login

The abortion debate in Canada has been a long time in developing. Its an offshoot of the womens rights movement. End of the point is, its your body do what you want with it. The problem of course it that there are human rights involved with a human being trapped inside another human being. The cases are pretty representative and it is pretty straight foward issue, women should have equal access to abortion, and it should be their decision not doctors decision because people have the right of consent or should have the right of consent to medical practice performed on them, or on their request. I don't think this is a place for the government though, unless the government opts to extend human rights to unborn children. Currently the law is problematic because it doesn't even address the requirement for doctors to perform a csection/extraction when a mother dies and the child is still alive inside. People are greatly disadvantaged by not having their babies lives protected by law. They were protected in anglo saxon times at half a wergeld.

Try reading what I write. First off my planes cost a 200th (1/200) what your planes cost. Second I do not suggest hiring more people I suggest expanding the size of a volunteer militia from 0 to whatever Canadians wanna. Likewise I suggest taking existing jobs and educating people to hold more skills at work sites. I did not suggest spending more taxpayer money. Likewise there are a whole lot of people who would like to learn to fly or rent a jet to go from point a to point b, they are called people who use airlines. A market exists, I think lots of people like aircraft and use them. I don't see why you would say they are a market nobody wants. You are quite wrong. Your supply management skills suck. You are making a system that fails by design not planing a system that succeeds by design. You are ignoring the TRAIN PEOPLE ASPECT. People can build parts. Companies do it then charge a markup of 100x. Where do you think billion dollar profits come from, jesus? The scrap metal is probably worth more than $40,000. You want incapable people and that sucks. You are trying to build a world full of stupid people, you make no sense. The rest of your post is nonsense because it is as I said not representative of my plan and based on your planning, which I stated was faulty.

Go tell that to your homeboys.

Oh come on Bonam lets not get technical, even though all options are on the table I think that one will get fed to the dogs. OK Mr. Smarty pants, how big would the shockwave of a 200MT nuke be? Doesn't seem right http://meyerweb.com/...ap/hydesim.html as the 50MT tsar bomba shattered windows 500 miles away.. yet this at 100MT has only 0.1 psi at 176 miles. type in damascus and 99999KT These seem dratically under powered. Thermal radiation is listing only at 100km. http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ this one does go up to 200MT meh, doesn't seem that impressive I thought it would do more.

The way the Inuit are pumping out babies you may have your answer right there. Colonial projects typically were launched with the poor and criminals. A new law like Parole to the North Pole brrrr. is something that could occur. They need to develope way more hydroponics and green houses some micro nuclear plants up there would probably be of great benefit since the population is so low, and nuclear power works year round to fuel green houses. Transport costs are massive up there. 0 emissions gas and oil plants are also something to look to... massive amounts of methane can be harvested from warming tundra, which in turn can be burned for energy to fuel green houses. There is a lot of room for development and sustainance. Living costs are just too high for most people to consider moving there. Once more infrastructure exists such as caribou and reindeer farms, greenhouses and heating oil and gas in abundance. Costs will come down, and the local economy will imporve. With northern shipping routes to be opened costal areas will also have an economic incentive. They need indoor stuff though.. seaside has an advantage because there is bedrock rather than shifting mud.

you forgot the part where the electoral college decides not the US public...

Hey they're good enough for the US navy and cost 1/3rd the price, and we've been flying them for decades. Whose sensors are we trying to avoid anyway our own? If we can't see stealth planes how do we fly ours before they get hit? If we can see them why can't other people? Who is attacking Canada by air again? Can't we just build ICBM's if it is about attacking other countries. One well placed 200 MT warhead will end a war pretty fast against most third world and second world countries no air war required. It is scary when the most powerful nuclear weapon made by the US was developed over 50 years ago... http://en.wikipedia....41_nuclear_bomb lwtf. Just think of the effect of a tsar bombina on Damascus and how it would render nato involvement in Syria must less required or one 8 times as powerful. 200 mile kill radius 4000 mile blast shockwave. Done. It might even bring world peace too... send a message, this is what happens to trouble makers.... just plop it down in the middle of syria job done, no huss no fuss.

No, nonconfidence is important to get rid of crappy governments. Also the PM can be removed at any time they arn't elected. The PM is in no way the same as the president. US presidents have vastly mroe power because they can independently issue executive orders that have massive power. The GIC is technically still required to be approved by the governor general. The PM is a powerful advisor, they are NOT an executive. The GG is at law the CEO while the PM is a general manager of sorts, the Queen is the President. Ministers are department supervisors, the operations are run by deputy ministers who are the department managers. Ministers in that sense report to the PM, and the PM reports to the government in the legislature as required. Ministers meanwhile act on powers given to them by the legislature or under the act that establishes their department. The US system is vastly different than the Canadian system. Because the President is the head of the executive branch of the US government, meanwhile the legislatures in the US are completely seperate from the executive. By law in Canada ministers are not allowed to sit in the commons but they do (the law which requires them to be issued a fine is ignored, it dates back to the turn of the 20th century when the lower houses in the Westminister system overthrew the superiority of the upper houses. Technically ministers should be from the senate, not the commons (this was execised in the early Canadian parliaments via the executive council system). The PM should also be from the senate, if following the house of lords comparison of the westminister system. Essentially the way they do it is totally wrong. Even doing it wrong it is not in any way like the US system because there are diffinitive seperations between the legislative and executive in the US system, while in Canada the supposed executive intrudes on the commons (they are only suppose to be there when called to the commons bar at the request of the commons.) Although I recognize they do it wrong, and the public is oblivious and complaicent to that fact, it is disgusting to hear people compare the Canadian system to the US system, it isn't the same. The PM sits at the leisure of the GG, although I recognize the KingBing affair, the nature of partisan politics and how non representative the Conservatives are of Canadian society and social views (being a minority of the population and popular vote but holding a majority in the commons), the ability to appoint a suitable PM should still be exercised by the GG, much like anyone can request the Queen for Redress with Privy Council having special status.

I'll have to check back on this as things progress, there are many things that can happen. A little curious to see it though... I'm hopeful they will go with the consortiums suggestion to build an Arrow II (completely built in Canada by Canadian companies owned by Canadians or the Federal Government Crown Corp) , as a first option. (There are lots of options though) I'm very surprised it was cancled before the report though. This is a little upsetting as if they new what it was going to say, why waste the millions getting the report done...? btw when I say consortium I mean the alternative canadian built plane consortium, not the f35 consortium see: http://www.cbc.ca/ne...avro-arrow.html it just has to be handled really well and low cost but functional technology needs to be put into it. They key is making it able to be upgraded as time progresses... and with Canadian technology made by Canadian companies. A lot of modernization could be done for very small cost. This is the scary part "Arrow's basic design and platform still exceed any current fighter jet" over 50 years later... The Arrow II could fly "20,000 feet higher than the F-35, soar twice as fast and would cost less." Total cost of the Arrow II $11.73 billion, Attach some modern sensor suites on these and some genies and they'll take down anything going. Although both russian and french planes could be issued unless intercept rockets or something of the sort wern't also included. or a 360 degree bi-CIWS type system to shred incoming missiles obviously you want to scale down the size of the CIWS.

In no way shape or form. It is your solution that risks lives and wastes money. You can't do anything but f35 with f35's. You can do a lot more with a bunch of jets and helicopters in terms of putting them to work earning money rather than eating it up. You don't need billions of dollars to solve an imaginary problem. Stop asking stupid questions. Its what you expect when people are indoctrinated to be selfish liars and crooks with no public morals and no private decency.

This is sort of spammy, it should be in "other" forum not federal spam is illegal. http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/story/2010/12/16/spam-law-canada.html

If you were given 5 billion dollars what would you buy, how many, make etc..?

I'd give them swords. THE FLOOR IS THERE FOR MORE THAN PAGES. SEND A MESSANGER MR. WHIP.

Why not kill two birds with one stone... increase forces with only Inuit and first nations in the North, you know cause they are unemployed.. but also do it at a highschool level because of poor attendance issues.. get them in the military young. Also include secondary education in with the forces training all covert like. They want excitement.. so give them some... rebellious youth can benefit from some structure. http://www.polarnet....t_Drop_Out.html You have inunit being upset government jobs arn't going to inuits.. well some time in the forces will better prepare them for government service jobs... the military regime for the north could even prepare them for the office work or officer school.. or university they might never see without it.

p.a. is not hamas muchlike canada is not conservatives, they just have a lot of support in the west

the middle and upper class should be paying for their own health insurance, and selecting the plan that offers them the type kf access they need. people are too reliant on hospitals, they need to take care of their own health the poor meanwhile need to be give a heakthy life, to reduce their future health issues, such as healthy food and fitness.- such as thrlugh garden coops and amd community gyms.

nope. we need low cost solutions A does not = B you are totally wrong my solutions saves solideirs lives and enhance their futures

This isn't the f35 thread. None the less here is another buy on the replacement challenger cost This one is like 300000 http://www.aso.com/l...istingType=true ( specs: http://en.wikipedia....iki/Eclipse_500 ) Loaded weight: 5,520 lb (2,504 kg) Useful load: 2,400 lb (1,089 kg) Max. takeoff weight: 5,950 lb (2,699 kg) PS You could try to get hybrid Mini Genie Missiles for air defence, against more capable jets. http://en.wikipedia....iki/AIR-2_Genie Weight 822 pounds (372.9 kg) Look at the Operators list Operators Canada Royal Canadian Air Force Canadian Forces Air Command see also: http://en.wikipedia....ircraft_weapons Like look how small this little thing is.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W54 Might be able to pick some stuff off with the fiscal cliff stuff in the US.. Canada should keep an eye on surplus possibilities.

Nope. Charges can be laid anytime. Cops lie all the time. It just means if they lie in trial they are liable to purgery charges. That's convincing. You are just against citizens rights, plain and simple. That and the fact you are a troll. What country is that? Obviously I'm geussing you arn't in Canada. WRONG.. if they are fleeing they are a fleeing criminal and you can pursue, and historically you are expected to pursue. Stupid troll stupid troll. troll. You have no fing clue. You are a sick and twisted troll. and that is never. when you stop being an idiot maybe we can have a real discussion, that is beneficial, and doesn't just get trolled to nothingness. No sorry. Not at all. You are a troll hiding behind net anonyminity out of touch with the real world and pursueing an alterior motive. Why not be real and stop being a jackass. I might even respect you for being a good person if you just tried t o be a good person and not just a stupid troll. It will get you nowhere fast, you can live your life being a problem or you can try to be constructive and help the world. I'm geussing you won't learn the error of your ways, but time will catch up with you, and with that I have my peace of mind. Go to hell. And its you that's the one who needs to mature buddy.

Don't be stupid. Ignorance is not a defence. Glad I'm not in a bar with a jerk.

Well first off only two of the six are being kept in service because they reached the end of their regular service life (from the early 1980's). But, yes, I think that diversifying available assets from 'used' equipment, is better than going out and buying new equipment when there is a deficit. I'd task the military to maintain it, use it for small engine repair, air technical training, support and expansion of CF assets, and executive training. You didn't read my "other usages" where available they could be rented or tasked to other government services as required. I'm sure crop dusting or serving under serviced areas, assisting flightschools, air cadets, reserve forces and regular CF testing, emergency management etc... I support militias to increase the size of the forces, and an open door policy. You know if people want to go out and do their regular fire arms training this is good. if they are trusted with regular guns, then making prohibited weapons available in secure settings is not a problem. Likewise providing training to the public --- perhaps as a service for a "payfor" service, I pay $500 to support this each year and I get flight hours, but I have operations to perform while doing my flight hours, and I have to be a sworn peace officer milita member or what have you. The program could be fine tuned but my policy position on the military is BIGGER BUT IT DOES MORE, especially economic activities, as well as skills and training. Re: public service, resource, infrastructure development etc.. If CF command told me that they don't need more soldiers to defend Canada, I would find that hard to beleive. As opposed to not having technical staff at airports? Definately but they would be everyone, but it would be like so you are a customs agent, well you are also now a small engine repair or an aircraft maintenance agent, and you get paid the same, but your hours are different. Now you are just on call for customs or crimes, but if you are sitting around the office get out to the hanger. Start working on that Light Aircraft kit that you get as a bonus for personal use. I think that buying 65 f35's is a waste of the budget. I support the purchase of some but I havn't seen a single report saying why it is 65, and why they are only going after one aircraft designed over 10 years ago as their only aircraft for the well last aircraft they ever get for a manned fighter. It is nonsense. From an outsider looking in, their plans are little more than a sublimentary brigade of the the US military (or 5 divisions (1 air 1 sea, 1 land, 1 sof/comm/intel,and 1 command) Well its not like there arlready arn't helicopters in those places. I'm sure you are well aware of the helicopters the CF has in the Toronto area for very specific usages, and seen SOF operations with helicopters. None the less having equipment stationed around Canada, is useful in such as a way that local areas can have faster response times. Figure that. Change the rules. 'fraid not. Read my comments about IP earlier. Pay them less, they are under contract. I'm sure they will still serve, remember there is more demand to be in the forces than Canada can provide for, this means, gasp that CF pilots that Canada trains to fly helicopters can get the same pay as if they didn't get training and they can be happy they actually get to fly them and got to learn how to fly them, and shut up and not ask for more money than they would get if they wern't gifted with the flight lessons in the first place. Train them. You hire capable people and you train them. Get it. You couldn't run a cost efficient program if your life depended on it. I can probably live off your gas costs alone. Expect less. The personnel resources already exist. If the execs want to use them, they have to learn to fly them otherwise take the bus. Of course the autopilot is there too. Exact programs would differ based on local needs and demands. They are a resource but they would be prioritized and only security cleared people would have access, potentially with deposits or insurance of some sort. What disabled people arn't accomodated on commercial flights? Take the cruise ferry that Canada could have tons of for the cost of the g20 security costs. Don't beg to the US. If they won't transport our wounded don't fight their wars. They would hold plenty of them. So hop a yatch. They hold 3 helicopters in some cases. While there are lower costing places the middle of lake ontario and getting to keep the boats is a better deal than getting nothing from it for the tax payer. It is a 500,000 dollar Hind. I don't care about geopolitics. If it was made by fartians I would care less. Except for sacrificing three f35's for the 400+ personal jets , the costs for everything else was maybe 30 million. The boats of course were offset from the cost of a future summit of world leaders that security costs would be high. sedate the prisoner and chuck them in the hold of an aircanada flight with the other animals, I'd question why bring him/her back, if they set foot in Canada again arrest them. I'm geussing on notifying thelocal authorities they will keep an eye on them anyway, less Canadian resources wasted.. I'm all for bombardier and they are getting good business. But buying them at 100 million to 200 million a pop you can buy a lot of private jets for that like at 1/2 million each that is 200-400 private jets for 1 challenger. Canadian execs don't deserve challengers. They can fly commercial. I could maybe substantiate it for military officers but I deem ministers non essential in terms of national security, I think the deputy ministers are more important,and the deputys should be in Canada most of the time and a replacement deputy should be chosen if they are not. Ministers largely should just be oversight they should not be executives except very extreme political context where the legistlature without corruption empowerd the minister to act, and was absolutelyrequired such as non unilaterally effectng a safegaurd forthe publicwell being or determining a course of action that would have grave political repercussions. 4 of the 6 are being eliminated. The remaining two will fly for another 10 or so years. But I would say do not buy 4 new challengers to replace the retired ones buy used aircraft and those small private jets in the place of one or two and "economize them" get them making money. If commercial activities can generate a revenue then you can go out and expand the crown corp managing the assets. If they can't make money off of it, chances are it is just wankery by the execs.

Was not convicted in Canada, was only "suspected" in Israel. Suspect does not equal "convict" (except in Israel and other countries (re: most countries) where the justice system is a sham orchestrated against political rivals. I'm sure Israel could throw a mound of papers (probably in Hebrew) on my desk demonstrating evidence that linked him to aiding and abedding criminal acts. I do need to remind people though there are two types of justice determination, that based on the act and that based on the outcome of the act. The outcome desired from the act (such as feeding your poor starving family from the loaf of bread from the bakery that was stolden) as opposed to selfish acts like B&E to fund a cocaine habit (although addition may be mitigating in that) None the less it is likely that if he did abet suicide bombings it was about more than just blowing up people, it was about showing that they are not depleted of power, and that they will wage Jihad for liberation even in self martyrdom, and they are still something that needs to be respected and dealt with rather than subjugated under rascist law that Israel forces on its Arab subjects. The marriage law is just a drop in the bucket that would make the KKK look like small frys no wonder the Harper Government supports Israel so much. http://www.telegraph...enship-law.html I have to note I'm not anti Israeli, I actually strongly identify with Jews, and have found most if not all Israeli's I have ever personally met to be 'good people'. I can say likewise of all Palestinians I have met. So this isn't about the people. it is about how they treat each other as entities such as Israel, I think if an Israeli honestly looked at their laws they would agree with my statements, but they would also if they were hardline say they were necesary due to the danger Israel faces to its very existence.

Its their union not yours.

I think you may be misreading my statements. Nope, sorry try again. Yes there are multiple charges where lies are illegal and criminal. Nope I have a defence. Learn the law,someone flees while in commission of commiting an indictable offence lethal force can be used to prevent the flight. Thats the law. This is no joke, it is really the law. We are entitled to stop the commission or continuance of indictable offences and to use reasonable force to do so there are defences for use of force that justify its use such as prevention of the commission of the offence. What is so weird about this for you. Someone rapes someone in the street you find it issued if you kick them to the ground, and if they try to run away you pull out a gun and shoot them to prevent a rapist from getting away? Maybe rape is ok for you but ruining someones life with lies isn't? Well the fact is both are indictable offences, meaning people were put to death for the level of offence in the past. It isn't trivial, so once you have been victimized by these sorts of offences you will shut your mouth nod and smile because morally i am right and you are ignorant of the seriousness of these crimes against good. http://yourlaws.ca/c...mission-offence Notice the "everyone" Every one is justified in using as much force as is reasonably necessary (a) to prevent the commission of an offence (i) for which, if it were committed, the person who committed it might be arrested without warrant, and (ii) that would be likely to cause immediate and serious injury to the person or property of anyone; or ( to prevent anything being done that, on reasonable grounds, he believes would, if it were done, be an offence mentioned in paragraph (a). Code. By the terms of section 494(1), anyone may arrest without warrant a person whom he or she: finds to be committing an indictable offence;17 or believes, on reasonable grounds, has committed a criminal offence and is escaping from and freshly pursued by those with lawful authority to arrest that person. If you didn't know defamation is an indictable offence. I'm not saying you go out walk behind the crook pull a handgun out quietly place it behind their head and pull the trigger judge jury and executioner, but you can use reasonable limits of the law to both protect your security and to stop criminals who have committed criminal acts or to stop crimes from being fullfilled. What is so "bizarre" about this to you? It is you who seems a little out of touch here. This could be you or your neighbour cheez factor sorry lots of pizza in me. ---- There are many other regs (such as public weapons laws) but if you follow them citizens can exercise much the same ways as police to prevent crime including application of force if justified for the public good.

What like today hearing someone who was evangelizing the mo- movement (movember) saying everyone who had a mustache looked like a pedofile meanwhile the only person in the room with a mustache felt a little defamed. When someone says you look like a criminal that is pretty offensive speech and defamatory, and is not acceptable. I honestly felt like hitting the guy for suggesting some innocent guy molested children for thrills. I had to settle for just plain out saying your speech is defamatory (and retorting that mustached men were masculine hunters of women, meat eaters - reminding him that it was European military tradition to sport the mustache). To end his giggly banter on the character of mustached men. It is effecitely a hate crime against every mustached person. (This of course the day after I post up to MLW on hate crimes and offensive speech) Calling everyone who has a mustache a child molester is pretty f**king offensive and defamatory.