fiction like Christmas is in December. The attacks in Spain, Great Britian and the Philipines killed more innocent civilians and you think the war is fiction? The terrorists strike out whenever and where ever they can. We stayed out of Iraq yet they still take Canadian hostages. I am glad Bush is in charge and not some head in the sand delusional. quote=Sparhawk,Dec 9 2005, 07:58 AM]Bush and Bin Laden are really moral twins - both justify the use of violance and various other human rights abuses (i.e. torture) in order to achieve the greater good as they define it. Bush's one virtue is he is democratically elected and there is a chance that he and his fellow war mongers will be tossed out on their a**es. Bush does not condone torture and he cannot hold the hand of every soldier and CIA operative to make sure they don't. By comparsion, look how Muslim countries treat enemies. In Saudi Arabia, where Osama is from, they repeatedly tortured a Canadian to get him to admit he committed a crime. ( I forget his name) It's the norm there, but the exception in the U.S., and you can't blame Bush if soldiers decide to break the law. quote=Sparhawk,Dec 9 2005, 07:58 AM]... The creation of Israel was a mistake - it has made the world a more dangerous place today. If the Jews needed a place to go there was plently of space in the US and Canada after WW2 but the latent anti-sematism prompted our political leaders to dump the problem on the Palistinians instead. Who are you to decide if it was a mistake to create Israel? Have you a doctorate in Middle Eastern History? Or are you just talking on points that you've heard others do. Jews were flocking to the area that now is Israel for years before the UN decided to create a state for them. They wouldn't have wanted to go anywhere else since that is their homeland. That's where their civilization started, but no, just plop them down somewhere. Also earlier you compared Osama to Pat Robertson. Robertson said Chavez should be taken out. Osama masterminded an attack that took out over 4,000 civilians. I hope you can see the difference.

IMO, best to let it simmer until January. It's obviously pretty serious and it usually takes the RCMP a while to start investigating. If it got big and hit the second week of January or so, what a christmas present for Harper!

Liberals tend to do this when they no longer have anything uselful to say.

Yah, like the criminals are going to register anything, keep dreaming! I heard someone say on TV, if they outlaw handguns the only people who will have them will be outlaws.

Personally, this seems pretty even handed, a fine for minor possession first offence as things stand today, and jail time based on past record and if the offender is currently on probation. The Liberals are just trying to get votes, like the new gun policy they introduced. Whether these new policies would help or not doesn't really matter, it's all about the votes.

So does no one find it just a little hypocritical that the Libs preach Kyoto but ignore it on practical decisions like this?

Like what was said on another thread, hey, why don't they just ban murder! It'll have about as much effect. Or ban cars, since they kill so many more people than guns. But when votes are up for grabs, things like logic and cost go out the window.

We have people on the left faking hate crimes to whip up more hate for the right.(Are people on the right faking hate crimes?) We have people on the right actually being escorted with bodyguards, like Anne Coulter. Left wingers recently heckled her so much she had to curtail her remarks, which is what they wanted to do, stifle her free speech, and at all places a university where their is supposed to be a free exchange of ideas. Last year, the former leader of Israel was booked to speak at a university in I think it was Montreal. On the appointed day, protests got so violent that the whole thing was cancelled, which is what they wanted, to stifle his free speech. Show me some examples of the MAINSTREAM right doing this kind of thing. I know there are kooks on both sides, but these were university students! BTW, your link just took me to an emply SFGATE page. I used to visit the Babble web site, but every time I commented on something I was shouted down and called all kinds of silly names. On our site, the tone much more civil, and yes I have seen you and Monty Burns go at it. But lefty types are allowed to present their ideas and their is a debate, not expressions of hate like at babble. The left is more intolerant.

In B.C. we had a referendum on some form of proportional representation during the last provincal election. It didn't pass, but it was close. Personally, I would prefer a system where you vote for the pm, not some local mp.

Actually bubber, Norman has been making comments on this topic all week. I am referring to the weight of his comments, not yours.

Either you missed my point completely or you're simply wrong once again. Could even be both I suppose. Those in the 95% group had less than 30 grams and those in the 5% group had less than 30 grams. That's the nature of the "crime". If you have evidence that those in the 5% group had greater amounts than those in the 95% group, let's see the evidence. Of course you have no such evidence but even if you did, why would it be relevant? Less than 30 grams is a small amount and no one should be going to jail for that even if you and social conservative Stephen Harper disagree. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You know, I enjoy debating the issues with people. I find it stimulating to discuss the various issues that face Canadians and have someone who can point out things from a different perspective. But Norm, when you can't or won't allow a simple point that if 5% do jail time, it must be because they are offending worse than the 95%, then there is no point talking with you anymore. Then you ask 'why is it relevant' when you have been repeating that Harper wants the status quo which is jail time for tiny amounts of pot, and this point about 5% refutes your argument. It's obvious you are here to campaign against the Conservatives, and for the Liberals. You know all their talking points and use terms like strategized voting. I will leave you to your efforts and hope things go well for you.