gc1765

Very true, the conservatives looove to bring up the sponsorship scandal anytime they possibly can. What some people can't seem to understand is that the crooks involved in the sponsorship program are no longer in the liberal party. No current liberal MPs were implicated in the scandal, so get over it.

I'm not sure about the legality of accessing financial records, but if it is anything like the illegal wiretapping then why shouldn't the media report it? If the government is committing a crime, shouldn't the public have the right to know about it? Instead they try to censor the media who are making them look bad. Link Link If terrorists are stupid enough to think that the government isn't going to be spying on them (especially if they have probable cause), then how hard could it be to catch these idiots?

Quite the opposite, in fact. Link P.S. your link doesn't work

Yes, I suppose stabilizing agents would prolong the lifetime of chemical weapons, and I assume that is what the U.S. uses. But is there any proof that iraq was using stabilizing agents? I don't remember reading anything about it in any of your links, but perhaps I missed it. Perhaps my sources are wrong, but everything I have read seems to indicate that these chemical weapons have a short shelf-life (same reference as I provided earlier): Link I suppose VX probably has a longer shelf-life (correct me if I'm wrong), but I haven't seen any evidence that anyone has found VX in iraq. I guess my biggest question would be that if these agents were truly deadly, why has the U.S. defence department described them as "unusable" and "degraded"? So which one was it none , or just alittle bit, inspection teams find hard evidence that it was more than alittle bit. how much could be produced in 5 years ? Iraq has stated that purity and stabilization problems caused the program to be abandoned in 1990, in favour of the production of Sarin and Cyclosarin. At the beginning of 1989, Iraq had in its possession the necessary quantities of precursors for the large-scale production of V-agents. UNSCOM has concluded that VX was produced on an industrial scale. Precursor and agent storage and stabilization problems were solved. Furthermore, one of Iraq's documents on this subject, dated 1989, proposes "the creation of strategic storage of the substance (VX - hydrochloride, one step from conversion into VX) so it can be used at any time if needed". Iraq denies that it weaponized VX. Sampling by UNSCOM of special warheads has thrown significant doubt upon this claim [s/1998/920]. Iraq stated that the VX it did succeed in producing had poor stability. Through sampling, however, UNSCOM said it has found traces of a VX stabilizer, indicating that in all probability the VX produced by Iraq was more stable than they have thus far admitted. Saddam pursued VX, did he succeed? Who knows? But the topic of the threat is "WMDs found in Iraq". Like I said earlier, I haven't read anything about VX being found in iraq. But I could be wrong, so if I am then please show me there reference where it was found. If VX is a better chemical weapon, and it's stable, how come no one has used it against the U.S. in the past 3-3 1/2 years. What is the stabilizer they used? How pure was the VX? And yet there is this report that says after 7 years the mustard agent found was still between 94 and 97% pure. This agent is still very lethal and still capable of inflicting mass cas. So was it degraded yes, but not beyond where it was no longer lethal. Besides if it was just a matter of laying them out in the sun to degrade until they were non lethal, why would the US and russia be spending millions on disposal sites. A dozen mustard-filled shells were recovered at a former chemical weapons storage facility in the period 1997-1998. The chemical sampling of these munitions in April 1998 revealed that the mustard was still of the highest quality. After seven years, the purity of mustard ranged between 94 per cent and 97 per cent. Iraq still has to account for the missing shells and to provide verifiable evidence of their disposition. In July 1998, Iraq promised to provide clarifications on this matter. To date, only preliminary information has been provided by Iraq on its continuing internal investigation[s/1998/920]. My Webpage Mustard gas is a blistering agent, not a nerve agent. It is incapacitating and causes injuries but is not very lethal. It would be much more effective to kill someone with a machine gun. Link True, but these wpns are designed with such things in mind, and in the 90's chemical agent process such as the Iraqis had were able to produce very stable very deadly agents. to the piont when a small drop would lead to death. even after long term storage. I think I've already covered this argument above. The US has many interests in the region , one including Israel, the other OIL and it's price, one just has to go to the pump to find out what Iraq could have down to the US. Sadam has also supported terrorist organizations, in the region with funding etc. So he was a indirect threat to US interests. As for a threat to Canada, i know i thank sadam and the US everytime i fill up my gas tank , but why threaten Canada we are a heaven for terrorists, and other scumbags. Are you suggesting that oil is part of the reason the U.S. went to war with iraq? So they could save some $$? Correct me if I'm wrong here, but wasn't iraq not allowed to sell it's oil on the world market because of the sanctions? So how would that affect global oil supplies? Also, it's been over 3 years since the invasion, and in that time gas prices have only increased? Either the insurgents are making it hard for the U.S. to get the oil, or there was an obvious mistake there since prices should be going down. Also, will the prices go down enough to justify spending over 200 billion on the war?

Thanks for the link gerryhatrick, I'll read those soon.

I followed your links and didn't see anywhere any reference to how the chemical weapons in iraq were stored as to give them a longer shelf-life. Even if the precursors are stored in separate containers, the precursors are just as unstable as the chemical weapons themselves. Your link shows how they were stored in the U.S., not how they were stored in iraq. The U.S. has obviously found a way to store them for long periods of time. As I said before, I would imagine they would keep them cool (frozen) under an inert gas to give them longer shelf-life but that is speculation on my part. If the chemical weapons were stored underground (in iraq) they would not be kept cool enough and would degrade in weeks/months. Since they are believed to have been made pre-1991, it is logical to conclude that they would have degraded. Plus, the defence department seems to agree with me: "Offering the official administration response to FOX News, a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions." and this "Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist."" (I added the bold font) Link That is the same link that started this entire thread. You're probably right, I'm not denying that saddam violated the UN agreement by not destroying all his chemical weapons. Chemicals weapons which have been hydrolyzed are much less toxic than the actual chemical weapons. They are also much less volatile, especially sarin and VX which contain a P-F bond that hydrolyzes. I'm sure if you ingested large amounts you would die, but their low volatility and low toxicity makes them poor chemical weapons. Never said he wasn't a threat to the region. He has shown that he is a threat to the middle east (i.e. Iran, Kuwait, his own people...). As far as I know iraq has never attacked america on american soil, and was not planning on it either. So I don't believe he was a threat to the U.S., and especially not a threat here in Canada. Once again, expired chemical weapons were found in iraq not chemical weapons. Dont know how they got there, maybe they were stolen, maybe saddam wanted to use them in case of a possible coup who knows...the point is I doubt they would be used in the U.S. or Canada.

No, I think you missed the point in this thread. There is a contract between Natives and the Crown, in the form of treaties, that any land purchased from Natives be purchased by the Crown. The rights to those lands are not granted to Natives just because they have the same colour of skin as the people who first inhabited the land, it is because of these treaties. That is much different than claiming that only you get to use modern technology because you have the same colour of skin (I'm assuming here that you are caucasian) as those who invented those technologies. As far as I know there are no treaties stating that only caucasians may use these technologies. I haven't complained about anything. Show me one quote that I said to back up your claim, or did you read my posts? Where did this come from? I never said anything about changing flows of rivers, or taking over the U.S. I did not complain that these things ruined my traditional way of life either, you do read don't you? Show me a quote where I said these things have ruined my traditional way of life. I can't claim to have made big changes. I am relatively young and have just begun my career in medical research. Have I found the cure for cancer yet? No, but I've certainly made progress. The difference between you and me, however, is that I don't claim to be the only one who gets to benefit from a particular contribution to society just because I have the same colour of skin as the person who made that contribution. I recognize that everyone makes small contributions, and that everyone is entitled to benefit from those contributions. Never said I knew you, but I sure as hell know you didn't invent schools, hospitals, airports, highways, guns, trucks and all the other technologies you mentioned in your post.

Here is a better idea, why don't YOU take everything YOU invented and "immigrate to a country where YOU would be welcome". YOU didn't invent "schools, hospitals, medical services and technology, highways, bridges, airports, utilities, such as phone service, electricity, etc etc etc EVERYTHING including Social Services and tax dollars, grocery stores, malls, etc etc, pickuptrucks, ATVs, skis, guns of any kind, manufactured clothing, manufactured food..." so stop taking credit for it. If YOU decide to leave the country, you don't get to claim any of those things, since YOU didn't invent them. That works for me. Are YOU willing to go back to a "traditional" way of life, before OTHER PEOPLE invented all of these things which you speak of and take credit for? You won't get to live in your European style home, watch satellite TV, wear manufactured clothing, eat food bought at a grocery store, drive on highways....That is more than just a tad hypocritical Likewise.

If God didn't want us having sex, he shouldn't have made us go through puberty at 12-14 years of age. However, of course adults should not be having sex with 14 year olds, so this law is good so long as that 5 year exemption is in place.

Who are these warring factions you are referring to? Are you saying we shouldn't let any people come to Canada if they are from a country that has wars? Where do you think the majority of people originally emigrated from? Should the Natives have not let us in because we fought wars? What country are your ancestors from, have they never fought wars? Speak for yourself. See above. So, you don't like his turban? That's your biggest complaint? What do you care?? Wearing a turban doesn't mean he wasn't wearing the proper uniform, unless something else was missing but you didn't mention anything about that. Who says you get to make the rules? I didn't see any european immigrants adapting to Native culture.

And the goalposts get up and move themselves further downfield, resulting in yet another 3rd and ten. I'll take this comment as meaning you have no actual rebuttal to my arguments, so I guess I have won this argument. And then you accuse the Bushies of making up excuses. BUSH LIED! about WMD. Well, maybe not, but in his not lying he could of at least been honest. What a rat that guy is. Bush did lie. I am naive enough to believe that bush actually believed saddam had WMD's (due to intelligence errors), but bush clearly lied when he said saddam had ties to bin laden. bush was told after 9/11 that saddam had nothing to do with it, yet he still went on tv and said that they are linked, a complete lie.

I would be much more convinced if they actually gave the references for these "34 abstracts [that] reject or doubt the view that human activities are the main drivers of the "the observed warming over the last 50 years" I don't feel like reading 1,247 papers...but I could easily read 34.

Weapons of Mass Destruction implies that the weapons are capable of causing mass destruction, wouldn't you agree? Expired chemical weapons are not capable of causing mass destruction. He probably did lie when he said he destroyed all of the chemical weapons, I don't think anyone would argue against that. Does that mean we should invade every country whose leader is a liar? Either way those chemical weapons were useless. A better question to ask before invading a country would be "does this person/regime post an immediate threat to national/global security?" If that is the question that must be answered before a war begins, I think many people would say (in hindsight) that saddam was not a threat, at least not to the U.S. These are good points, saddam is evil no question and I don't think anyone is trying to defend him. I would have to agree with Black Dog though, why did the bush administration need to make up excuses to invade iraq when they could have been honest about the reasons for invading iraq, whatever those reasons are.

I think we have a better chance of stopping global warming than we do of stopping an asteroid from crashing into the earth. That is exactly what is contributing to it. True, we do need forests to remove the CO2, but remember that most of the CO2 is removed by algae. Even if the entire earth was forested, I doubt the trees could keep up with human CO2 production. Therefore reducing CO2 production is essential to stoping global warming. Anyone familiar with global warming/climate change would know that it is not just warming that is occuring, that the climate is changing in other ways which are directly related to the warming of the earth. I believe that is why he uses the term global "climate change" which is much easier than saying "global warming and the increase in frequency and intensity of storms that go along with it, etc...". The changes that will occur to the climate are much more complex than 'it's gonna get hotter'. Could you please give an example where David Suzuki ignores credible scientific data? Do you really think that a non-scientist who is funded by oil companies is a credible source of "information"???

the link works fine now.

The link doesn't work.

I don't think anyone was lumping poverty with terroism, at least that wasn't my intention. I thought the purpose of the post I was agreeing with was to say that poverty is a bigger issue than terrorism, but maybe I misinterpreted it. Good point, I never thought of this.

Only to those gullible enough to believe that harper has changed. What has harper done to fight terrorism? None of the candidates (with the exception of Brison and Volpe) were implicated in any scandals, so it would be a big stretch for harper to try to accuse the next liberal leader of corruption.

Thanks TS.

Let me just clear up a few falsehoods, misconceptions and contradictions: Which reserve are you speaking of? I've been through reserves in northern B.C., northern Ontario and Vancouver Island, and unfortunately I see mostly poverty. I would love to see Natives in decent housing, with vehicules and food in their shopping carts. However, in many parts of Canada that's simply not the case. If you have a problem with Natives receiving free education, health care etc., why don't you take it up with the governments that signed the treaties guaranteeing these things? And Natives DO pay taxes off-reserve, so don't claim that Natives don't pay taxes, that is ignorant and false. Another lie, at least at U.B.C. (can't speak for other universities). Registration for classes is first come first served, based on marks. I know Natives who could not get into classes because they were full. Funny, earlier in your post you said that "very few Natives take advantage of the free post secondary education...", yet now you are saying this college is crammed with Natives wanting to obtain post secondary education. Don't you see the contradiction there? The last residential school closed in 1996, and many were running less than one generation ago. Many of these students were so badly abused that they could not be good parents to their children, who grew up without strong role models thanks to the residential schools. Without role models, these children are bound to have "problems", and the cycle continues. Since many of these things happened only 1 or 2 generations ago, the cycle has not been broken, though it is starting to be broken and with any luck will be soon. Yes, obviously it is this young Native male's fault that he was approached by a lawyer. This just shows that the lawyer is trying to exploit the Native, not the other way around. So isn't the lawyer to blame? Was the lawyer Native? You didn't mention the race of the lawyer, but given your earlier comments "...and have no desire to work or contribute to a society and a country who's back they are, for the majority, riding on..." I'm guessing you think Natives are too lazy to become lawyers.

I followed the link, but I didn't find any reference to a long shelf life, or how the chemical was stored to give it a long self life. The fact that only two people were slightly injured could simply mean that most of the sarin had decomposed, even if the dispersal was "limited".

You're probably right, though the u.s. is not far behind. Either way the u.s. has much, much more chemical weapons than iraq.

Well you have to admit that if the conservatives do have a hidden agenda, it won't come out until they have a majority. It would be stupid of them to do it in a minority, harper knows that and he will keep everyone else in line. I won't argue one way or another that harper has a hidden agenda, only that if he does we won't know about it until he has a majority.

I never said that other countries don't have chemical weapons, I only said that the U.S. has the most chemical weapons. That is a fact. Remember that the link between saddam and al qaeda was a lie to justify the war. There was no evidence to suggest that saddam has, or was planning to sell chemical weapons to terrorists. If he even had (useable) chemical weapons. My response would have been the same, which is that there was no find. The closest thing to WMD's that anyone has found in iraq are these "Weapons of Massive Decomposition". Even the U.S. acknowledges that these chemical weapons were made before 1991, and chemical weapons don't last a few months let alone 10-15 years and the defense department says The same official also said Doesn't sound like much of a find to me. P.S. Here's an interesting article Link Apparently a roadside bomb containing sarin exploded in may 2004 releasing "a small amount of the deadly chemical". I wonder if they say "small amount" as a clever way to refer to the fact that the rest of the chemical had decomposed. Two people injured hardly sounds like weapons of mass destruction.

So the U.S. knew about the missile and we didn't hear about it from george bush? Hmmm sounds a bit strange doesn't it? I doubt the credibility of this news report from the korea times. It's on the internet, why wouldn't the media pick up on it? It would be good for ratings and ratings = money, which just makes me doubt this story even more.