Jerry J. Fortin

One version from one side another a different one from another. Fair enough. Please provide documentation that the Crown or for that matter the Government of Canada recognizes Mohawk Sovereignty, I cannot seem to find anything on that at all. There is much about the Mohawk "claim" but nothing from the feds.

Harper will never win a single majority.

You are assuming that Iggy doesn't pull the trigger.

The opposite is true of taxes..........they are becoming more expensive not more affordable.

Right or wrong, he is the guy we are supposed to be listening to. I will offer this to folks, if he is wrong then is should be considered incompetent and dismissed.

Put the criminals behind bars, that is where they belong. Violent offenders deserve to be in jail and nowhere else. I do not believe anyone has the right to take a life, not me, or any of you, and especially the government. Still, something has to be done to prevent re-offenders, capital punishment and duration of natural life sentences are the only two ways of doing that. So I am left with one viable option, and I believe it to be the only possible means of dealing with the problem.

Like Guam, Wake and a host of others.

I think you are mistaken. The entire things is rooted in falsehood, the Mohawks sold that land to pay for things it needed a long time ago. It is well known that after the fact the tribe was displeased with its leader of the day, but that leader was legally empowered to make the sale. Hence the entire slur "Indian Giver" arises.

Well if the government did not own it it may account for them wanting to relocate it no? Lets say they did not own the land and the bridge, or at best there is a legal question that may compromise the title. The First Nations are taking some very aggressive legal steps, time to deal with the problem.

The unguided hand? Look at the Swiss system. I don't know about you folks, but it seems to me that the only "guide" here is the partisan leaders.

Okay you did the math, but you provided no number as an answer. Are you assuming that these clowns be supplies with swimming pools and spas, like they have at their disposal now? I think you can spend a lot less on them in "protective" custody.

I doubt that.

I think that is a nice little group, sums things up nicely! Take that crowd into "protective" custody, and ensure they cannot harm anyone else, ever.

Violent crime is a very specific and problematic issue. It should be addressed through changing the penal system in such a manner as to provide natural life sentencing in protective confinement.

If the First Nations own it let them worry about it. If Canada owns it then do what they have to do to keep it open, period.

I think that negotiation is in fact the way to go. They can negotiate to either open the bridge or close the area, choose which ever the self governing First Nations folks want.

I will suggest these folks don't bet on it! They are talking to pump life into a system in very deep trouble. Obama was at least wise enough to phrase things in the way he did.

Yes it is urgent. However not in the way folks seem to think it is.

Citizens can believe what they want, MOses did this, Jesus did that, it makes no real difference. The reality is that government is charged with protecting its citizens and to do so requires a judicial system. That system is supposed to function in a manner that provides justice for crimes committed. We have come far down this road in the last few decades, making a kinder and more gentle means of dispensing justice. While we have evolved in a legal sense, the crimes are still being perpetrated so that indicates we have not gone as far with our social system. Its time for a change.

That whole growth concept seems to result in boom and bust cycles, there are a little annoying.

I think the only valid defense for murder would be self defense. Other than that the degree to which a person is dead doesn't mean a whole lot to me. Dead is dead, you killed, you lose all rights and end up in prison till you die.

Excessive punishment is the death penalty. Life behind bars, solitary confinement, is fair.

Smells a little fishy doesn't it?

Resignation is a clue to wrongdoing no?

Sure it is! Do you think letting a wife or a child beater out of jail is anything less than risky for the victims of their crimes? How about child molesters? Rapists? We have not even got into the murderers. Where is the concern for the victim in this respect?