Jerry J. Fortin

You make an excellent point. I for one would like to see an informed electorate, one better able to exercise their democratic rights in a manner that would serve to improve our society. You see, I hold the elected representatives responsible for this lack of information. I mean how often do you get government propaganda and how often does it solicit an opinion from you. Usually the partisan representative TELLS us how they will proceed with an issue instead of ASKING us how to respond. This is the basic issue as far as I am concerned, it is the root of the apathy we find so detrimental to society. What I believe is needed is independent representatives accountable to the people. Now we all know these folks cannot legislate effectively, but they can attempt to force debates and they can make known the citizens voices from their own ridings. They can present private members bills, and they can garner media attention in those efforts. In time this could serve to promote the interest of citizens. I for one may even take the steps required to run as an independent at some point not far into the future. The nanny state is a reflection of partisan desire to retain power by vote buying. The reality of taxation is a mere paradigm in the greater scheme of things. Paradigm shifts are the key, and a very powerful political tool not willingly utilized by partisan efforts because the impacts are rarely beneficial to their isolated agendas. Those impacts are exactly what would favour independent representation. There are ways to improve our economy at both the provincial and federal levels that would serve the purpose of providing the opportunity of improving the human condition of our citizens. Things like health care, education, and pensions could be addressed in a manner that would be seen as revenue neutral in terms of taxation. Crown corporations utilized as non-profit partnerships of cooperatives are one simple and effective means of creating productive capacity and meeting consumption demands on a more focused local level. Helping citizens achieve economic viability within local economies will go a long way toward industrial development and creating secondary industry. Part of our problem as I see it is the focus on exportation of raw material instead of value added manufactured products. To exploit this economic issue, we will need to use advanced technologies and automated production.

The laws are written to protect the rich. The rich can nearly always buy their way out of trouble. Look at O.J.! Listen this isn't what I was getting at. What I was getting at was that there is a class based society here, one set of rules for the rich and one for the poor. Look at taxation for instance, there are loopholes that can reduce your tax load but you need the capital to exploit them. There is more here than meets the eye. Look at the banking industry, and how society which once rejected it has now embraced it. Witness the reality of corporate welfare and the cost to the public. We have forgot that the individual is the paramount concern. We have legislated against the freedom of the individual, but allowed rights to legal citizens. We have created a society of two classes, those of the natural citizens who are the living breathing kind, and that of the legal citizens who are the kind designed to serve us in the manner of systems and efforts. We are creating a world of privileges which outweigh the rights of citizens. Within each class of citizens there are structures to both limit and elevate class members. In both cases, money is involved. Money is the most common and the most limiting factor. Knowing this we have to wonder why the money supply is controlled in the way that it is. We have to wonder why the entire question of wealth creation is now dependent upon financing instead of production. We have to wonder why production and consumption are not a major focus of political efforts. We have to wonder why, politicians concern themselves at all with marco-economic policies twice removed from the control of the consumer. We have to wonder why the consumer is unable to define the demands of production. We have to wonder what the relationship between politics and production is when the consumer is left without the means employment and yet retains the needs of consumption. All of these things lead to questions about the true meaning of sovereignty and capitalism. Our society must come to grips with the "new world order" and what it really means to citizens.

Not at all. They are people, just like you and me. However when they support terrorists, they become animals and should be treated as such.

Nonsense. I have an expectation of laws to be just.

Canada never stops debating health care.

JBG, move north please. WE could use people like you here.

I didn't say that now did I? I did say they generate profits, but that is not the same thing.

If I was a citizen of Israel, I would be advocating the elimination of the problem immediately. Lucky for everyone I am not a citizen of Israel. I would not be able to stand still for this crap. If that kind of thing was happening in the USA, how long would it take to form up a posse and get the job done if the government refused to act in a timely fashion?

My mistake, what I should have said was that not all justice systems were fair and impartial.

I agree with that.

You mistake actions from intentions, and behaviors from emotions. I speak of child like behavior on the part of terrorists. Adults use logic and experience to mitigate their emotions from their behaviors and actions. They think before they speak. The speak instead of lashing out. They control themselves. Do you see the difference?

Because not systems of justice are fair and impartial. Take for instance that of a totalitarian government, verses a democratic one. Please keep in mind we are dealing with an issue that stems from a culture not like our own. Their is a lack of understanding involved and a complete lack of respect. I would sentence the guilty party, then deport them to where they came from after striping their citizenship. They don't want to be part of our society, because they choose not to follow our laws.

No it doesn't. Being adult means not to react like children on any level.

The north represents an unknown, that is in turn both opportunity and danger. For Canada to ignore this almost unknown portion of the nation is completely foolish. Yes there is a huge cost to develop the north, but the risks are outnumbered by the rewards.

I will suggest that there is more to this than what meets the eye. I think "fired" would have been a more accurate use of terminology.

They certainly are. Just as the practical application of law through a fair justice system is.

Not at all. Once violence has been foresaken and peace has been embraced then go ahead and sit at the table with the adults.

A very well reasoned post. Having said that, it was for the most part rich people, or at least people who had enough money to invest it that got hurt. These folks carry a lot more weight than those without the money to invest. Therefore the crime was a big deal. My question remains, what of the crimes perpetrated upon the poor by slum landlords and real estate speculators? What of the "predatory lenders" and the financial industry? It would seem that we have one set of laws and level of protection from crime for the rich and another for the poor.

The rule of law is pretty damned basic as a concept. Unfortunately special interests like to have changes made to suit them, and the law becomes more complicated with each instance.

No, and I will bet that you are not either, as I am not. The fact of the matter is that terrorists have no place at the table. Give up the violence and many things are possible.

Universities generate profits and so do some clinics in Canada.

Yes and no............

I too desire that this nation take up the challenge of our final frontier. I believe that this single issue represents a potential that must be understood by our citizens, and the lack of debate on the issue was to say the least of deep concern to me. At least in raising the debate, the opportunity for decisive action exists. This one little thing could be used to unite Canadians because of all the specifics and all the generalities it will expose the problems within our system and serve to correct them, as all frontier challenges do.

So how do you account for health care and education in this nation? Is that merely a case of enlightened self interest according to you?

Your post does not constitute basic understanding of legal principles in my view.