Rue

Blckdog your lack of awareness of the Middle East never ceases to amaze me. You made a comment that Hamas set up shop in Gaza because that is where they live. See when you make comments like that I am not sure if you are being deliberately provocative or are just completely ignorant of what you are talking about. Hamas, Hezbollah and the countless terrorist cells could set up shop away from civilians. I wish you would travel to the Gaza and West Bank and Israel and Lebanon before you make such comments. The choice to place terrorists in apartments WITH civilians, in hospitals, in schools, is deliberate and completely and absolutely avoidable. Do you see Israel's military setting itself up in civilian zones and in apartments and hospitals and hiding behind civilians? Well do you? I mean to try and argue that the tactic of using civilians as a shield is understndable nd justifiable because they live there is absolutely the most pathetic thing you have stated to date on this topic and yes you should be embarassed to say it. For that matter why don't you examine the make up of Hamas and Hezbollah. Would it dawn on you that Hamas and Hezbollah are made up of foreigners not residents of the Gaza, West Bank or Southern Lebanon? As for the South of Lebanon, Hezbollah has plenty of sites nowhere near civilian populations where it trainits terrorists, likewise with Hamas. When terrorists train, they have no problems finding civilian free zones. Man talk about a double standard. I can just imagine you black-dog if Israeli soldiers took their uniforms off, engaged in the same tactics and hid behind civilians...would you be defending Israeli civilian deaths...of course not because in your mind Israel is the oppressor and everyone else in the Middle East is a victim. Man if I could take you to Haifa for just one day and have you sit through a missile attack man would your tune change.

" Do the Palestinians not have loudspeakers erected by Israelis blasting orders in the middle of their streets? Is the Occupied Territory not a mish-mash of checkpoints? Are there not Israeli watchtowers with snipers posted around each Palestinian area?" Of course. This is because of the choice of terrorists to live within Palestinian's civilian population and hide there before, during and after attacks. And for that matter, Israelis also live with the same mish-mash of check-points, security measures and loud-speakers. It is not one-sided. "As you know, the other Arab nations, and the rest of the world, would only accept so many of the several million refugees." The Arab League refused to accept ANY Palestinians as citizens. "Call us racist if you will, but it appears Israel does not wish to absorb them either." Israel is a tiny nation. It unlike the Arab world, has no physical room to absorb Palestinians. And why would it take in people that do not recognize the right for Jews to have a jewish state as Muslims choose to have a Muslim state? Why the selectivity? Has any Arab country taken in Jews and offered them equal citizenship? Absolutely not. The Muslim world has practiced a form of apartheid against Jews and Christians called Dhimmitude for centuries. More to the point, Israel has more Muslim Israels by a far larger ration something like 1000% higher then the no. of Jews living in the Muslim world. "Many, many displaced Palestinians DO live in Lebanon, Oman, Syria, Kuwait, Dubai, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Yemen and, yes, Canada and many other places. But we're talking A LOT of displaced people. Millions." Yes and they are discriminated against by their fellow Arabs, refused citizenship and treated by their Arab counterparts as Jews were treated by Europeans prior to and culminating in the holocaust. This is the irony. "No, Israel chose to keep the Occupied Territories in contradiction of a standing UN resolution. The intention is a gradual process of envelopment into Greater Israel. If you lived there, you know this. Read Haa'retz?" Again your analysis of this situation is selective and a misrepresentation. Israel did not choose to keep "occupied territories". Let us be completely accurate. The border of Israel between 1949 and 1967 was a de facto border established by a war. In fact the original UN declaration proposed two small enclaves one for Muslims one for Jews in Palestine, both land-locked. The Arab League then chose to reject this UN declaration, and made it clear they would either kill all Jews in Palestine or force them backt o Europe. The border Israel established in 1949 and that existed until 1967 was never established by law. De facto borders are not legally recognized until a long period of no contestation and acceptance by all sides that never happened. In fact the West bank was illegally seized by Jordan in 1949 and was never part of Jordan or trans-Jordan and was illegally seized by Jordan until Israel went in after the 1967 war. You say Israel chose to heep the occupied territories. It didn't choose. The choice was imposed upon it by the continued refusal of the entire Arab League to recognize the 1967 borders and to refuse to disarm terrorist cells on Israel's borders. Israel was forced to occupy these territories to keep buffer zones to keep terrorist cells off their borders. Your depiction of events is ridiculously selective. It is also a complete and utter misrepesentation to state Israel had a policy to expand its borders and if you read Haaretz or anything else you would know the decision to place settlement posts in so called "occupied territories " was a deliberate tactic to try create outposts to prevent terrorist attacks and it failed. This is precisely why Israel is now unilaterally moving towards building large security walls and dismantling such settlement sites. It is absolutely incorrect to believe that the Israeli government or military wants to occupy zones hostile to Jewish Israelis- what it wants to do is completely avoid Arabs of any kind and create no man zones or buffer zones. "I'm comparing the conditions in the Polish ghettos of Warsaw (created by the Nazis) to the conditions in the Palestinian ghettos of Gaza and the West Bank." It is an odious and ignorant comparison and openly insulting to Jews and I will tell you why. The Jews in Warsaw unlike the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank, had nowhere to go. The rest of Europe would not take them! They knew they would die and they sat in silence! Today Canada, and many other nations can and does accept Palestinians as civilians. The entire Arab world could absorb all Palestinians and finance their assimilation into Muslim society. It chooses not to. To equate the refusal of the Arab world to absorb its Palestinians to the European refusal to save and let Jews live in peace makes a mockery of Jewish suffering and history and attempts to compare two completely different events of history. What I am saying quite clearly is that Palestinians have choices the Jews never had. However I do admit openly as do most Israelis that Palestinians live in open hell with no hope and in horrid conditions. This is the tragic consequence of its terrorist leaders who refuse to coexist with Israel. And just in case you do not understand, there was a time when the PLO and Israel Defence Force had an unwritten alliance and co-existed and the Israeli military brought education and medical supplies and water to Palestinians. This ended because of fundamentalist Muslim terrorist cells taking over and killing off or ridding Palestinian society of anyone who cared to work in alliance with Israelis. "Now if only Israel would let the rest of the world learn about this without calling anyone who should mention it an 'anti-semite'. Because that charge is patently absurd, the way it is lobbied about - it dilutes the real meaning of anti-semitism, which is a real and vile threat. Conflating honest criticism and education with hatred allows the real bad guys to come into their own, so to speak." Let's get something really clear. The typical Israel could care less what you or anyone else thinks about them and they are way past the point of caring what you think about them. Yes there are a minority of a minority of Jewish people outside Israel who react to strongly when people criticize Israel no different then when Muslims cry out racism when people criticize arab extremism. The fact is non Jews use attacks against the right for Jews to live in Israel and atacks against Israel as a vehicle to vent hatred against all Jews. Hezbollah, Hamas, the Syrian and Iranian government and millions upon millions of Muslims openly practice anti-semitism, openly state they hate all Jews, consider all Jews the enemy and teach their children Hezbollah on its radio and t.v. stations openly broadcast anti-semitic shows depicting Jews as evil sub-humans to be wiped out. All across the Muslim world, its t.v. and radio stations and newspapers broadcast anti-semtiiism and do not differentiate between Jews and Israelis. More to the point in the Christian or non Jewish world, the vast majority of you non Jews do not take the effort to understand the religious or spiritual meaning and connection between Jews and the soil called Erezt Israel and because you refuse to understand this link, are necessarily ignorant of the very thing that makes Jews want to live in a country called Israel. Is it anti-semitic to criticize Israel? Not automatically but the moment you use criticism of Israel to set up a double standard of behaviour and infer Jews have to act differently then everyone else, and are not allowed the same rights as everyone else, then yes it necessarily evolves into anti-semitism particularly when ignorant generalizations are made about Zionism and the Jewish religious connection to the soil of the land in Eretz Israel. The irony here is that for most of you who criticize Israel, you are Christian and simply take it for granted you are the majority and all institutions in Canada and Euorpe are Christian. You also have never lived in a world where another religion has openly taught its people that you are cursed and deserve to be killled and should either be killed or converted before the world can have any hope. You have never lived in a country in Europe or North America where the government said, Christians can't own land. In fact not satisfied with what you had, you had to invade, Africa, Asia and North America and kill off others and seize their land-and you want to lecture Israelis who are the descendants of true aboriginals from that land? The closest people to what Israelis experience today are the Tibetans. As for the plight of the Palestinians isn't the solution so damn obvious? Why beat around the bush and set up this double standard and depict Jews as being oppressors when the blood of Jews is on the hands of both Christians and Muslims from past history...why not look squarely in the eyes of the Arab world and ask them why they have chosen to embrace terrorism and refuse to co-exist not just with Israeli Jews, but Israeli Arabs, Hindus, Buddists, Bahaiis, Druze, or different sects within its own Muslim religion? Why do you insist on suggesting it is Israel who has created this mess? Where is the culpability of the Arab world, and the Christians of Europe who for oevr 3000 years exterminated and hunted down and killed and tormented Jews. No I will not roll over while you criticize Israel and play the intellectual game that it is not an attack against Jews of all kinds. It almost always becomes that way. At least Stephen Harper now has the credibility to be able eventually to sit down with Israel and be taken seriously and be able to criticize them. He has earned their respect by unequivocally denouncing terrorism and supporting their right to exist. It is precisely why for that reason, downt he road he will have the goodwill to ask Israel to make concessions. He has credibility. But his counter-part Jaques Chirac who Jean Chretiens imitated and mimmicked in his Middle East approach? What credibility does this man have? What did France do in Africa, Algeria, the Central African Republic,with its Foreign Legion, with is shennanigans in its artificially created Tunisia and Lebanon? Does this man who represents a country full of blatant anti-semites and a country with a legacy of going out of its way to deport Jews to their death have the right to lecture Israel on not using proper restraint? This coming from a country that savagely occupied and terrorized so many colonies? This coming from a man who protects French multi-nationals who sold chemicals to Hussein to use to slaughter Kurds? This coming from a man whose military-industrial complex floods conflict zones with French weapons? How about Putin? What a joke that is. This man tells the world its nobody's business how he will go after Chechen terrorists, but then in the same breath lectures Israel on going too far? How about China and its shining human rights treatment of Tibetans or its own Muslim nationals? You want to criticize Israel and avoid anti-semitism, then use the same standard of criticism for all nations equally and don't question the right of Jews to believe in a religion where they feel as an expression to a promise they have with God they must live in Israel. It is that simple. Me? I openly criticize much of Israel's policy because I am a Reform Jew and am totally against fundamentalism, but like most people who support the peace movement, we have no choices these days and can only hope moderate Palestinians and Muslims find the courage to embrace an alternative to terrorism and open their arms to us. Then and only then can we put all this violence to the side and try find a way to co-exist. As for Canada, I am convinced Stephen Harper will do more to help achieve peace by being unapologetic about terrorism and supporting Israel then his predecessors who still think if they appease terrorists they will simply go away. They aint.

Lets start from the beginning shall we. Yes Lebanon has absorbed large qtys of palestians from Isreal, But that is not what caused the civil war as you suggested, in fact Jordan expelled more palestinians into lebanon at the time than Isreal could have ever do. And it was jordans actions that were the start of lebanons problems... Yes Israel did invade in 1982, but again this conflict was well under way before this date, and if you had read the link i gave you Israel was responding to attacks agains't it juast like today.... You fail to mention that Israel does not absorb them either - even with its discrimnatory, two-tier society, Israel wishes to take their land, not the people on it. To be perfectly accurate and clear the West Bank was never intended to be part of Jordan. It was seized by Jordan during the initial War of Israeli independence but the actual territory of the West Bank was not intended for Jordan and the absorbing of it by Jordan was illegal and the borders are what is called de facto borders. They were established by war and occupation not international treaty. Under international law, de facto borders can become recognized as permanent legal borders, but only after an extended period of time without war or contestation. In the North of Canada, the US, Russia, Britain, France, Denmark and numerous other nations are trying to establish under international law that Canada does not have a sovereign claim to the North because it doesn't use it. That is why they send their submarines and ships through the Northern seas. The pre-1967 border of Israel was only created because that is what Israel captured after the entire Arab Leaguue refused to go along with the Muslim and Jewish enclaves far smaller in size proposed by the Belfour declaration. Israel's pre-1967 border was a de facto border, i.e., one established by war but under international law never subject to years of acceptance required to turn it into legal borders. This is why when the Arab world uses the pre-1967 borders as its basis for one peace proposal its an absurd joke because this is the same Arab league that would not recognize these pre-1967 borders before 1967 and only started referring to them after Israel was forced in the 1967 war in which it seized the West Bank and Sinai and Golan Heights precisely for the same reasons it always did, to prevent terrorists from coming across its borders and to create buffer zones. To understand Israel's tiny size and its vulnerability to attacks you must travel and see with your own eyes how small it is and how easy it is to kill people driving in to Jerusalem or living under the Golan Heights, or next to the Gaza Strip or Sinai, etc. Its tiny and its compact and its a security nightmare. The expanded borders after 1967 were also de facto borders created from war. In fact the Arab league to this date can not even decide where many of its nations borders should be. There are on-going disputes between Morrocco and the former Spanish Sahara, between Morrocco and Algeria, between Libya and Chad, between Chad and Somalia, between Somalia and Ethiopia and Eritrea, between Syria, Iraq and Lebanon, between Iran and The Soviet Union, bedtween Iraq, Iran and Turkey. This notion that the Arab world only has a problemw ith Israel's borders is pure b.s. More to the point under international law, we have yet to determine what borders Israel should have because the majority of the Arab League is still officially at war with Israel and does not recognize its existence or right to exist. Although it has an unwritten truce with Jordan, Jordan does not legally rezognize it. In fact Egypt is the only country with an official treaty with it but does not exchange ambassadors but more low level officials.

You have yet to show me where I am in error. You fail to mention that Israel does not absorb them either - even with its discrimnatory, two-tier society, Israel wishes to take their land, not the people on it. Where did I say that I supported the King of Jordan? I expect barbaric activity from a monarchy - I do not from a so-called 'western democracy'. It seems to be you are backing up my earlier statement - in order for Israel to acheive peace in the region, and security, they need to come to a compromise with the Palestinians - give them some land and give up the idea of 'Greater Israel'. See its comments like this that reflect your ignorance for Israel's immigration policies and laws. Israel has repeatedly offered citizenship to any Muslim born within Israel and always has and many are Israeli citizens and are Muslim or Druze of Christian. For that matter Israel took in Albanian Muslim refugees during the civil war in Yogoslavia in a far larger ratio per its population size then any other country in the world. You say its a discriminatory two tier society. I again repeat, Israel law guarantees the use of Arabic in schools, government and in Parliament and Arab Israelis and Muslim Israels have the exact identical rights as to land ownership, voting and anything else as Jewish Israelis. In fact the Supreme Court of Israel has awarded many Muslim Israelis compensation in law suits against the Israeli government so you are just absolutely and utterly wrong. What you are doing is parroting an ignorance that comes from your conception of Zionism. Let us be clear. Because of the constant state of seige Israel finds itself in, every citizen from the age of 18 to 65 is in the army and can be called up in a moment's notice. That means everyone is in the armed forces and knows someone in the armed forces and the entire society is a network of people in the military. So if you are an Arab or Christian Israeli, chances are you are not going to be asked to join the army and so that leaves you on the outside looking in when it comes to job interviews or security checks before you are hired. That is what makes it difficult for Muslim Israelis and Christian Israelis NOT government condoned or institutionalized discrimination. Do some research before you utter inaccurate stereotypes of your ignorance of Israeli society. Better still take yourself there and talk to its citizens before you make such statements and understand first hand what it is like to live there whether you are Jewish or not. There is no conspiracy going on by Israeli Jews to turn Muslim Jews or Christian Jews into sub-humans. Israel does not practice dhimmitude. In fact the second class citizenship and treatment and institutionalized discrimination goes on in each and every Muslim country against non Muslims not Israel and you should take the time to speak to Christians, Jews or Bahaiis that have tried to live in the Muslim world.

Its one thing to go to Lebanon as a tourist to visit relatives. That is one category of Canadians and its estimated there's about 1000-3000 people like that. Then there is the issue of that 50,000 joint Canadian-Lebanon citizens. Many people criticize Canada's lax immigration policies that allows people to be convenient Canadians, i.e., get a Canadian passport, but have their principal residence in another country. In the case of these 50,000 they live in Lebanon, there loyalty is to Lebanon and they use Canada as a convenience, somewhere to go to if things get bad or they need a medical operation but other then that for nothing else. There is usually a 3 month waiting period when you move back to Canada to get OHIP but with these 50,000, many whom have not lived in Canada for years, Ontario is waiving their 3 month wait. Now there is a debate going on. Who should be helped out first, the accidental tourists and people with principal residences and homes and businesses in Canada, or these 50,000 joint citizens who in reality are citizens simply because they got passports.. That is Canada's problem. It now may have to absorb 50,000 people who up until this crisis could have cared less about Canada. I personally have a problem with the notion of dual citizenship. I always have and I practice what I preach, I did not go out and get an Israeli citizenship as I believe I am Canadian and only Canadian and you can only be loyal to one country not two. I think in this current crisis, there area lot of unrealistic people who think they can make demands on Canada when its convenient. Maybe its time we question our immigration policy which makes it so easy t be a hyphenated Canadian and live elsewhere and contribute zero to this country. I say this for a simple reason. How many of these 50,000 are really loyal to Canada before Lebanon when push comes to shove? More to the point, of these 50,000 how many are related to Canadians and assist in the obtaining of money to finance Hezbollah from their fellow Canadian relatives? We know in the past Al Sahid and Karballah Charities in Canada were under investigation and exposed by CSIS and Interpol as front operations along with numerous other charitable fronts Hezbollah operates in the US, Latin and South America, Europe, and Africa. Terrorist organizations like Hezbollah exist precisely because they can find host countries to place their operatives and have them raise finances. How does it help to build a vision of a strong and unified Canada when people have divided loyalties and only see Canada as a convenient pit stop? Should we be suprised some of these citizens would have contempt for Canada or divided loyalties since we ask so little of them in return for their citizenship?

I studied at Hebew University of Jerusalem and was taught history by a former member of Irgun who was a survivor of Aushwitz. At no time did this man feel good about what he did and was riddled with guilt. Its easy to refer to the Irgun and infer that since they engaged in terrorism, somehow its o.k. for the Palestinians do engage in terrorism. The point missed is that the vast majority of Jews struggling for a homeland, denounced the Irgun tactics and the Israel Defence Force's origins were precisely because its members did not want to target civilians. Here is also the true irony. The same people who try suggest Palestinians now are faced with what the Jews were faced during and after the holocaust are completely ignorant and selective of history. Jews had nowhere to go. Palestinians have always had the rest of the Arab world to go to. Just like the Europeans did not want Jews, before, during and after the holocaust because of their wide spread anti-semitism. What is the Arab world's excuse for turning its back on its own Muslims and Arabs? The answer is simple-the Arab League deliberately chose to leave Palestinians stateless so they could be a pawn in its desire to prevent a Jewish state. To equate the deliberate political manouver the Arab League chose to do with Palestinians is not and has no similiarities to the European inability to take in and let Jews live in peace. That said whether it was Irgun, or any other terrorist group, terrorism is never and can never be something we choose. Israel is not proud of its past terrorist activities and openly laments the past.

Of course with the usual anti-Israeli diatribe comes the selective memory attached to the conflict that when Israel does what it does it is in response to a terrorist attack and when innocent Palestinians die it is precisely because terrorists hide behind civilians, make a mockery of the Geneva Convention, use children, pregnant women and geriatrics, ambulances, hospitals, animals and what-ever else they can, to engage in attacks. The death of countless Palestinians is the direct result of terrorists from its society deliberately choosing to refuse to wear a uniform, engage in conventional war, and most importantly, engage in non violent communications. This continuous nonsense to try infer Israel is morally wrong to defend itself for killing innocent Palestinians is about as logical as saying someone being strangled to death should not fight back and should show restraint. I would like to take just one of these posters who feel Israel is a terrorist nation and have them experience what it is like to live through or witness a terrorist bomb going off. It never fails that the people who criticize Israel as being terrorist and immoral are selective as to terrorism and feel terrorism is justified. I will end this discussion with this easy point- how could the Israel Defence Force possibly be germaine if Palestinians refused to engage in violence.? Does anyone think if Palestinians used Ghandi's approach Israel would have sent its army or in to hunt down terrorists? Israel has always had an open and extensive peace network trying to reach out to moderate Palestinians who do not believe in violence. The tragedy is that moderate Palestinians do not feel they can express themselves because of the terrorists in their midst. You posters that are quick to piss in Israel's direction-are you equally as quick to criticize the terrorists within Palestinian society and lament the absence of moderate peaceful representatives from that same society? And before you spin the usual social injustice breeds terrorism, remember this - it is an insult to the vast majority of Palestinians or anyone who has lived through war and terror and have NOT chosen to engage in violence to try legitimize terrorism as an understandable consequence of injustice. But then it is always the fault of Israel. How dare Jews want to live in a country and defend themselves from extinction.

There is no scandal. Canada has 50,0000 citizens within Lebanon unlike the other nations. To compare it to Sweden or the US, etc., is not fair. Planning for the evacuation of 50,000 is not like planning for the evacuation of 3,000. Canada will do its best and yes Lebanese/Canadians will suffer. I appreciate Lebanese Canadians want to be like many Canadians, dual citizens. They want to enjoy the best Canada has to offer, but maintain their heritage and roots and visit Lebanon in the summer. The problem here is in this day and age, it was obvious to anyone who cared to be honest about it, that Lebanon could not continue as a captive to Hezbollah. Lebanese Canadians know they were taking a risk going back to a country where Hezbollah openly did what they wanted and walked around and flourished out in the open. Is it realistic to think you can live in a country with no conflict when terrorists walk about in broad day-light extolling their desire to kill and wipe out Jews and broadcasting this every night on t.v.? This is the tragic consequence of a nation to weak too flush itself of terroist murderers and hipporcritical countries like France trading and doing businesses wink wink nudge nudge with known terrorists and being fully aware Lebanese citizens in France finance Hezbollah. For that matter the only scandal will be if it is revealed in Canada how many Lebanese Canadian citizens have been involved laundering money and financing Hezbollah. It is a small minority of people of Lebanon but none-the-less the truth will eventually come out. People should understand that terrorist organizations like Hezbollah or The Tiger Elam, or the IRA in its day all depended on citizens in safe countries to finance their operations.

I have become a complete Harper fan. I think the man has moral integrity and is refreshing. I am sick and tired of people who think this is a one sided conflict and that it is acceptable for Hezbollah to attack and kill Israelis but somehow Israel is a villain if Israel defends itself. Yes innocent civilians are dying in Lebanon but that is specifically because Hezbollah chose to set up shop hiding behind civilians and because the world has sat silently by while Hezbollah, Hamas and countless other terrorist cells set up shop in hospitals, crowded refugee camps, and population centres. Where is the world's disgust with Hezbollah, Hamas and these cowards who hide behidn civilians. The tragedy is the only hope for a free Lebanon and the safety of Israel is to track down and exterminate these terrorists. Harper has not minced words and why should he? Where does it say Canadians must act like neuters? You can't have it both ways. There is no credibility to a foreign policy that avoids condemning terrorists. This is not a matter of being a little bit pregnant. There is no such thing as fighting back but with restraint. That is pure and absolute b.s. and a concept that people hold to when they live in safe environments and can't understand what it is like to be threatened by death at a moment's notice. I applaud Harper's courage. He has practiced what he preached with Quebec and now his foreign policy. He is an admirable man. This is a man who knows full well he may lose votes over this. I also think if someone bothers to read his comments they will see at NO TIME has he been disrespectful to the Lebanese victims. This man knows the Lebanese people like the Israelis will have many deaths. It is a tragic shame and Harper knows it. You want to talk pathetic, take a look at Jack Layton suggesting Canada should send peace-keeping troops to Lebanon. Tell me would any Canadians ask for Israeli soldiers to be sent to Canada as peacekeepers and place them in Mississauga to protect against future terrorism?

I completely concur with what Moron X said. I also think this guy in Holland trying to publicize his pedophile preferences is going to end up dead. He seems to have a death wish. It has been my experience working with these deviants that many of them have inner conflicts because they know their sexual urges are wrong. I think this idiot in Holland is typical of many child molesters. Part of him denies there is anything wrong and tries to make it sound normal, put another part inside him wants to get caught so the dummy goes public exposing himself to being caught. Part of me wants him strung up by his petunias (the non rational part) the other part is glad that at least he is out in the open so someone will hopefully watch this sicko. There is zero cure for this and the scary thing is most will not stay on sexual suppressant medication or think it is wrong. There have even been cases where persons have had their testes removed and they still go on to molest. Sick world.

Israel vacated the South of Lebanon precisely because people like Black Dog complained how unfair and unjust it was for Israel to control Southern Lebanon and the South Lebanese Army which buffered Israel from Hezbollah and the Syrians and prevented missile and cross border attacks. Of course the United Nations led by France, China, Russia, and the European Union continued to lecture Israel as being an occupier and villain and Israel withdrew when it should have left the SLA where it was. Sure enough, as Israel withdrew, Hezbollah moved in and concentrated itself all along the Israeli border with the full cooperation and funding of Syria and Iran and it took over half of Beirut. This is what Israel gets for vacating. It gives land for peace for what? It leaves the Gaza for what? In BlackDog's simplistic world of evil Zionists, its all the bad guy Jewish Israelis and anyone who believes Jews should have a country that are responsible for everything. The point is when Israel tries to give land for peace, it comes face to face on its borders with terrorist organizations that believe in its destruction not peaceful coexistence. The point is Hezbollah took over Lebanon. It took over all of the South and it took over half of Beirut. It placed its headquarters, missile sites, bomb making and terrorist operations smack dab in the heart of civilian populations. That is what groups like Hezbollah and Hamas do best-hiding behind civilians so that when Israel strikes innocent civilians die hoping the public will turn on Israel. Thatr is the m.o. attack Israel then hide behind civilians and hope civilians deliberately die so that the world turns against Israel. Its a pathetic manipulation of innocent civilians. The fact is Israel can't hold back. It is in a struggle for its very existence It is now engaged in a deadly war of survival. As missiles kill civilians in Haifa and other cities, it will strike back at where0ever Hezbollah is and because Hezbollah deliberately chooses to hide behind civilians, civilians will die. As for Syria and Iran who prop up Hezbollah and turned Lebanon into a shell country with no real government or army it is the utmost hippocracy for them or France or Russia or anyone else to open their big mouths and lecture Israel. Israel is through talking. Civilians will die. Lebanon as a nation has already ceased to exist. It is now rubble. What Israel is clearly doing is pushing Hezbollah North to the Syrian border and will create a new buffer zone. Now that Iran and Syria have supplied Hezbollah with up-to-date missiles, there is a war going on. Syria and Iran are at War with Israel only being the cowards that they are they will do it through Hezbollah and not send their armies because their armies are corupted, weak and have no logistics capable of supporting an invasion of Israel. They will do what they do best, hide behind someone else and act passively letting other people fight their war. As for Hezbollah, it is a fierce terrorist organization but it is doomed to failure for a simple reason - as much as it disrespects and wishes all Jews dead, it loaths Christian Lebanese, Christian Arabs, Druze, Sunni Muslims and everything else that moves. It would also turn on Syria in a second if it could and did not need their support. For the first time in the history of the Arab Leaguge of nations there was not a universal condemnation of Israel for fighting back against Hezbollah. That is not an accident. Many Arab nations including Saudia Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Morrocco, Tunisia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Oman fear Hezbollah and fundamentalism Shiite Islam. As much as Russia's Putin scolds Israel he and the Turkish in secret support everything Israel is doing because they also loath the Shiite Muslim fundamentalists given their proximity to Russia and Turkey. Then we have China trying to stay friendly with Iran so as not to prejudice their oil supply but on the other hand brutally exterminating its own Muslim Chinese fundamentalists primarily supplied by Iran. When all is said and done there will be a war with Syria and Iran. It is inevitable. It is inescapable at this point. We can not also forget that Egypt could at a moment's notice assassinate Mubarak seeing the Muslim Brotherhood seize control and turn that country into a Sunni fundamentalist regime like Iran. Saudi Arabia and Jordan could also be subject to a massive civil war by fundamentalists so let us not kid ourselves. This is a war between Muslim fundamentalism and anything perceived as Western. The irony is these same fundamentalists would love to get their hands on a Blackdog and cut off his naive head.

People say the US is a dictatorship now. After all, with a signing statement Bush can excuse himself from any law. I would not make that claim, because I think it is partisan nonsense. On what do you base your assurtion that Russia is now a dictatorship as of several years ago? Who says the US is a dictatorship? Please, provide names. Why-you going to pick them up and ship them off to Guantanamo Bay?

- gerryhatrick ... 1) No, you don't feel sorry for Bush. In truth, you are well know to be the biggest left wing whackjob on this board (and that is saying a lot) when it comes to having a pathological hatred for Bush and for Harper over here, a nonstop penchant for twisting and turning and distorting and misquoting everything Bush and Harper do and say to make them look as bad as you possibly can, and an eagerness to troll 24/7 on every far left mindlessly partisan blog in cyberspace to find things you can use on your nutty crusade against Bush, Harper and anyone else not to the left of Che Guevera's ghost. 2) WHAT - EXACTLY - DO YOU FIND SO OFFENSIVE WITH BUSH'S QUOTE? IS IT: 1/ You strongly favour socialist dictatorships like the old USSR and are still mouring its passing and resent Bush's effrontery in criticising even the new Russia? 2/ You think that the leader of the world's only hyperpower should be "seen and not heard" and keep his mouth and his nose out of the affairs of the rest of the world and allow your corrupt mugs, thugs and slugs in the UN to dictate the state of world affairs which means usually just ignoring the ruthless tyrannts who repress, ensalve, impoverish, torture and kill their countrymen and neighbours by the hundreds of thousands as your good pal Saddam Insane used to do in Iraq? 3/ You contend that Bush is wrong to be the strongest ever US presidential advocate of fundamental democratic change including freedom of the press and of religion and other manifestations of open government and open economies and should keep silent on what most discerning people see as some disquieting and disturbing backsliding by Putin in Russia concerning democratic freedoms? 4/ You are anti-US and Bush, pro-Russia and Putin, and are opposed to freedom of the press and freedom of relgion and even opposed to those who favour such freedoms? 3} WHAT - EXACTLY - DID YOU LIKE SO MUCH ABOUT PUTIN'S QUOTE? 1/ That instead of actually addressing Bush's well founded concerns about new restrictions in Russia on freedom of speech, assembly, the press and religion - thereby threatening the country's still emerging democracy - he chose to take a cheap and superficial shot at the even newer and more fragile democracy in Iraq? 2/ That his cheap and superficial shot at Iraqi democracy was especially hilarious to you in that if it were up to Putin and his ilk and useful idiots like you there would be no democracy at all in Iraq and Saddam Insane would continue to be ensalving, impoverishing, torturing and killing Iraqis by the thousands? You know, except for Biblio Bublia (sic) who was known as Rudyard The Insane on prior forums and is quite clearly insane as well as someone whose nonstop libelling, stalking, harrassing and outing of others on former boards got him suspended from said boards for life, you are the most annoying character on this board due to your obvious hard left bias and your equally obvious animus and bile for Bush, Harper and all of those not on the left. It will probably get me banned from here for saying so but, frankly, I could care less if Greg The Legend of Lethbridge wants to act like an ass again and ban me instead of nutters like you and Biblio. Teddy you sound a tad extreme and quick to label people. The fact is Bush said something very stupid and Putin had a right to say what he did. It is the utmost idiocy for Bush to be lecturing Putin on democracy when his mission in Iraq has completely and utterly failed. You can pretend all you want with your need little definitions of left and right and democracy and leftists, but the fact is Iraq has never been democratic and will never be democratic. Iraq is a classic case of imperialism gone wrong. The Americans are no different then hundreds of imperial powers before them who thought they could mark into countries with conventional armies and simply impose their lifestyle and institutions. The American invasion of Iraq was dommed for obvious reasons; 1-you can not leave a conventional army on the ground as a police force-they are sitting ducks for terrorism and guerilla attacks making them helpless; 2-you can not impose cultural concepts on people who think completely differently-they will simply not understand you and revert back to their behaviour the first chance they get; 3-the Americans blew up Iraq's infrastructure, they obliterated its water, electricity, sewage, roads, schools, hospitals- after sending its people back to the stone age, they then send in contractors from the United States to rebuild and those contractors will not hire Iraqis and so no Iraqi even if he wants to can help rebuild his nation-this is about setting up a state completely dependent on American contractors; 4-as a result of 1,2 and 3, the United States has trigged off a civil war that a conventional army can not win and condemns Iraqis to perpetual violence - this is not about winning the hearts and minds of Iraqis, this is about American soldiers trapped in a quagmire or war of attrition and as each day ends, more and more Americans are killed, injured and learn to hate Iraqis to the point of no return. So you can pretend Iraq is democratic and that Bush can lecture Putin but the fact is Iraq is a disaster and any simpleton can see that. Its another Vietnam fiasco only the difference here is there is oil. Putin can afford to laugh. Bush has made a point of lecturing him on democracy. Putin is not some idiot who needs lectures. He is a cold blooed, KGB trained assassin who is skilled in several martial arts, and has military, political risk, and economic training. This is not some dummy. This is a highly intelligent, manipulative, cunning, powerful fearless man who mocks Bush because Bush is an idiot and an embarassement and a moron and a simpleton. I can assure you Putin probably would have more respect for someone who has been trained to kill and fight not some rich boy drunk cocaine addicted putz who paid for his MBA from Yale and used his status to avoid going to war or take on any kind of real job before he became President. The only democracy in the Middle East is Israel and it is alone in this world.

An increase of one dollar to the price of a barrel of oil produces a l cent increase in the price of oil on the markets. That is a fact. What is also a fact is that the market place now determining the price of oil is in a complete state of economic chaos. What used to happen was that Europe and the Americans would influence OPEC, the oil producing council of countries and use their political influence to control the price of oil on the world markets. OPEC would increase and decrease oil production depending on the influence exerted by the US and/or Europe and oil prices would then go up or down. Yes when the production of oil went down and therefore the existing supplies of oil went down, the price went up so the Americans would try prevent dramatic price increases by increasing the supply through increased production. Some major things have happened. First of all, as a result of Iran's decision in the last four years to try control the world oil market's prices, it deliberately convinced the greedy Europeans to turn on the Americans and change the world trading currency for petrol from American dollars to Europ dollars. This in itself has caused major economic problems. What has also happened is that oil commodity brokers have broken loose and are simply establishing the prioce of oil on the commodity markets through panic and emotion. Many people think there is an illuminati of oil conspirators that sit in some back-room and manipulate the world markets and there may be some truth to that but right now what we are seeing are commodity traders driving the price of oil sky high for no logical reason. While Saudia Arabia and Iran continue to be major oil suppliers, so are the Libyans, Russians, Canada, and Venezuela. Oil production is healty and there is NO SHORTAGE OF OIL SUPPLIES contrary to what people may think. The Oil commodity trading experts in Canada are stating that they do not think oil prices will continue to rise and that we have peeked. Its hard to know who to believe. What does not make sense is the following-there is no direct corelation between what is going on in Israel with the price of oil world wide. Many are saying oil costs are increasing in anticipation of war but that is just not true. If oil prices are rising it is because someone is doing a great job of using fera and panic to drive up the prices and make a fortune. Oil production and supplies are quite healthy world-wide and despite the disaster in Iraq, oil from that country is also flowing. Russia is on the verge of finalizing a deal with Turkey and Israel that will send oil through a pipe-line via Russia and Turkey to Israel for export to Europe. If anything, India's and China's dramatic increasing demands for fuel is the real cause of unstable oil prices and even that is not the full reason for what we are seeing right now. As for Atlantic Canada, there is no excuse, absolutely no excuse, that the Irving Empire has been allowed to monopolize the distribution of oil and shut down any competition. It will also be interesting to see if Newfoundland goes the way of Alberta and turns itself into a little pathetic colony of US oil multi-national interests and cowtows to some fools in Tulsa, Oklahoma, or takes on an international approach with its oil and truly competes on the world markets. I personally think it is a complete accident but fortunate timing that someone who understands economic market places and comes from an oil producing province, is now the federal Prime Minister at a time when the exporting of oil is going to be a culminating issue that decides the direction of Canada's economy for years to come.

It certainly is an interesting question August. What I also find timely about your question is that leading into the G8 Summit, Prime Minister Harper, deliberately, with great care and choice in his words, has begun to advocate Canada as an up and coming energy superpower and is deliberately challenging Russia and presenting Canada as an alternative to Russia, when considering investing and obtaining energy supplies. Most Canadians have missed it in the last few days, but for Harper to directly take on Putin, make a direct criticism of Russia's government monopolization of energy production and present Canada as an alternative to energy sources instead of Russia, if nothing else is amazing. It is a profoundly different approach then the Liberal government of Paul Martin-Jean Chretien which went bowing and scraping to China and other countries like some two bit banana colony looking for investments. Harper has been selling Canada as a major supplier of natural gas, oil, hydro-electricity and nuclear power. It actually suprises me how he has chosen to tout or advocate Canada as an energy power. Its totally different to what Chretien did. So Haper's bold and I am telling you very bold approach necessarily will cause a lot of Canadians to question, are we charging enough and will the Europeans and Americans pay us their fair share for energy or do we continue to be a banana republic of the US, and like Alberta's Premier the embarasing drunk Ralph Klein, grovel for American investment, or do what Harper is doing and present ourselves as confident, nd yes brash players in the world market. I prefer Harper's bold approach to Ralph Klein's or Jean Chretien's butt kissing any day.

I have been writing too many posts and I do not mean to dominate discussions but now I am pissed off and have to write this. I am a lawyer with specialized graduate and post graduate training in investigating and mediating sexual abuse in institutions. I actually went to Newfoundland and on CBC radio advised the pubic two years before Mt. Cashel that they had a sexual abuse scandal on their hands that must be exposed. I have spent 20 years as a family mediator, counselor and volunteer working with the sexually abused. Please please believe me when I say this. What happened to the aboriginals, the sexual abuse, physical violence, rape, humiliation, forced conversions, is all true. This is not the figment of anyone's imagination. Also please understand, it is very very rare for there to be situations where people fabricate stories of sexual abuse in institutions. Do not mix that up with family law custody battles where a parent may try use sexual abuse as a tool to gain custody of the child. The situations are not the same. The injustice done to aborginals in these residential schools has been documented by neutral third parties and fully admitted through the testimony of the perpetrators confessions. What happened to Phil Fontaine and countless others is not made up. Please do not suggest that directly or indirectly. Also please understand, there are ways today in the court system to detect fabrication. Also please understand that most false memory cases evolved from people engaging in hypnotism when they were not trained properly to use hypnotism. This is not the case with the residential school abuse which was and continues to be coroborated by third parties other then the victims.

Jerry in your own wierd blunt way you do make a point. However I will say this. I am a strong supporter of Isael's right to exist. I lived in Israek and volunteered there and went to school there although I can't speal a friggin word of Hebrew. But I also have friends that are Muslim, Syrian, Jordanian, Lebanese, Egyptian, Israeli Christian, Israeli Arab, Druze, Beduin, and Palestinian (both Christian and Muslim). I also know Bahaiis from the Middle East and Zoroastrians (I apologize if I spelled that wrong). I also know Afghanis and Iranians. I would like to think I am typical of many Jewish Canadians and many people you don't hear about. Whether we are Jewish, Christian, Muslim and what-ever our nationality, etc., we simply want both Palestinians and Israelis to be able to co-exist. So there is a third option Jerry and now more then ever and that is the option for moderate, peaceful people of all religions and nationalities to try mediate the dispute and find ways to defuse the the tension. No these moderate mediators can not stop terrorism but they can encourage and incite a peace network to bridge the fear and distrust between the two sides. Don' t understimate that. I will never give up the dream of hoping one day Palestinians and Israelis can find peace. I do think right now however in the interim that from a purely practical point of view Hezbollah and Hamas need to be crippled and I regret very much innocent civilians will suffer. Now more then ever we need peace activists who won't choose sides and can remain neutral and non judgemental. In the interim I applaud Stephen Harper for being the first Canadian politician in years to not be afraid to denounce terrorism as he did. As for Lebanon, it is a cursed nation long dominated by Syria and the Hezbollah and it is truly tragic but to finally move Hezbollah from the border with Israel innocent Lebanese will suffer. For that I directly blame Syria and Iran for turning Lebanon into a crippled state helpless to expel terrorists and I directly blame the French who had the power and ability to put an end to terrorism in Lebanon and turned the other way so it could complete its nuclear, chemical, military and other sales in Iran not to mention gain selected country status when obtaining Iranian oil. The French also have done very well in their business deals with Syria. I remember sitting in Beirut years ago. ( I am now 50) I was 17. A more beautiful city you have never seen. Its Christian and Muslim communities could have co-existed had it not been for Syria and Iran flooding the country with terrorist cells and for the havoc Arafat permeated when he squatted in Lebanon. To the Lebanese people I say, one day, one day, none of this shit will last and you will be left alone. This is all part of the cleansing process and returning you to what you were, an oasis in the Middle East. In the interim your people will suffer as will Israeli and Palestinian civilians. Its a damn shame. As for the Americans, they were oh so naive thinking they could remain on the ground in Iraq, and making a difference, but at least they tried. The other super-powers and the European Union are self-righteous hipporcates. They talk but do nothing but sell weapons and exploit the misery. And by the way, I am glad I am Canadian and can live in a country where I can walk down the street and not have a missile parked up my butt.

I hope you can back that up with some evidence, this is the first time I hear of it. The largest supplier of arms to Israel is the U.S.A. A good deal of weapons and craft for the Army, airforce and navy have come from the US or been designed by US corps. The more Israel uses, the more they will get. For the companies in the US are making money from it. Not like they are going to stop that anytime soon. Isreal is the only major power in the middle east. That was no accident. You really should read up on military journals. The US is the major military supplier not just for Israel but Egypt, Saudia Arabia, Kuwait, The United Arab Emirates, Pakistan. The United States, Russia, France, Britain, Belgium, Germany, China, North Korea, all sell weapons in the Middle East. France supplies military, chemical, nuclear and industrial technology to Iran and every Middle East country. Britain seems to be doing quite well with Libya and Jordan. The French have always been the military suppliers to all French speaking Arab countries, i.e., Morrocco, Algeria and Tunisia. Look and you will find that it is a misnomer to simply state Israel is supplied by the U.S. 90% of the U.S. economy is related to its military industrial complex and the same can be said of France. In fact Israel has an internal ability to build its own weapons. While it uses US military for patriot missiles and its air fighter fleet it also manufactures its own fighter jets (Kfirs) that are right now the best in the world, and it pretty much rebuilds all its navy vessels. In fact Israel has military alliances with India, Turkey and Russia as well which are not broadcast and it still maintains a military development relationship with certain African nations. There is a popular misconception that Israel is completely dependent on the U.S. Understand how internal military suppliers work. If the US for any reason could not supply Israel within seconds, military salesman from many nations would be lining up to sell. The biggest whores when it comes to military sales are the Chinese, North Koreans, Belgians, French, Germans, Russians and Americans. The US simply does what other countries do. They play the feuding parties against each other, and sell both sides weapons. Don't kid yourself when it comes to military supplies, the US and these other nations will sell to anyone. As for Canada we have no problems selling nuclear reactors to ANYONE. We have no problems with China and at the peak of Cucescu's bloody facistic rule of Romania we had no problem selling him Candu reactors.

That is a bad analogy. Individual European countries are politically independent. They do not tax other countries or tell other countries how to run their internal affairs. The relationship between the federal government and the provinces is different. Are you serious? You think European countries are independent of one another? You don't think certain European countries have not deliberately monopolized the European market place deliberately to dominate other European countries? You ever heard of European countries dumping their goods in other European states? Part of the reason the European Union was formulated was to prevent the Germans and French from trying to unfairly dominate the European market and impose their beliefs on others. Its not all a bed of independent roses in Europe. Don't mistake cultural independence from economic independence which was my point. Yes European countries like to say they are culturally different, but economically they are not independent, their economic actions are completely interlated. I believe the analogy I was making was of economic trade not culture. Quebec should not confuse its cultural desire to remain French with economic independence which is an illusion since we are all controlled by world markets. I think that is the pt. Charest was making.

Getting back to the original postulation, many of us believe there is something behind that which we see or something intelligent beyond our understanding that created. Many of us believe the act of creation is indefinite and originated from a source that decided to put into a motion an infinite cycle of seperation into indefinite parts and then reunification of those parts as an act of love or perhaps simply to keep itself company from being lonely. Some of us belief in this concept using fundamentalist religions and dogmatic approaches, others such as myself get quite mystical and pagan like, etc. The fact that we believe in something intelligent or positive behind everything does not mean we want the world to be blown up with nuclear weapons. So this inference that people who believe in a spiritual power are all dumb Americans makes no sense. If anything its just a generalization and a negative one at that. Americans are no more retarded then anyone else. We all have our share of retards.

I am trying to re-frame the terms of debate. Native activists try to make it sound like these treaties are absolutely binding documents and that the rest of the country must accept them no matter how unfair they are to the majority of people. I feel that things are not so black and white and that ultimately we need to find a political solution. I am also saying that a political solution is not possible in as a long as natives insist that these treaties are the minimum terms for any compromise. It is very similar to the israeli-palestinian problem. In that case, there can be no solution as long as the palestinians refuse to recognize the right of Israel to exist. I get your pt. River. I am no expert on this debate but from what I have read from Phil Fontaine (I hope I spelled that right) this man has been a classic moderate and very flexible and willing to discuss issues. I think of Israel and Palestine had leaders like him they would be a lot better off then they are now. That said there has been intransigence on both sides. I say that because yes some native leaders have been militant and inflexible but there are some odious federal and provinicial politicians and government officials who just can't think outside the box.

Natives were economically and socially disadvantaged compared to non-natives at the time. Assimilation was seen as a way to correct this inequality. Assimilation may sound bad in our post-Trudeau society where multiculturalism is an artical of faith, however, at the time assimilation was considered to a good thing that would help the natives. You seem to agree that the purpose of residential schools was assimilation. However, assimilation was meant to benefit the Canadian settlers by making Natives 'productive' members of society. I don't believe that their intentions were to help the Natives. Natives have survived in Canada for thousands of years, and appeared to be doing fine, so why try to change thier lifestyle? The Germans did not send to the Jews to the concentration camps to make them better Germans. They sent them there to kill them. There is no comparison to what happened in the residential schools and the holocaust. Pretending that there is a comparison simply invites people to dismiss your arguments. I'm not trying to make a direct comparison between the holocaust and residential schools, which is why I used "holocaust" in quotations. The germans purposely killed millions of jews, Canadians sent Natives to residential schools to try to assimilate them and in the process 50,000 died/went missing (edit), many were raped and countless others witnessed these murders/rapes. One is worse than the other, but that does NOT make either of them right. All I'm trying to say is why do we learn about one in school and not the other, especially when it occured in Canada? Once again, I don't believe that residential schools were well intentioned at all. Hey just some feed-back from a Jewish guy. I fully understood your use of the quotes with holocaust and understood you were not making a direct comparison and appreciate the point you are making!

The problem is Dion is NOT the prime minister, Harper is. Stehen Harper is showing a definite disdain for the majority language of Canada and a lack of respect concerning the history of Canada. It is obvious Mr. Harper continues to pander to Quebec which is his choice but will be remembered by some Canadians come election day. Sorry I completely disagree. I think Harper is being consistent and treating Quebec exactly how the West wants the federal government to treat it. Harper is practicing what he preaches. He is not paying lip service to Quebecers. He is practicing a style of federalism that Joe Clark offered as an alternative to Trudeau's nd one which respects regional differences and is sensitive to regional alienation. I challenge you to find one thing in a Harper speech or policy where he has offered Quebecers anything different then he has any other Canadian. I am a Liberal by tradition so don't paint me as a Harper groupy but this man deserves some credit. He unlike Chretien has not madse a mockery of the French and English languages and put down either side of the equation. He is treating people as he wants to be treated and in my books that makes him a man of integrity and its refreshing. Speaking French first or second means nothing. If you are that petty then so be it. I am glad Harper is not and if I were Westerners be proud this man has shown a Westerner can lead the nation because he may not be French but he knows what its like to come from a region forgotten by central Canada. If anything he is taking away the steam from the seperatists. Quebecers can not look this man in the face and say he is anti-French. His actions speak louder then his words. He has Canadian balls.

I also recommend you actually read up and understand this tax exemption you are referring to. I do not think its a blanket exemption or the great value and benefit you think it is. I also suggest before you wish too hard to be an aboriginal you travel to their reservations and see how they actually live in some reservations. It isn't all glitz and utopia.

I personally like what Jean Charest actually stated - that Quebec as an independent country is unrealistic. As he said the tendency is for nations to form unions. How would it make sense for Quebec to seperate when all European states have no formed a United States of Europe and Canada, Mexico and the US have had to in all intensive purposes form an economic alliance to counter the Europeans? In this shrinking world of instant trade on the inter-net and immediate travel, borders and nationalities are becoming obsolete. For Quebecers to think they could be a distinct and independent country in north America is unrealistic. More to the point the average Quebec seperatist is aged and old. Young Quebecers travel the world and speak at least two languages and are not afraid of their own shadow or competiting in the international market place. L'Universite de Montreal's business school is clearly international and so is Laval's. I think the typical Quebecer of the next generation is more like Jean Charest-they are bilingual and pragmatic and see federalism as an opportunity to balance their own needs with other needs they have in common with other provinces. I think Harper's concept of federalism has suprised me. I thought he would be a red-neck with Quebec but he has shown a remarkable moral integrity and is approaching federalism like Joe Clark would have. I think his approach to Quebec has more integrity then Mulroney's patronage approach and I think the Harper-Charest alliance is good for all of Canada.