WestViking

I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but metal detectors are useless in detecting explosives. One can easily pass with a brief-case full of high intensity explosives. Detonators are a little more difficult - you sent then to yourself by courier. Assemble on site and go create a little mayhem.

How quickly you forget that PM Chretien asked the US for help to get our initial forces over the Afghanistan back in early 2002. Just because Taliban Jack Layton and clueless Stephan Dion are dithering over what they would do if they had any power (one wanst to negotiate with al Qaeda while the other wants to invade Pakistan) there is no real spit on support for our military in Afghanistan beyond the usual crowd of ragged peaceniks and limousine liberals. Modern terrorism has change the world. Considering the amount of drugs smuggled into North America every month, smuggling in the makings of bombs that could seriously maim and kill hundreds in our civilian population is not all that challenging. Getting a major bomb into a container sent to Canada is not a great challenge. We are not safe from terrorist attack

Eyeball, you don't have to believe or accept anything. No one is duty bound to argue with you. Wallow in ignorance if you so choose. Looks good on you.

I have to ask, :What gun registry"? Handguns have been registered in Canada since 1934. The system works fine. The gun registry under discussion has never been developed past the theory stage despite massive spending. What data there is in the registry is unreliable and thus useless. Requiring millions of Canadians to register rifles and shotguns has no effect whatever on criminals who prefer handguns and automatic weapons which cannot be legally purchased in Canada. The gun registry focuses on law abiding citizens and ignores criminals. I can see Canadian chapters of the Hell's Angels lining up to take firearms safety training and acquire licenses for their armament. If we want to stop criminal shooting, we had best put some criminals in prison. That cuts down on their activity. We can and are introducing criminal laws that make the unlawful use of a firearm result in a longer prison sentence than the same crime without a firearm. We do not need an expensive gun registry to deal with criminals.

The poppy that police officer wore symbolizes thousands of Canadians who gave their lives to ensure that Judge had a bench to sit on. The Judge should be required to make a public apology, during Remembrance Day ceremonies in the town where she presides every year until she dies. She is one who has forgotten those who died for her freedom.

Yeah, legalizing marijuana will solve a lot of problems. Predators will no longer be trying to sell drugs to school students. Urban gangs will stop shooting up the neighbourhood during turf wars. Addicts will stop committing crimes to get money to feed their habit. Leftists are already in full cry claiming that criminal addicts are 'entitled' to receive treatment rather than a jail term. I have one comment: "Not on my dime". Individuals are responsible for their actions and behaviour. If you commit the crime you do the time. We have hardworking people who need a break and help to improve their education and skills. Committing a crime is not a free ticket to jump the lineup for a better place in society. Explain to us how pandering to potheads will improve our society, productivity and general well-being.

Only about one third of the world population is privileged to live in free democracies. Those democracies do not exist by chance, or due to some inalienable right of man to be free; they exist due to centuries of bloody wars fought to secure the liberty of individuals from kings and tyrants and later fought so ensure the liberty won was maintained in the face of aggressors (including fascists) who wished to reinstate control over the populace. The United States fought a war of rebellion against a British king they felt was taxing them unfairly and excessively, without giving them their rights as British citizens, including effective representation. The British did not adequately protect the 13 colonies against the French, even ceding to them much of the land west of the Appalachians, without consulting the colonists. Liberty became a rallying cry of the Americans that survives to this day. The liberty won by the Americans had a profound effect far beyond US borders. The bloody nose given the British in America showed the British and eventually other colonies that the Crown was not invincible and true liberty was within reach This forced the end of religious restrictions in 1831 and affected her relations with other colonies allowing other nations to gain independence without bloodshed. The Anglosphere has much for which to thank the Founding Fathers of America. It is significant that all of the nations that either fell to or embraced fascism to some degree in the past have returned to democratic governance. There is no indication that current democracies are turning to fascism. As members of free democracies, our largest concern is to guard against growing statism and socialism disguised as welfare. The problems are somewhat different depending on which side of the border we reside on, but Canada faces a relatively high degree of socialism and both nations suffer statists who are convinced they are acting in the public good while trying to regulate our lives. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were not engaged to help or save the local populace. We are engaging elements of radical Islam who have decreed a holy war of terrorism on free democracies with the objective of frightening the populations of free nations into allowing themselves to be subjugated to Islamic rule. The wars are preemptive, designed in part to engage the enemy on his ground rather than on ours. Flowing therefrom is an obligation to support Afghanistan and Iraq to the point that they can be independent and able to protect themselves from incursion by a common enemy and allow us to disengage.

I think you mean (Liberal Senators refusing to hear the voices of Canadians... sounds SOOOO good).

The entity of 'Canada' actually came into being under the Constitution Act of 1841, and Canada consisted of the provinces of Upper and Lower Canada. Unfortunately the new entity proved to be ungovernable, and staggered through no less than 12 different governments in a span of 15 years. By the 1860s politicians were desperate to break the impasse and this was a powerful motivator towards confederation of the provinces which formed the British North American colonies. Framers of the BNA Act were not unfamiliar with the problems of governing a pair of provinces under one parliament, and had the advantage of referring to the US constitution, which they rejected as a model.

Al Gore insists we will all drown. The water shortages are because the water is needed to drown us all.

Despite demands and threats made prior to the throne speech, opposition leaders have placed self-interest above service to their constituents and to Canada. Mr. Duceppe made a motion to amend Mr. Dion’s amendment to the Throne Speech. Mr. Dion and Mr. Duceppe sought to fundamentally change portions of the throne speech, in effect reversing stated government policy. Mr. Layton sat on the sidelines urging Mr. Dion to do the right thing and defeat the Conservative government. When it came to voting, Dion and Layton refused to support Duceppe’s motion. Then Layton and Duceppe refused to support Dion’s motion. Finally, Dion refused to support Duceppe and Layton in a vote against the throne speech he had roughly trashed days earlier. We must conclude that we cannot take opposition attacks on the government seriously. Opposition parties must admit that either they have put the self-preservation above the public interest or that their attacks on the government are frivolous. One thing is very clear; opposition attacks on the government are not based on principle or in the public interest. Dion, Duceppe and Layton have lost credibility with energetic attacks that they are not prepared to follow through. Partisan politics based on principles of convenience is repulsive, and is clearly not parliamentary opposition in the public interest.

Absolutely nothing. Besides there being no American "empire', their economic and military might does not make them an 'enemy' of anyone, particularly those who are not in violation of international law. When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait, the nation asked for American assistance in repelling an invader who was clearly in violation of international law. The Kuwaiti knew that America would respond and secure their freedom. Your proposition that because the US is one of the world's major powers, it is an enemy of what is right and good is unsupportable. The USA provides more foreign aid than many other nations combined and the USA alone keeps the United Nations afloat. You may think it smart to gnaw in the hand that feeds much of the world, but that does not qualify you as particularly astute.

I do not think America is hated by very many. Simply because we regularly see people led by communist trained professional 'protesters' on the nightly news, it does not translate into hatred for the USA. It is laughable when squads of protesters from some third world theocracy carrying signs and chanting anti-American slogans are on the TV news, but the MSM ignores the thousands fleeing the same nation seeking refugee status - in the USA. Leftist/progressives love to chant that the US is "hated" but they do have a propensity for telling us what they would like rather than what is correct and true. I have no respect for Americans who hate their nation.

Unless Dion brings down the government by month end, it will be too late for a fall election and we will be into another over Christmas campaign and January election. If he waits, we will be into an April or May election.

Regrettably human slavery is rampant world-wide, including in America and Canada. I do not wish to throw the thread off-topic, but please Google the term "human trafficking" to get some grasp of the problem.

Ever stop to consider that sitting on death row is conducive to adopting some form of religious belief? Faint hope is better than none.

Uh-huh - and the sovereign nation of Syria is just sitting on her hands allowing a huge opportunity to condemn Israel to the world for its aggressive action float by. Considering that Syria is already awash with the Iranian National Guard your theory is more than just difficult to accept. Do you lay awake nights dreaming up this nonsense?

Sure, Osama bin Laden is just a poor misunderstood patriot without a nation (his family and his home nation of Saudi Arabia have disowned him) struggling to preserve the dictatorships and theocracies of the Middle East. Afghanistan, Pakistan and India do not fit your description, are not in ‘bin Laden’s back yard’, do not have troops in the middle east and yet are under recent and prolonged al-Qaeda attack. Your claims to superior knowledge of Middle East affairs is suspect. And your ‘sweeping generalizations’ are superior because . . . . . . . . ??? How do you ‘study’ Muslim societies who have limited educations, no freedoms, no liberty, no human rights and no freedom of speech and get a credible view of their perspective on world affairs? The study you cite is interesting in (1) the nations that were not surveyed, such a Libya, Iran, Syria and Lebanon, and (2) the low confidence levels for bin Laden combined with the high levels of concern over Islamic extremists. Clearly, bin Laden is no longer seen as the head or even the driving force behind Islamic extremism. We have every reason to believe that terrorists simply want to take over the west and that their desire is not rooted in some legitimate grievance. Where are the results? Where have Middle East nations acquired even the basics of human rights as expressed in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Which Middle East Nations have seen a measurable increase in personal and family incomes? Which Middle East nations have developed an open just and equitable justice system that conforms to the principles of natural justice? Perhaps in your narrow world, but the fact is that the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan have triggered a regional war that extends well beyond the Middle East. So called ‘insurgents’ in Iraq come from all over the region with the simple objective of preventing any sort of stability ion that nation. The terrorists, and the nations who aid, back, support and supply them have to win. They cannot allow a neighbour nation with a modicum of democracy, and an Iraqi federation is even more unthinkable. The Mullahs are nervous as well as some dictators. It is effective to keep the terrorists occupied in the Middle East and Afghanistan rather than planning IEDs on the freeway, or blowing up supermarkets and malls in western nations. How conveniently you forget that the entire Middle East was ruled by the Ottoman Empire from about 1450 to 1922 – roughly 470 years or over four and a half centuries. European nations ruled the Middle East from roughly 1922 to 1948 – or about a quarter century. I seriously doubt that ‘long held grievances’ would be against the western nations. Arabic people, like all others, have the choice of nursing perceived grievances and seeking revenge, or getting on with building themselves a better life and future. Their choice so far is obvious. How many will they sacrifice before rethinking their position? Your apparent hatred of America does not in any way justify that attacks on America that took place September 11, 2001, or the 3,000 deaths resulting therefrom. Your anti-American rant does not justify Islamic terrorist attacks on other nations around the world. Unprovoked attacks on the civilian populations of sovereign nations by radical terrorist groups are not acceptable and will never be acceptable to civilized nations. These predators, their activities and their supporters have to be stopped and will be.

Prison inmates are not treated as animals and never have been in Canada. It is reasonable to expect prison inmates to follow the rules of the Correctional Service. I have no respect whatever for the threat that a prison inmate will eventually be released. If they do not obey the law on release they return to prison on new charges. Society does not owe the convicted criminal anything more than a bed, clothing, three meals a day and appropriate medical care.

Including, of course, the Aboriginal politicians who refuse to allow extension of the Human Rights Act to Aboriginals on reserves. The same Aboriginal politicians also do not want to account for government funds they accept on behalf of their tribes. Strange that.

There is no Canadian law requiring Muslim women to wear a Hiijiab, burka or any other garment. There is a Canadian law requiring all person who vote to identify themselves. Those who refuse to show their faces forfeit the right to vote. There is no problem to solve and nothing to 'accommodate'.

Perhaps you missed the Biblical admonition to treat others as you would like to be treated. Much of the Biblical teachings are about living a responsible life and avoiding temptations. We are taught not to sin and for many, their pleasures involve sin. If there was no ethical conflict, there would be little need for Biblical ethics and far less controversy. Perhaps we should start a thread on “Hedonists and the Bible”.

There may be some merit in claiming to be a godless and amoral character, divorced from personal responsibilities, but I fail to see it. Mocking another's belief and faith is indicative of low character and even lower standards. Then again, living up to your standards is dead easy if you lack discernable values.

Terrorism has moved into the 21st century. Terrorists hide ina civilian population in order to make the most of civilian casualties if they are attacked. Makes for great media releases. Terrorists can only hide amongst civilians by terrorizing them. They tell their unwilling hosts that they may be killed if (the terrorists) are attacked, but they will be murdered if they don't co-operate. Terrorists regularly murder a few 'resistors' to make it plain they are serious. You cannot educate people held hostage. Moreover, the myth that terrorists are poor people with nothing to lose is sharply contradicted by fact. Osama bin Laden is hardly a pauper. The crew that carried off 9/11 were not poor - they were well funded and lived very well prior to the attack. The latest British bombers were all educated professionals. You cannot educate a religious zealot. Muslims have a clear choice. They can continue to tacitly allow the radicals in their number to hold them hostage and risk death when free men retaliate against terrorist aggression, or they can renounce war on people of other faiths and hope to survive.

...said the certified and self-confessed troll. Goodnight.