Wilber

How is it a ridiculous topic? Sure conservation may have something to do with it but if the demise of the polar bear is really the 800 pound canary in the coal mine, the theory isn't quite working out. The numbers aren't backing that up so now they need another reason to explain why. Must be conservation. Another one of those inconsistencies. More of that undeniable science. It isn't what we expected and we can't explain it so it must be conservation. The fact that conservation wouldn't make much difference if the earths climate was determined to do the bears in is neither here not there. Maybe it is global warming but it is having the opposite effect of what they have been feeding us. Something to think about, no.

Thats 2100 in just those three areas, not 2100 total world wide. The question is, if this is the global warning canary, why are the numbers going up? Maybe the increase is due to warming, in which case they got it backwards. Makes you wonder what else they might have backwards. Just another "irregularity" I guess.

GLOBAL WARMING CAUSES IRREGULARITIES. AT LEAST THAT'S WHAT SCIENCE SAYS WILL HAPPEN. Wow, hard to argue with that. Doesn't matter what happens, its global warming because it's an irregularity. Works just like religion.

That is actually one of my more recent goals in life. Oh, do not get too comfortable with that thought. The day that YOUR vote carries ANY weight, will be the day that you are completely surrounded by people like me. There is a reason why the "government" spends advertizing money to convince people to vote. Carry on.

After that, I'm surprised you don't.

Hmm

You keep saying that and convince anyone else you can. The fewer people who vote, the more weight mine has.

You can't have a bidding process if there is only one bidder that has what you need. You just have to make the best deal you can. I don't know how often that needs to be said. Any equipment that has been bought since we went to Afghanistan have been panic purchases to make up for glaring deficiencies. Canada has a bad habit of buying equipment then keeping it until it rusts out before replacement. Instead of having a plan and replacing one major system every ten years or so, we wait until it all rusts out at once. Then we have to panic and replace everything at once. Then we dick around for years fighting over how much of it will be built in Canada and in which province. The fact that our nation's military needed it yesterday but will have to make do with junk until all the regional political interests are settled is a minor consideration. If that is the way we are going to operate, it pays to buy the best because there is no telling when it will ever be replaced. Finally a government that has put the military's needs first. About time seeing as they are the ones getting shot at.

Figgy, are you in favour of corporal punishment? Coulter would be a no name if she wasn't decent looking and continuously making outrageous statements. As Guyser says, a lightweight.

I agree with you that victims should be compensated by the criminals and that the criminals should not get to keep the proceeds of their crimes. I just don't think they should be negotiable. The victim should be able to apply for compensation and the courts should impose it. The criminal gets a say but does as he is told. He doesn't get a choice of pay or go to jail when it comes to compensation. He pays, period.

By that logic then, what if someone had murdered Saddam Hussein and also faced the death penalty? Like I said, Canada has no moral authority to decide which heads of state it is OK to assassinate and which aren't. I seems you do and would make that someone a Canadian citizen. If we can make that judgment, so can others in return. We've sure put the word out about where these people should run to. Canada will take anyone.

There is no if. Why do people who don't like the result always assume that the people who didn't vote agreed with them? That's presumptuous nonsense. When it comes to forming the government, if you don't vote, you don't exist because you sat on your ass and left the decision to someone else.

In this case not just any heinous crime but the murder of the country's head of state. Should get you the order of Canada next.

Nice attempt at twisting my words. I harbor no love of war criminals. Despite that fact, however, if they are Canadian citizens then yes, yes they do have rights as laid out in the Charter. If, as your quoted sources state, those 40000 were slated to be deported but never were, then that is a different issue. Chowdhury was never slated for deportation. dThat's the problem with this whole scenario. If you commit a crime heinous enough to get the death penalty in another country, that makes you good enough to be a Canadian citizen. Boy, does that make me proud to be a Canadian.

Inuit is Canadian PC. In Alaska the common term is still Eskimo.

Then stop breathing.

It is people like you who are turning it into a political issue. Harper is just getting the equipment the military has needed for years. There can be no competitive bidding process if only one manufacturer is building what you need.

Seeing that every Canadian is spending $700 on military equipment, I want to know that my money is well spent. Handing out contracts without a bidding process suggests that we are not getting the best price possible. The half billion in penalties it took to get out of the EH101 contract was money well spent? 14 years later the Navy still doesn't have it's Sea King replacement and when it finally does get one it will be less capable than the EH101.

I don't think it will amount to much. They might have been able to grind out a little better deal but the fact is, they bought the right aircraft. The C-17 and C-130 are really the only game in town so how could they have a bidding process? The C-17 has no real competition and the Air Force has well over 30 years of experience operating the C-130. When it comes to helicopters, the Liberals should probably keep their mouths shut. 14 years after Chretien canceled the EH101's, the Navy is still waiting.

So Geoffrey Dahmer wasn't a murderer because he wasn't convicted in a Canadian court. Seems like kind of an arrogant position to take.

Nice of you to make that judgment for them. This country has no moral authority to decide which heads of state it is OK to assassinate. That is one thing that Canadians love to throw in the face of Americans every time they involve themselves in the affairs of foreign governments.

Because it's the moral high road, it's the right thing to do. So we let assassins run free in our country. Not just any assassin but the assassin of a head of state. I'm certainly not proud of that kind of high road and it seems like a stupid thing to do.

Why not? You believe convicted criminals should be allowed to negotiate their sentences and compensation? We obviously have very different ideas.

I am proposing that he does pay the victim. Right now, victims get nothing. Congratulations. I agree that they should pay the victim. I don't agree that it should be negotiable.

Either way the majority government did not have majority support, 3 out of 4 opposed if you include non-voters, 6 out of 10 opposed if non-voters excluded. The problem remains. There is no way you can include non voters. If you can't be bothered to vote, you don't count. You just assume they don't support the winner. For all you know they might all have voted for the Liberals and they would have had over 80% of the vote. Your premise is nonsense.