gc1765

Ha, what a poor comparison! Don't forget the other "Jim Crow" laws of the time: No intermarriage, Separate schools, bathrooms, restaurants, drinking fountains, apartments...even talking about equality was illegal. It's not as if non-smokers are saying that smokers and non-smokers can't get married. By refusing to give up her seat, Rosa Parks was protesting against all of those laws. On the other hand, smoking in public is much different because it puts other people's health in jeopardy. My right to breathe clean air is more important than your right to smoke.

As I've mentioned previously, there is not one race or religion of people who do not have some violent members, at least not as far as I know. So using your refrigerator analogy, what happens when a small percentage of all refrigerator brands set fire to the house? Do you not buy any refrigerator at all, even if you need one? But if .001% of GE fridges catch fire and .002% of Westinghouse fridges catch fire, and 5% of LG fridges catch fire, then I'd assume you would avoid the LG fridges. So you are assuming that Muslims are 2,500-5,000 times more likely to commit violent acts than other races/religions? I assume you have some statistics to back up your case??

The Internet is fun because it gives the chance to raise threads like this to the top. If the conservatives had chosen someone like MacKay as their leader, they would probably have a majority. Stephen harper and the reform party were given a huge gift with the sponsorship scandal and the best they could do was turn it into a minority. They should have gotten rid of him after the 2004 election.

Anyone else think Haliburton is much worse than any corruption we've seen in Canada? The company gives Dick Cheney a $20 million dollar severance package (or bribe, depending on how you look at it) and in return halliburton gets over ten billion dollars in direct award contracts from the government!

As I've mentioned previously, there is not one race or religion of people who do not have some violent members, at least not as far as I know. So using your refrigerator analogy, what happens when a small percentage of all refrigerator brands set fire to the house? Do you not buy any refrigerator at all, even if you need one?

True. Which is probably why the number of theatres at which An Inconvenient Truth is playing is steadily increasing, as are the profits. On the other hand, x-men (which has been out for about the same amount of time) is decreasing in number of theatres it is being played at and decreasing in it's gross per weekend. http://boxofficemojo.com/weekend/chart/

Since you're such an expert economist, could you please explain this? http://www.cbc.ca/story/business/national/...12/markets.html

What you should have "noticed", is that the debate wasn't centered on whether Iraq possessed illegal weapons, all believed that, the debate was centered on what to do about it, more inspections versus removal from power. Again, France, Germany, Russia, China, and the UN all had intelligence that strongly suggested Iraq possessed illegal weapons and continued to pursuit illegal weapons programs. Your lies may work with a less informed audience, but not with this one, and not in this forum. Re-write your history someplace else. Did France, Germany, Russia and China tell their citizens that Saddam Hussein has ties to Bin Laden? That was a pretty blatant lie.

I think you are the one using faulty logic. You seem to believe that it was ok for Natives to let your family come here (wherever they are from and whenever they came) but now that you're here we must stop letting people in. Where is the logic in that?

So we should basically all pledge allegiance to the flag of Canada, as they do in the U.S.? Or just muslims should have to do that? Or just immigrants? I think it should be incumbent upon immigrants to recognize that this is the land and society they have chosen to make their homes in, have chosen to raise their children in, and where their descendants will be born and raised. And in light of that they should seek to assimilate without destroying who they are, seek to raise their children at least with the respect due the nation which they have adopted, and not with contempt for it and its people and institutions and cultural values. And if they can't do that they should not come, and if here already they should be encouraged to return from whence they came. If you teach your children that local women are whores who are unfit for them to the degree they must return "home" for a proper bride, and that the local men are worthless and godless so that they must again return "home" for a husband, then you are teaching your children contempt for Canada and Canadians, and have no business calling yourself a Canadian. I agree that those who show contempt for Canada and who would do harm against Canadians simply for being Canadians, should not be in this country. I would hope that anyone who hates Canada would not come to this country and it makes no sense to me why they would, but I realize that some do. However I disagree with betsy that all muslims must publicly show their support for this country, especially when we do not apply those same standards to other religous or ethnic groups. Living a productive life and not harming others is enough support for this country that I would expect from anyone. For example, I myself love this country and would never do harm to anyone, especially my own country. However, I don't think I need to prove my support for this country publicly nor does any other Canadian, whether they are born and raised here, immigrants, muslim or non-muslim.

So we should basically all pledge allegiance to the flag of Canada, as they do in the U.S.? Or just muslims should have to do that? Or just immigrants?

It is good news for Canada, but what does it have to do with Harper? You can't possibly suggest all of those new jobs are solely because of him. Like GostHacked said the GST cut has not been implemented yet and the budget only came out in may, and only passed very recently.

They don't? Some do. Not all do though.

Dick Cheney, George Bush and (as far as I know) Donald Rumsfeld are all Christians who waged a war in Iraq that has killed over a hundred thousand people. Therefore all Christians must publicly voice their disapprval of the war and hold big anti-war rallies, according to your logic.

While I can not say for certain whether someone would harm someone else, I can say that it is unlikely. I have been friends with some of these people for years now and they certainly have never harmed me (even though I'm not muslim) and I have no reason to believe that they would even consider harming anyone else. Thanks but I know enough about Islam to know what their religious views are. I have never met a muslim that has said any of those things (though I'm not denying that some muslims do). Not all muslims are so conservative. Perhaps per capita, though that's not what I said in my original post. The point I was trying to make is that all races and all religions are guilty of violent crimes, so it would be dangerous to stereotype muslims as the only evil in this country, when it is well known that whites, blacks, hispanics etc all commit violent crimes. There are none in this country that I'm aware of. How about people who take innocent lives in the name of Oil? There's lots of them in the U.S. You have admitted that not all muslims are terrorists, but you can't admit that not all muslims are radical islamists who hate Canada. I still believe that is the minority. I agree that anyone who 'hates' Canada so much should not live here, but like I said I have met many muslims (some of them recent immigrants) who are proud to call themselves Canadian.

A merger would definately benefit the liberals, and possibly the NDP. However I can't see Jack Layton ever agreeing to such a move.

Do you have a reference for that, or other cities as well? I couldn't find any information from statistics canada. Apparently they don't keep records on it, I guess because it would inspire racsim. By the way Canada's biggest convicted serial killer: clifford olson (caucasian) killed 11 people. He could be surpassed by robert pickton (charged with 27 murders), also caucasian, if convicted.

That is probably because, unlike Michael Moore, Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell have been known to make blatantly anti-feminist, homophobic, anti-everything except christianity comments, call for the murder of hugo chavez and support charles taylor (now indicted for war crimes). How could anyone support them? You can say what you want about Michael Moore, but he is no Robertson/Falwell.

I don't have the exact statistics but I would be willing to bet money that the majority of murders in Canada are commited by caucasians. Does it matter if a murder (or attempted murder) is commited with a bomb, a gun, or a knife? Does that mean caucasians should be the "least desirable population to allow at this point in time"? And how does having the same religion as someone make you a sympathizer to terrorism? I guess that would mean all Christians are "aligned" with those who commited the crusades, holocaust etc...

Perhaps you haven't met enough muslims? I know many muslims who are very kind and would never hurt anyone. While their religious views may differ from mine (actually just about everyone's religious views differ from mine), they are non-judgemental and none have tried to force their beliefs upon me or society in general. Don't they deserve to stay in this country they call home?

Some notable caucasian terrorists: Theodore Kaczynski, Timothy McVeigh, Eric Robert Rudolph, not to mention countless murderers and attempted murders (you get the point). All of these peoples families emigrated to the u.s. at some point, so I guess we should stop immigration of all caucasians. The point is that terrorists deserve to be punished for their crimes, but non-terrorist muslims don't deserve to be descriminated against because of the actions of the few.

Well I suppose I'm on the left of many issues, and yes I do believe in rights for all people, including gays and muslims. However, I have no sympathy for someone who would kill innocent people. Afterall I do believe in the right to live. So I don't see the "contradiction" that you are referring to.

I could say the same about you. The difference is that my facts are true. CALGARY - Alberta's greenhouse-gas emissions have once again topped all other provinces -- accounting for nearly a third of the country's total emissions, the latest government figures show. The province's emissions rose to 39.4 per cent above its 1990 level in 2004, with the oil and gas industry cast as the main culprit behind the 235 megatonnes of greenhouse gases released into the air, the federal government's national inventory report states. http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/st...28-cd4a45236aed You'll notice if you read my previous posts that I never once defended Ontario's environmental policies. All I said was the facts, which is that Alberta contributes more to greenhouse gases than anyone. Hey we finally agree on something. I also believe strongly in increasing cancer research in Canada, which is something I argued on another thread (see Stephen Harper already using terrorism for political gain). But why not decrease greenhouse gases and try to reduce cancer rates? I am not jealous of oil riches, I'm doing quite fine thank you. And yes I actually am quite educated on the subject. However you might want take some of your own advice.

What a great idea! A pity the Liberals didn't think of it sometime over the past 12 years of robbing us blind... until they were voted out. Now it's time to hold the PM up to higher standards. no doubt. The liberals did create CIHR, a step in the right direction, but it would be nice if it had more funding. It's too bad the U.S. didn't use that 200 billion on the war in iraq to fight cancer, who knows we just might have a cure by now. Or at least it could have eradicated aids or poverty in africa. Oh well, too late now.

What a great idea!