betsy

I saw the footage again. More detailed, this time. Apparently those women heard the gunmen on the radio asking for help. So these women rushed to help and shield them...and they even provided extra burquas SO THE GUNMEN CAN DISGUISE THEMSELVES AS WOMEN. See the implication in this? What this entails? DO NOT ASSUME EVERYONE WEARING BURQUAS ARE WOMEN!

I don't see how we are forfeiting the war to them by taking them on. Yes, even if this is about "ways of life." We'll be caring about what others may think is acceptable and inacceptable....and the enemies are using that very thing against us. We think we're so civilized...and they think we're so stupid! Because in the end, the ways of all life, lead to one simple rule: survival!

Maybe. But with a much publicized scandal like this...and with that name tag? It won't be sometime soon....not as a preacher anyway. As a man, he was already forgiven.

How would it look like if he said: "Well, I decided not to go because they'll be jumping mad about my decision...a decision I made as the PM of Canada, thinking and deciding what is best for Canadians. If they end up attacking my decision, of course I will have to defend it...and they might only end up being all the more sore when I become really, really honest....frankly honest....brutally honest....about what I think about it!" Of course, that reply will be plastered all over the world. It can't be and it won't be, "for Canadians' eyes only." I think he did the right thing. He is using strategy. Diplomacy. And I can only see the positive step in his decision about not going....most especially that I'm still fuming about the Senators' Dubai holiday affair!

They already know his stance! Why does he need to waste time...and taxpayer's money...over what? To tell them again about what they already know? I don't think he is scared of being chided. If you saw how he stood up to the Francophonie..."scared" is not the right word to describe Harper. Knowing that they're all pouting and miffed about his decision, I think he wants to salvage diplomatic relations by using diplomacy instead. If he is not there "to be chided", as you assume....there will be no need to defend his decisions and most likely end up crossing words with them. He's giving them some time to cool off.

I was watching CTV newsnet and they showed the accuser. He said he wanted to expose the hypocrisy over gay marriage. How can there be an hypocrisy over gay marraige....since we know that there are homosexuals who do not support gay marriage (meaning the changing of the definition). Unless the pastor had asked him (the accuser) to marry him? It is hypocritical though of preaching about the sin of sodomy and homosexual acts, and yet he indulges in it. But in the end, the pastor is only human. Anyone can fall into sin. I think the church had done the right thing in removing him from that position. Unless I've misread the article, I think he knew who Haggard was way back...otherwise why would he have kept those voice mails? Quite opportune to come out with it now, isn't it? He may not have blackmailed Haggard....but I wonder if he was paid by other sources to come out at this time?

So what about this other cultures being brought into this country? Like for instance, the violence towards the Hindu women or women from India? Three deaths in a matter of 2 weeks....boy, we need to be bustin' some balls! But no, kidding aside...WHY IS THIS HAPPENING IN THIS SOCIETY? (Gross, I think I'm a little bit tipsy right now....hubby and me had been gossipping over several glasses of wine, I lost count!) Better quit for now. See ya.

So they're miffed. let them pout. Who cares? Do we really have to abide by their dictations? If our PM decided another way that he thinks is good for Canadians...then I stand behind him!

1.- What do you consider culturally important: (a) the majority language of Canada ( or your minority language concerning your minority culture? Majority. ( What is your skin colour? Brown? Or Yellow? Not sure anymore...since I"ve just realized from reading some posts here that middle-easterns are said to be "brown." So what am I? 2.- How long have you been a Canadian citizen? 20 years 3.- Are Western ideologies the main theme of your life as being a Canadian or are you more interested in cultural aspects concerning your natural origin? Western ideologies. It is the very reason why I chosed to come to Canada....or possibly the USA. Having worked in an American Air Force Base, I've had 2 marriage proposals from Americans, one asking me to seriously re-consider going to the USA instead (after he learned I was on my way to Canada as a nanny). 4.- Do you think religion in Canada plays an important part in providing society a form of spiritual and moral order. Very much so. 5.- What political party do you support? Conservative.

Did you see the footage? A big cluster of women like that....and only two killed. To think that only two women were killed when the Israeli soldiers open fired showed the soldiers practiced some restraints. They could've just easily mowed them all down with bullets just to get to the gunmen! That's civilized enough I'd say.

In other words....this is like a "time-out?" If a woman threw a bomb yesterday....and now, just because she doesn't carry any weapons at all, she's suddenly an "innocent." Does this apply only to women? If so....why? Why aren't women being treated as an equal to men? If this is true, then definitely....this "time-out" rule ought to be revised. Makes me wonder why some nations did not sign up....what's on Protocol 1?

I wonder if these Canadians who make you proud ever said anything against the terrorists and our enemies.....or their criticisms are reserved only for our own government and the mission in Afghanistan?

As an adult in charge of those youths in her bus (just like a teacher in charge of her students in her class), she has a responsibility to set a good example.

The terrorists of today do not follow the Geneva Conventions! So if your enemy's main location is in the middle of a village (for strategic purpose obviously)....do you mean to say, we shouldn't engage then? That bombing it is not acceptable?

Can you please get your own thread back on track here? You seem determined and want to stay stuck on this so-called BMax's threat! That comment was said on page 1...I can't believe you're still on about it on page 4! Get on with your own topic! Otherwise, this thread is nothing more than trolling!

I did see some middle-eastern or Arab people (women were wearing that veil but with faces showing). It did occur to me to question the possible likelihood that undermining our mission can be achieve by so-called peaceful rallies. It's only normal to question motives...and deeply-rooted loyalties and allegiance. After all, we've had some terrorist plotters living among us.

And their parents taking government grants to settle on the occupied land, and wearing guns on patrols in their settlements also are only passive targets? I have to qulify that this applies to settlers on the occupied land, not residents of Israel proper. They are every single bit the same willing human shields as those Palestinian women. Every side had a perceived valid reason for doing what they do. The point is: if you are a participant, in this case the women trying to shield the gunmen from pursuing soldiers....well, expect to be treated like any other enemy! We see this tactics among terrorists like Hezbollah (that deliberately hid among the civilians knowing that there will be worldwide condemnation if Israel atacked their position and kill civilians as well). This type of warfare is becoming the norm. This morning on CBC radio...they gave honor to a Canadian soldier(?) who fought during the American-Canadian war....and they mentioned that he also killed some civilians. BUT CBC was quick to add and justify that, that was the "war of the time." Eh? What's different from then and now? War, is war! Everybody wants to play to win!

Today on tv, they showed a footage of a large group of Palestinian women in their traditional burqua apparently shielding and hiding gunmen from Israeli soldiers. The Israeli soldiers open fired....two women were killed. Civilians do not have to be excluded from the fight....if they are participants in the war. That includes children as well. I think it's fair. I cannot find the topic on Geneva Conventions....so let me say it here that I think, the Geneva Conventions Rules ought to be revised.

I just got only the basic channels......because I'm afraid of getting hooked and addicted to tv....wasting my time. So far I only watch the CTV newsnet and MDuffy Live regularly. I tried some other shows but can't really get myself to really be interested. Once in a while I gravitate towards the entertainment shows Insider....and Dr Phil, if the subject interests me....or check out the shopping channel (I'm waiting for the next edition of Wolfgang Puck Stainless Steel Collection....it was sold out when I tried to order the last time), and the cooking shows on PBS.Org. But the tv is still used more for watching DVDs and playing games.

Take a good look at the Liberal Party and then let's talk of dishonesty and acknowledgments. How many among the members of the Liberal Party are dishonest? I would be more critical of the kind of dishonesty that actually steal, wastes or abuse taxpayers' money, among other things....than the perceived dishonesty of a man who's trying to squirm out of making a stupid remark, about an ex-lover! The latter one can easily be dismissed as a knee-jerk reaction...a juvenile reaction...over personal history.

So he broke a promise. Didn't the Liberals break a promise over the GST? That got one of their MPs to resign? At least, Harper delivered partly on that! Didn't McGuinty break a promise over medicare? Laghi from Globe and Mail was saying at MDuffy Live yesterday...he doesn't think this is the one that will break the Conservatives. It may crop up during election time as an ammunition for the other parties to use in their campaign, though. The Liberals should stop asking for apologies....because if we ask for an apology for each and every wrongdoing, promise broken or undelivered, among other things....there'll be no time left to discuss other things. The Liberals will be hogging the floor...and will fill the time apologizing. Everyone else will be napping.

I must say I haven't touched the lawnmower...not even once. And the barbeque! But a few times I tried helping hubby shovel the snow..... he was the one who went like: "Oh you're not holding the shovel right. You'll end up with a broken back. I'll just be the one to do it...." But one time he was sick. I insisted on doing it...it was light and fluffy anyway. Oh boy! The whole time he was there by the window, making sure I was holding that shovel right! It's like having a supervisor over my shoulder....but I know, he was just being concerned.

Mine too! I bet a lot of these guys here tried it too?

Corrections. It should be....IF she had asserted herself and laid down the rules from the get go! By saying, "if she had been working from the get go"....implies having to have something to use as "an excuse" to be treated with respect and consideration. What, so she can say, "well I've been working all day earning some money...blah-blah-blah...therefore I don't think it is fair that I still have to pick up after you guys and do everything around the house." She should just say: "I don't have to pick up after you guys! You start doing your fair share!".....whether she works out of the house, or stays at home all day! You don't relinquinsh your power as the queen of your own house (that is if you view yourself as an equal and the counterpart of the king)...and kowtow just like that! That's the mistake a lot of women do. They don't use their power! I'm telling you.....some men know how to work on women and play them like a fiddle. I could swear some men deliberately clean sloppily because they know some women can't stand sloppy jobs and will just say: "Oh for heaven's sake! You don't know how to do it right...here lemme do it instead!"

What, women who no longer experience PMS are not women anymore? What are they? Old hags? There is still life after 60, you know. I hear there's still sex at 80! I mean, talk about prejudice....