blueblood

Ah, don't be so silly. If the sailors were in Iranian territorial waters, Iran was perfectly within it's rights to take them into custody. That's not kidnappping, it's self-defense. I sure as hell hope Canada would take Iranian sailors into custody if they were boarding civilian ships off Halifax harbor. And BTW, attacking civilian shipping in someone elses territorial waters is an act of war. I'm quite sure the U.S. coast guard has boarded drug boats in Canadian waters, should we detain the Americans? I'm quite sure if Iran wanted to stop smuggled goods from entering Canada, I'd say thanks. The Brits weren't in an Iranian harbor either. If Iran wanted to defend itself, it could have easily dispatched a destroyer to shoo off the British ship. Did Canada ever detain any Russian/US sailors who most definetely operated in our territory? The worst we've ever done is seize a Spanish trawler and sent those guys back home. Should we start throwing Danish sailors in jail over the disputed Hans Island? Denmark has sent warships up there.

And you people are just revelling in it aren't you? WAR WAR WAR! Kill em ALL! Nuke the SOBs! No -- Let ISRAEL do it!! (*wink wink nudge nuge -- who'd yah think us warmongers meant!?) It is currently NOT known by ANYONE on this board whether or not the British were in Iranian waters. Iran is currently under threat by the very same countries who said they were part of "the axis of evil". Iran has EVERY RIGHT to be suspicious of a British military vessel sniffing around. Friggin warmongers want a world war. They FRIGGIN' WANT it. Iran has every right to be suspicious. THEY DO NOT HAVE A RIGHT TO KIDNAP SAILORS!!!! There was a lot of other actions the Iranians could have taken, "you are in Iranian territorial waters, leave!" If Iran doesn't want a war, maybe they should have left the sailors alone. Britain doesn't have to bomb/invade iran, just sending an armada into Iranian waters and weighing anchor in the waters/harbours until the prisoners are released. This method has proven successful throughout history in providing a peaceful solution to a tense situation.

I don't see either of those groups being as radical as the Islamists, we may have one or two or want to kill abortionists, all religions have their crackpots I suppose, but none to my knowledge are beheading people, stoning women to death or even suggesting that they might want to bomb a subway or fly planes into building and kill a few thousand people at a go, and certainly none of them are using kids as human bombs or decoys. Neither do I see them planting bombs in places of worship that belonged to their own faith There is no equivalence. All groups are entitled to a voice in our democracy, we have no right to insist that only secularists be allowed a voice. I really don't know what 'extreme brand of Christianity' is brewing among us, but whatever it is, it doesn't hold the same connotations as Sharia Law. Ever hear of Franklin and Billy Graham???

And that is what I call GOOD news. Nobody does it better . Whether it a dollar or a billion, it makes money. And making money is a good thing for the Corp. Lord knows they have and can waste it. I'd rather have my tax dollars fund a Canadian Cultural centrepiece, than the other crap on CBC. This is CBC's gravy boat. I don't think the CBC can survive w/o it. If CBC lost HNIC, then the plug should be pulled on it. As far as covering sports goes, the CBC does the best job. I don't think the other networks can pull off better sports coverage than the CBC, it just wouldn't seem right watching HNIC on TSN or CTV. That having been said, that's my ONLY defense of the CBC.

Yet tellingly this gets barely a peep from Bush et al. Instead, they trot out explosive devices allegedly manufactured in Iran as exidence of Iranian interference. Now call me crazy, but I would think actual Iranians would make that case far stronger. Which leads us to a few conclusions. (a) The U.S., for some unknown reason, doesn't want to inflame tensions with Iran or is keeping these Iranians as bargaining chips. ( the Iraqi security officials are wrong or lying and no Iranians were qactually captured. Now google turned up some other stories in that vein, but there's been little in the way of public statements on this. If true, however, it changes the complexion of the mess with the UK a bit. Iran could be holding the Brits in response to the capture of their folks. Or it could be unrelated. Apparently the Iranians captured by the States were in Iraq, it's not like the Americans trotted into Iran and grabbed the first 5 soldiers they seen. The iranians in fact went into Iraqi waters and snatched the Brit sailors. Either way the Brit sailors have been kidnapped and something needs to be done about it. I'd say throw in the fleet right in Iranian waters as a show of force until the prisoners are released.

It's like survivor, Harper has to plot and scheme to get voters on his side, that's what he's doing now (and doing a bang on job on top of it). If there isn't some form of major fiscal conservatism reform in a Harper Majority mandate, I will concede my point.

They do things different in Western Canada too, should Western Canada start applying reasonable accomodation, the voting public would most likely go for it.

It's time for the Brits to send an armada over there and park themselves in Iranian waters, when the sabre's been rattled it's time to rattle back. The Iranians would be insane to attack the British fleet. But if Iran releases the prisoners, then obviously withdraw the fleet.

Wait until a majority until we see the true fiscal conservatism come out.

No it doesn't, if there's no "NO Trespassing" signs and if the protesters aren't comitting any crimes then the quarry owners are hooped, but it's hard to believe that there are no "NO Trespassing" signs at a quarry considering a truck load fetches a nice price.

You don't live in Ontario, but you do wish for a federal government handout to help move your crops. Government interference is good when it suits you. You talk the talk, but you won't walk the walk. Hah research my posts, especially the one concerning the 1B to farmers, I am against that. I am walking pretty fine.

If it's posted land all it needs is a sign. As a land owner dealing with people who fill ditches on my land I exercise this right to the full extent of the law.

Ipsos Reid has the Tories at 40% and the Libs at 29%, uh oh!! Just seen it on MDL.

I know you think of it as a science. The Liberals used to it and were roundly criticized. The Tories now do it as they are the new Liberals of Canada right down to their bloated budget. In all fairness the Liberals had it at a science when Day was the leader, and when Harper was first starting up as tory leader.

Good for the Ontario economy. Lots of "help wanted" signs around. A decent minimum wage will give a push to some of the welfare crowd to get a job - excellent for government coffers. Oh boy...I don't know this coming from someone who doesn't believe people are smart enough to spend their paycheques and that people would spend their cheques on beer and popcorn. If it's taxed like how you want it productivity will probably go down, inflation will rise, and that 10 bucks an hour won't have any buying power anymore. Bad idea. Let the market dictate wages.

Personally, I don't think they should make a big deal about it. It just gives publicity to the comment. I think they are right on pressing on O'Connor. If the military police are concerned that soldiers are breaking the law, he should be too. Let Harper lash out. It makes me him look like the childish one. How is it childish for Harper to appropriately stump the opposition? Watch QP. That's half of politics is being able to stump the opposition. These attacks by Harper are done with impeccable timing and tact. They don't really backfire on him. If Harper were to use his line of the Liberals support the Taliban more than our troops in an attack ad, it would surely backfire on him, using it in QP to shut Dion up worked like a charm. The tories have the "stumper" lines down to a science now.

I have heard this before somewhere? Tyranny, Checks..... you forgot balances I am not a fan of such handcuffing. You can achieve better results with with one legislature and drop the first past the post format. Regardless, Canada has been served well with one real parliment and the rubber stamp above. Dropping the Senate is a good thing. Its time to be dissolved occurred long ago. It is an unnecessary expense. I do not wish to believe that the only thing checking the Tyranny of a Harper Majority would be the Senate. Of course the thing checking a harper tyranny majority would be the voting public on election day and the RCMP.

On that maybe. I think the ongoing attack on the Tories in B.C and Newfoundland as well as Saskatchewan over the budget the next days may be influential in shaping opinion. Things are still in flux. The Quebec election alone could change the dynamic completely. He does need to smooth things over with Danny Williams, this majority if he gets one will be razor thin, he cannot write off whole seats. By pissing off the FN only, his seats are relatively safe. Pissing off Danny Williams is a write off of seats. His seats in Saskatchewan are secure, I can assure you of that. B.C. is another story, he'll have to work there too. Quebec IMO is a wildcard.

My grade 12 French has no hope in translating what went on here, a little commentary on the video and a discription about what it's about would be appreciated.

Hmm, Harper going against the First Nations. I wonder how that would play when every province supported it. In the budget Harper burned a lot of the provinces, he has no problem doing that. There are a great many Canadians who would support it and knowing how well the tories can spin things now, he'd pull it off. It's not like the first nations would vote tory anyway. It would be a lesser of two evils game like the one he's played with western canada concerning quebec. If he went down on the Kelowna accord, the majority of western canada would back him on this.

There won't be a confidence vote on it. What pretext would he use to call an election when he said he wouldn't call one, especially if the Liberals vote for the legislation. There might be one concerning the Kelowna Accord. Harper's pretty crafty, if the stars align for Harper he'll get his election at the hands of the opposition.

Bike paths are great but not everyone lives in cities. A lot of people really do need vehicles. I don't have a problem with discouraging people from using unnecessarily inefficient vehicles and using that money to encourage the use of more efficient vehicles. Just a note from the cycling community on bike paths... they are actually a death trap. Your statistically much more likely to be injured on a bike path then on a road. What we need to do is make cheap changes to our roads and traffic laws to make cycling safer, and then encourage it a little more through either a stick or carrot approach. Bike paths have ridiculous speed limits of 15km/h and the such to accomodate the pedestrians with a death wish. It'd take me as long to get to work then if I was driving if I had to ride that slow. On my road bike, I can comfortably keep it around 35km an hour... a not too shabby one-ish hour commute in a city with a disgusting traffic conundrum. Riding on the highways outside of Calgary and some of the routes within Calgary (I obviously don't ride on the super busy roads), I have noticed an absolute arrogance of drivers towards cyclists. I've had hot coffees tossed at me, honked, sworn at, just for riding on the road... not even being in anyone's way. I had a massive RV pass me within inches on the highway... a four lane divided highway with 6 foot shoulders and this guy had to drive on the shoulder. Like what the hell? People are in such a hurry to race towards the next red light or traffic congestion. Makes no sense to me. IMO, most people are not mentally competent enough to operate a vehicle. If there is any reason to not bike commute, amongst all the disincentives the government provides, it's the attitude of other road users. I hear lots of excuses for people not to ride to work. "Oh, I need my car during the day." Well congratulations. I can actually tell you that most people that say this don't need their car, they are just too lazy to walk down the street for lunch and instead drive 2 blocks. Another strategy. Leave your car at work when your not using it in evenings (you can bike to the corner store pretty easy). I do this occasionally. In my European experience, I've noticed alot more people cycling. What are they doing that we're not. Is it just the gas prices? I'd like to think no. I'm saying they need bike paths better because from personal experience having a guy on the highway is a bloody accident waiting to happen. I've driven in cities, it's hard enough with a 3/4 ton let alone having to deal with a biker going much slower than the flow of traffic. Have bike paths and keep pedestrians off of it, they can walk off the path. Seeing cyclists on the highway drives me nuts especially when trucking grain, an overloaded super B doesn't stop on dimes!! Bikes and cars don't mix, neither do bikes and pedestrians. I think it's arrogant that a guy on a bike has a god given right to slow traffic to a crawl, just because he wants to ride his bike in traffic. Make bike paths and put a stop to this madness.

Which the Liberals already said they would support and fast track. Nothing tory spin can take care of, ha ha. This is the tory centrepiece, the Libs are going to have to come out with tough leg. themselves. You and I both know the tories are on top as far as justice goes and that the tories can outspin the Libs on this. Mind you the Libs have the shoe on the other foot as far as the environment goes.

39% !!! Oh boy Tory Majority!! The grits are in some serious trouble, all Harper needs to do is go for the throat with the crime legislation.

Sure it does. There is no further right party for the sane to go to, and it buys votes in Quebec. Why not? Why not just throw all of Canada's money into Quebec. Right now, it'd get you a majority. Screw the West, we'll take the rest (and the West because they have no where to go)... Harper style? Is there a chance Reform II could come about?