Murray B.

Canada has a long history of racism and other discrimination but it appears less obvious than it once was. Discrimination against Catholics and the Irish seems to have ended and overt discrimination against blacks seems to have declined but not so much for Canadian Indians. Of course now we can add smokers, gun owners, and fat people to the list so perhaps we may not have made as much progress as some people may think. Individual racism continues to exist and one can only hope that this will decline with education. This is not the big problem, however, unless the discrimination becomes widespread and institutionalized. Then the victim becomes trapped and cannot find relief by simply moving or finding another job. It would benfit us all if institutions did not discriminate against any identifiable group but in this respect the United States is ahead of Canada. Methinks there are more individual bigots in the States but more bigoted institutions here in Canada. Which is best? Well, I'll leave it up to you to call the kettle black. P.S. Are you intolerant of bigots? I know I sure am... which makes me a bigot ... which I can't tolerate. Got to go now, my head hurts.

The Canadian constitution is a two pager and there is not much there. If the violation involves property then there is no such right at all. It was eliminated when they did the 'new' constitution. If the right is enumerated in the constitution then the identity of the "someone" becomes important. If the violation is by any level of government then forget it unless you are part of some sort of group that can finance a long court case. Canadian law was designed to prevent colonists from getting uppity. The fact that the country is now a colony of Ottawa instead of Britain changes nothing as far as individual citizens are concerned. Other than that, you can call a lawyer and pay thousands of dollars to right the wrong. If you win then you get the money back and then some. If you lose however you will get to pay all the court costs. In real tersm rights in Canada are only for the upper class.

Canada is not in Iraq promoting democracy because the PM at the time was French. When the PM is English then Canada goes along with Britain and when French we pretty much go along with France. It was a French PM this time and France did not go and so didn't we. Not sending troops, however, does not excuse the vehement anti-U.S. statements coming from some Canadians. Let's not forget that the U.S. was attacked in a monsterous way and the military actions were a response to that attack. Iraq was included because it had trained, equipped and financed anti-western terrorists for years. Right or wrong this is an issue for the U.S. voters to decide and this is one Canadian that will stay out of it. If Mr. Bush wins the next election then I'm fine with that. If the Democrats, or Libertarians or Constitution party should win then I'm fine with that too. Canadians have no business trying to influence elections outside of the country.