gc1765

Here's something interesting, the shelf-life of sarin is apparently only a few weeks to months. I'm not sure how the U.S. manages to store their supply of sarin but they must have figured out a way. I suppose they probably store it under nitrogen and keep it frozen, that would make it last. However, I doubt iraq had huge freezers buried underground. Edit: I forgot to include the reference http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin#Shelf_life

The News of WMD's being found is proof Iraq under Saddam did indeed have WMD's which made him a threat. Liberals and the MSM are silent on this because when the Iraq War is judged they will go down in history as being on the wrong side that claimed Iraq under Saddam never had WMD's and was never a threat.. Who has the most chemical weapons in the world? The U.S.! Does that mean the U.S. is a threat to Canada? Hell no. See the flaw in logic there? The U.S. has so many chemical weapons they don't even know what to do with them. Would Saddam use chemical weapons on U.S. (or Canadian) soil? How? Why? Who knows. It would be pretty stupid of them if they did, since the U.S. would obviously retaliate. Besides chemical weapons are not very effective killers and it would be pretty hard to attack North America with them. P.S. I'm curious how those chemicals were found stored. They are water-sensitive and decompose on contact with water (including water vapour in the atmosphere). In fact that's how mustard gas works, it reacts with water (ie in your eyes) and produces HCl (hydrochloric acid).

And I'm sure that $20 million they gave to Cheney for severance greased the wheels pretty damn well.

I never said that chiefs are the root of all Native financial evils. However, it is true that some chiefs pocket more money at the expense of the rest of the band. That is a sad fact, but a fact nonetheless. I would like your opinion on how to go about solving this problem (if you do recognize that it is a problem). Oh it's a problem alright, but let's tend to our problems in a chronological manner. My suggestion for this problem for those "some" chiefs is that the people need to be educated on commerce, accountability and transparent funding/ spending. Scenario: When members hear" the band just got a million dollars" many of them start thinking.." where's my cut?". Little do they realize that the band is in a defict cause of the new school, or the fresh water system. Some do, Some don't. Might I suggest some reading material for you? Taiaiake Alfred writes about how we lost several generations of our leaders simply because they were acting like the white ones. Interesting none the less. Again, in case you missed my suggestion: people need to be educated on commerce, accountability and transparent funding/ spending. Thank you.

I agree that that people shouldn't be prevented from smoking in homes or in their yard, but it's funny how smoking pot in your own home IS illegal! And pot has less carcinogens than tobacco smoke (especially since not many people smoke a pack of joints a day), so it's less of a drain on health care and even more of an outrage.

Well said. "Instead of war on poverty they got a war on drugs so the police can bother me" - Tupac Shakur

Some issues that are more important than terrorism in Canada (not that I have the solution to all of these, but then again I don't have the solution to terrorism either): Cancer, AIDS, Drug-resistant bacteria and other diseases... Health Care Poverty Affordable Education The economy These are just a few off the top of my head, I'm sure there's more.

Agreed. Absolutely. The speculation concerns what the CBC would have done if a Tory had done this - and we won't know since Harper has said, I believe, that no one in his caucus will do it in this session.I think the CBC is singled out because it is a State organization and many people (including myself) view it as biased. Fair enough.

I understand your point, however your entire argument is based on mere speculation not facts. You don't actually know what the CBC would have done if it had been a CPC private members bill. The fact is that none of the major media outlets (to my knowledge) have reported the story, therefore it doesn't make sense to criticize the CBC and not the rest of the media.

What? First you criticize the CBC for not running the story, now you are saying they they do have the story and criticizing them for that? I haven't seen the story on CBC, or any news for that matter. If you are going to criticize the CBC for having a liberal agenda, you should be criticizing the national post etc. just as much since they are not running the story either. How can you criticize one but not the others when they are doing the exact same thing. Do you think the national post has a liberal agenda? Cause you'd be the first person I've ever heard say that. Pure speculation.

I never said that chiefs are the root of all Native financial evils. However, it is true that some chiefs pocket more money at the expense of the rest of the band. That is a sad fact, but a fact nonetheless. I would like your opinion on how to go about solving this problem (if you do recognize that it is a problem).

Actually, I think you are quite right here. The money goes to the chiefs, which may give it to the entire band, but sometimes a lot of it is kept. This is a serious problem, but nobody seems to have a solution. Any thoughts as to prevent this from happening? As far as I know the money is related to the treaties so they have to pay the chiefs, and since natives want self-government they don't want the government to tell them how they spend their money. It is unfortunate and I wish there was a solution where all members of a band can benefit from the money and not just the chiefs.

You're right, my mistake.

Ha, you anti-CBC people are hilarious. I checked the globe and mail website and the national post website, and still no mention of it. I guess you think the national post has a liberal agenda?

I have to agree with geoffrey on this one. Even if she's not doing a great job, that is no reason for her to resign, and I think that is why the liberals voted against the motion. As for the conservatives, they are playing political games. Either they want their government to fall so they can try for a majority (which would be completely inconsistent with their previous proposal to set fixed election dates), or they think they can use it as a threat since they know the liberals don't want an election. And the NDP just complains about everything, as you can see here.

Here is the interview: Coulter is clearly wrong. I don't hate her for being wrong, but she is still wrong nevertheless.

No, there is no brain damage involved in homosexuality. You could just as easily say that humans love of chocolate is hardwired into our brain. There is no reason to believe that homosexuals are any more brain damaged than people who do not like chocolate. It is not 'damaged', just different. Do you believe people who don't like chocolate to be brain damaged? My opinion is stated in my previous post, it is the choice of the mother/individual.

This may be true, however the same could be said about hair colour, eye colour or skin colour. You could just as easily say that light coloured hair/eyes/skin is a genetic 'defect', though I've never heard that term used to describe those characteristics. There is no brain damage involved in homosexuality, why would you even suggest such a thing? If that is the case then it would be the mother's decision, just as with abortion, as a fetus can not decide for itself. Once it is old enough, that would be the individual's decision. It would not be a decision made by the government as many pro-lifers would argue in the case of abortion. I see no problem with that.

The suffix Phobia can also mean to dislike. Look up the definition of "Hydrophobic". Oil is not afraid of water. I think Canadians are intelligent enough to recognize that words can have more than one meaning.

How about we consider homophobia to be a mental disorder?

Excellent Post. I couldn't have said it better myself.

That's what you get for trusting the U.S. government, this wasn't the first time they got involved in a useless war. Palestinians do a little more than throw rocks. I agree.

Yeah and the CBC's agenda is obviously anti-pilotism as well. http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/20...sh-landing.html

All those bands which fall within the Royal Proclamation of 1763 do have ownership over the land, unless purchased by the crown through a treaty. See here for a map of the Royal Proclamation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Proclamation_Of_1763

Next to section 1, the Charter says: "Rights and freedoms in Canada", but nothing about having to be a Canadian citizen, even though it specifically says that every citizen has the right to vote etc... Some sections specifically mention Canadian citizens, while others say Everyone. So that would imply that Everyone in Canada, regardless of citizenship, has those rights.