watching&waiting

There just is not any quick fixes when it comes to drug use (pardon the pun), but the one thing you can count on is the more sanitised you make the use the more users that will be drawn to it. I did drugs when I was a teenager and yes we ran and hid way out in the woods to smoke our pot or do our LSD etc. No on wanted to be caught and no one wanted the stigma of being a druggie. The times have changed and the stigma arguement just does not exist today. Kids openly barge about their drug use and hold those who are stoned out space cadets, are looked at as being cool. This has now made drug use many times what it was. The proof that the more you easy its use the more its use will increase. If you see people doing drugs in your back yard or property, turn a hose on them, or get a large dog and set him on them. Call the police and report it. Get it on film or pictuures if you can. That way the police have evidence to prove what and where they were. People need to take their own property rights back and help clean up their neighbourhoods. Start a watch group and patrol tha parks after dark and the empty school grounds and report any and all suspicious activity. This whole safe injection site stuff comes only when the people have given up and surrender their neighbourhoods to the addicts. I must admit that I will never given in to addicts but then again I am not living in the middle of a city. I get ashamed many times when I read about things going on in the city and people just watched and did nothing. To me they are as bad as the offenders. Society has certain standards, and we need to up hold those standards not lower them to suit the addicts. With winter soon coming it will be once again where the addicts start using building stair wells and garages to shoot their drugs and sleep off some affects. Building managers need to inspect their properties after 11pm and make sure that they put out anyone they find. Safe injection sites are nothing more then a waste of time and money. There is no way that I would support any of them anywhere, even if far away from me and my family. Police need to spend more time going after the dealers and street level distributors. I sickens me when I can go to certain areas of the city of Ottawa and see dealing going on right out in the open. It makes me wonder just how hard it would be for police to put a stop to this, if not permanently then temporarily.

I find that Harper has done quite well so far and he is going in the right direction with regards to improving the Military, and spending on new equipment and also increasing the size of the overall forces. I still believe that Canada will again learn to be proud of our forces and their abilities. Something that under Liberal rule was always left to detoirate to a small shell of what it once was. For that I give him an A+ His appearance of being more inline with Bush is not going to win favour in Quebec, but I think the rest of Canada will see that this is not giving into Bush but just showing that both Harper and Bush share some common ground on security and other things. Harper has said that when it comes to Canadian soveirgnty he will alway be Canada first. for this part I will give him a B-. For being able to rule within his minority government and still get some controversial issues passed I give him an A. From seeing him once again making the government something that is honest and willing to be more in step with the people I will say he is miles ahead of all the rest of them in this. This coming fall house, will show more of the metal he is made of. If he goes on as he has already then I will again give him top marks. So for me, I think that yes Harper has been a very good honest leader and I see no problem with the policies I have seen so far. Many will critisize him for things, but seldom is there any viable alternative shown with the said arguments.

Army guy, you have all my support and that of my family. Do not let the newspapers make you think anything else, as they are only trying to sell papers. The truth is things here at home are pretty quiet and there is not alot of political news, as we do not have a corrupt deal per week being let out to the press. So they then go searching for sensationalism from the ranks where it always has been, The Libs and NDP. They use all this as a wedge to see how many cases of foot in mouth they can find. As you should know that is not the Canada we want to have, and it really is not represemntative of the majority of people. Just do the job you started doing and rest assured that we here back at home support the troops 100%.

The problem with safe sites to inject drugs, is that this has nothing to do with the real problem of addition to the drugs in the first place. Those who would use the site for its intended purpose would also soon abuse thwe site in every way they could. I still find it hard to believe that an addict will wait and walk to the site before they inject their purchase of drugs. From my own experience I know that many of the addicts iject right where they buy the drugs, they will use their own syringe etc if they have it, or borrow one from the seller if they do not have one. That should tell volumes about just how little use these sites would be. In my youth I did try just about every kind of drug their were, and I guess I am lucky to be of the type that I did not find these drugs all so compelling, that I carried on using. But my older brother became a speed freak and he and his girlfriend did put myself and our family through hell. I was lucky enough to be able to force my brother out of this, and to this day I still find I can not trust him as before, and he has been clean now for 20 years. It still carries scars though on many memories in the past. Disposible needles and such are not hard to come by, and many programs will now give a new disposible syringe for everyone you bring in that is used. That would be more to my liking but the fact remains that heroine users and others do have a period where they are in a complete stupor after injecting, that they are in danger of anything while in this. Many rapes and things have happened. Not to menetion the OD that happen. It may well be this that the safe sites are trying to address, but I still do not see value in it by making things easier on the addicts.

As I said earlier, it would be something that should be investigated only after an official complaint was made. I am not saying this out of sympathy, but rather out of my own thinking that this does sound like something that could have happened. We all know thta the treatment in many of the church run orphanages were not exactly good and christian behaviour. I do not believethat anyone today would willingly trust preists unsupervised acess to young children, relying on faith alone to protect them. Many things have been brought to light about these times and yes they are not things that we would be proud of. But the shame for these things remains with the churches and that is where the guilt would be as well. If we did nothing to investigate after complaints were made, then and only then would we be guilty in any of this. As I said earlier, this sounds to me to be quite possible, from the story teller and to that end I would say that if she was really that bothered about all of this, then why is she not bothered anought to file a complaint about it, and then let society investigate it accordingly.

For me it is the question of whether the safe sites and new syringe programs, need to show that the cost of this, save the system money, either by ensuring better health, or being able to reach out and get those who want off drugs, a place to go and ask for it. It also would probably fit in with the call home program for runaway child, but it also would be giving some legitimacy to do drugs as well. So it is a double edged sword. I just do not think that a drug addicted prostitute would bother going to a site to hit up, when if you look around the red light areas of cities you can see then hitting up in laneways and alleys, and then walk out to the sidewalk to find their next trick. I just do not see where there would be any advantage in having these sites, and can actually think of more reasons why not to have them, then for them.

It was totally foreseeable that a number of the conference attendee's would show a desire to stay here in Canada. Many of these refugees are HIV+ and the countries where they are from do not have the drugs and for many where the drugs sre available, many can not afford them. So having them come to Canada for a conference, and then see that here we do not have the stigma associated with aids that many other countries have, they would be crazy not to want to stay here. The problem though is the costs to Canadians will be very high and lets face it, those with HIV+ are not going to be long term contributors to our system. The 140 people now wanting to remain in Canada will put approx $14,000,000.00 burden on the people who pay taxes. This is like forcing us to donate this money to the cause, and that while morally compelling, it is not something we should have to burden ourselves with. I believe that Canada would do itself a big favour in denying them refugee status, as the aids conference was not and should not be a medical payday for those who believe it is they right to stay here. Once we start letting this happen there will be millions more just waiting to do the same.

I am not religious and I do not worry about burning in hell or in paradise in heaven. But I do see that by past verified actions of the Churches and their priests, that not only could this have happened, I would have to give more weight to the possibility then to the dismissal of the events. To me this would be a good case to investigate, and see just when and where such things were done. While the priesthood today is more inclined to see sexual abuse of young boys, it was not always just that way. We do know that priests and children have been proven in more then a few occassions, so logic only says it would be worth the investigation. The Catholic Churchs here in North America have already braced themselves against the on slaught of abuse cases, that are now coming forward. The churches now see that they can no longer just move priests with these tendencies around and hide thier deeds. This is what has caused much of the stories now coming forward. The time of looking up to the priest as a blessed person, is not going to wash away the stains of the past, nor should it. But only when the churches themselves start taking control over this aspect, and openly show they are trying to live up to the better example type of priest, then and only then will they deserve consideration they seek.

Gerry is just frustrated like his Liberal buddies, because Harper actually runs the government where there is not a shocking revealation about corrupt practices and backroom deals, once a week likr the liberals were used to. Plain clean, well run government, is just something a lib will never even be able to dream about. They are all about full corrupted power where ther are no rewards in honest dealing government, so they do not believe that is the way it should be done. It is just so much sour grapes that posts like this show the real people that no matter what the liberals can never be trusted again for at least a generation or so, as it will take that long to rid the party of the likes that caused their fall in the first place. Yes they would like to have the news turned to Harper for some reason, and my own prediction is because they want to take the news away from being able to report and see some of the backroom dealing the liberals want to make for their leadership convention. If the press stays hungry for news it means they will have to be more careful about what they do. To me this makes more sense then any rambling here about why Harper is not giving news spots every day.

I have stayed out of this thread so far because just its title makes me want to shout"so what is the big deal ". Free speech was not invented by the Iroquios, it is just a description of the way things may have been done. But just like here, what you say can and will be used against you by others, and I imagine it was even by the Iroquios. What I find though is that there are just as many dumb and halfwitted Native people as we have in our non native communities. There are just so many things that people do not understand in the native land claims that both sides are in the wrong much of the time. It is when you get some of the real idiots from either side yapping about things they have been told, that have really no basis in life or law, then you breed the making of racists. Racism will only favour the non native population, idf and when push comes to shove. So I find it really strange that the more robust posters here have been all about racism then anything else. I am what would be considered a mutt, when it comes to heritage. I am part german, french, irish, native Iroquois, and Austrian. My family tree has so many branches that I could not find one time the family memebers married into their own nationalities. I am proud not to be pure blood, and I do not think I should be looked down upon by anyone, no matter what their birth. I now call myself a Canadian and I am a contributing member of this country, and I hold no special will to any pasts and traditions. I am proud to be me. It just seems like everyone here has forgot that pure blood pretty much does not exist in the country anymore. Even in the reserves and the like it is no different outside of them. The courts will soon put an end to all the land claim stuff and it will not make anyone happy, as there will be no payooffs and it will not be protested by violence or occupation. What is going on here is the fact that when the government is pushed to settle this, it will simply enact it by law and take away all the claims by law and that will be that. The native population will not be happy but considering that they are just a very small minority, and the rest is a vastly voting majority, just how do you see the going, and if new laws are needed to whom do you expect them to favour? I for one believe this has gone on far too long and the end should be sooner rather then later.

I am more then a little surprised at all the hyperbloa over the CBC misquoting a statement made by the PM. It is not that this is the first time this has ever happened and I am sure it will not be the last. I do not put much faith in what TV news says and I prefer to read the papers and then online sites before I make any conclusions. The CBC is really a terrible station and it is very politically bias in its reports, but it also could not exist on its own programming revenues as they are just incompetent about all they do. We all pretty much view it as a government sponsered channel that pushes canadian content, and not much good even at that. Yes it is a drain on the taxpayers and if it were any other channel it would have been gone long ago. But are we ready for relying on the other channels to supply us with the things that while not be commercially viable they are domestically relavent. Oddly enough we here in Canada are seeing more and more Canadian productions getting fair and even playing even in the USA. So we are closing that gap, but does that mean then that the CBC is totally without merit? I am not sure and while I am still inconclusive about it, I guess the status quo is where I will say it should be. While I can say I lean more and more each day to the close it down, firness says give it a bit longer. I guess I am hoping that they just die a natural death so no one will be to blame but the channel itself.

I like to think that I am pretty much a middle thinker when it comes to religions etc.. But I find myself being pulled to a more right of center when these things encroach on our way of like in Canada, on a daily basis. We welcome new Canadians but do we do enought to explain that here we have laws that supercede all religious laws, when there are disputes. We find prearranged marrige distasteful and against the law if either the bride or groom do not want to go threw with it. We do not allow the beating of your wife and family, and will not allow you to plead religious grounds. I think we also need to eplain to these people that there is a need to learn one of our official languages within a year of being here. We also should say how intolerent we are of those who preach violence and hate under any disguise. As far as funding religions go, we should let them be as long as their religions are insync with our laws of the land. We should not allow funding to any organisation that then preaches to the masses how we are eveil and are not deserving. This is our country and we need to make sure that those we let in are aware of the values we seek and if they can not fit into that, then maybe they should seek another place to go. Yes we need immigration, but we do not need it to the point of allowing people who hate our way of life to come here and not try to fit in. This is Canada and we openly show what we stand for. If you can not see yourself as part of that, then we are not the place for you to call home.

I would be all for decriminalizing pot for small quanities and also for growers who are growing 5 or less plants. I do want to see the government legalize it for medicinal use, and then for those caught with large gro ops or other concerns, that they be fined heavily for first offences and jail time there after. This would kill the black market for the organized crime and will still address the small user to small penalties with out criminal records. But I guess the trouble is that organized crime will just move on to other chemical drugs to make the money.

These idiots just can not be seriuos about this. They must have been absent during this last war where it was the Hezbolla that was calling all the shots during it and also were the ones to repeatedly do the action that lead to the war to start with. They do not observe any human rights or freedoms, and they are openly calling for the genocide of the Israelli people. That pretty much makes them a terrorist group and to me that means they should be on that list for all time. The Liberal and NDP must really be in trouble when they try to push this crap as a wedge, as not Canadian who reds the papers or listens to the news will ever be able to get the picture of the Hezbolla being a terrorist group out of their mines. The films of these guys fighting while wearing civillian clothing so they can hide in the groups of civillians, and attack at will, is what makes them terrorists. Otherwise they would form their own army and wear their own uniforms, just like every other army. Just this alone makes it easy to declare them terrorists. But I guess just like the corrupt liberals who think they can hide in the populatiuon and steal money from it, or the NDP who knows they will never form a government, so they promise everything they can, just to get votes, to them this is a normal way of life, so they can not see it as being the mark of terrorists.

The aids conference is nothing more then a money making event where many people who want to be known for donating can do so at these events and then they can get the warm and fuzzy feelings the seek. There are many times this number who have donated the vast majority of the money trying to do so without the fan fare and recognition for doing so. The event is n0othing more then another charity looking to get funding by trying to sir in us emotions that we may not normally have. I see no need for any celebrity to feel so compelled that they go to this, out of an obligation type feeling. If the event organizers feel that they have some how had their invitations snubbed by some, that is not a news worthy item, and they only do them selves harm by taking issue with this. I am quite familiar with aids and its mechanisms only because I was studying biochemistry in college when it was first found to be a growing issue here in North America. I learned many things and yes I do know how it can be caught and the ways and methods to be safe around this. But I would not want to be working in a hospice as a person donating my time for free. I am not comfortable around those who have aids, no matter how many precautions have been made. Yet I do not feel that level of uncertainty around people who are just HIV+. Yes I do know that in Africa there are who populations that are HIV+ and they are going to die of aids because they can not get or afford treatment. But the same can be said for those who have ruptured appendixes and can not make it to a surgery etc. That stuff just does happen, even though it would not happen here in our cities etc. I find the whole aids conferences to be a huge publicity event aimed at getting maximum dollar and publicity for their cause. I can accept that, but to blame people for not coming, that just shows a level of entitlement that is equal only to the liberals that have been turfed. The PM sent the Health minister in his place, which was way more fitting and the GG in other aspects which again should have quenched the conferences thirst for celebrity. It seems though that the Liberal youth group is determined to make this a political issue, even though there should be none. That tells me that it will be at least 2 generations before the liberla will be able to clease the stink of wanton thievery and entiltlement from their midsts. It already has infected the youth wing so it will need to wited for a new geration of children before they can remove the stink of the sponsorship and the rot within the bowels of their party. It is too bad that they have decided to make this a political issue which then will ruin the true nature of what the aids conference should have been. Even thought the conference is more a money raising issue, it would do better if the politics were left out of it.

I would be all for settling the land claims as long as the government takes into consideration all the money they have given to the Native groups already. Of course once this is settled they will have to live and pay their way just like everyone else does. The free ride should end and they should be equal to all other citizens, tax wise and other ways as well. I am sick and tired of this same debate going on and it never really goes any where. Either settle it willingly or call in the army and settle it forcefully. Just do one or the other quickly before tempers go worse then where mine is going on this.

This does not mean 10 year olds are going to be in jail in large numbers or even that they will be at all. It does give the courts an earlier time in which to intervene on behalf of the child, especially if the parents are not teaching them properly or can not get control of them to instill proper rules of law. By the time they are 12 they will be less likely to respond to guidance. As for saying then let 10 be the age of consent goes, that is the outlook of the pedophiles, not thinking people. Most children know the difference between right and wrong by age 10, and for those that do not, there is not much time left before ouberty when as we all know thta they kn ow everything on their own. So to me the lowering of the age of responsiblity is not an issue of being able to jail a child, but it is an age where the government gets to come in and guide the child if they believe the parents uncapable or unwilling to do the right thing.

I just was pointing out that the data was from 1993 and it didn't say that homosexuals were the root cause. Otherwise, I can't find anything that suggests that the root cause of HIV is homosexuality. Actually the first strain of the disease were of a hybrid human/and animal cross. Now I know that many are choping at the bit on that, but as I recall it was noted and then quickly kept quiet. The disease did spread rapidly thru the gay community and then to the public at large. So saying it was a gay disease is only trying to track its transmission to where it has come to today

Replay of dumb and dumber as I see it.

Aids is a deadly disease that spreads quite readily thru a promiscuious population, or that was the aids of yesterday. By now most know of the dangers and the costs that this disease will cause and still many do nothing to defend themselves against getting the disease. I see nothing about aids that should make it a political animal, and unless PM Harper is a disease specialist, then I can see nothing that his presence there would have other then celebrity status, and with all the celebrities that are donating to this disease there is no pressing need for Harper to be there. Back in the beginning when people got HIV thru blood transfussions and other innocent ways, I would say that it was up to the government to try and resolve the system to stop this disease from spreading. Yes I sympathize with those who caught it through their own stupidity, but I also do the same for moths to the flame. It is a shame that the event organisers take this as a snub on their otherwise successful event, but I can not and will not support any thoughts that Harpers presence was a mandatory thing or even a good thing for politics. In fact I think he has the right idea and that is let those who know how to work the limelight work it and those who are awkward in such things stay out of the events. He knows his strengths and that I give credit for. As for the rest, it is just rabble rousing, trying to make more of something that was not there in the first place.

Most people who watch and analyse politics know there are not that many differences between the parties. But the ones there are seem to be fundamental differences, and that is why I just can not see Rae as ever becoming the leader of the Liberals. I figured he only threw in his name for it, so he could garner some small support that he would then use to make deals with others how may well stand a better chance. Or in other words, because in the end it will benefit him financially later. I would say this of most of the candidates, as there just does not seem to be anyone running that clearly has a lead in this so far. It is the political equivalent of the game hot potatoe. Maybe as things draw closer to the convention, maybe we will see some one stepping forward that would be capable of turning the party around in the next decade or so, but I just can not think of anyone who would fit the bill for that job. Rae will probably stay as a party fund raiser, and backroom things, but he will never garner trust on the scale needed to pull this off. I would agree that if Rae ever was the leader, we would see vast CPC majority governments for quite a while

It is just the kind of thing that makes people go HMMM

Canada is known for doing some hard thinking before supporting countries engaged in wars. We have done so in this case and yes that means we have taken sides. But if you look at the past elections in Lebanon you will see that the People voted in a terrorist party to govern the country. Now, not only did Canada thing long and hard about this, but we did take a stand on it and yes, I believe we took the right stand in opposing any support for the government. After that the Lebanese government tried to re-invent itself into more palettable versions, but it still was a spade is a spade. So why is it that when war starts between Israel and Lebanon that we find ourselves taking the side of the Israelli government? Just how was it not seen coming that the terrorist government of Lebanon who has a view that Isael should be removed from the map, gets into power and of course in short order we find them at war with Israel. Does anyone really think that this came as a surprise? Just as Canada does not support terrorists or governments that are aligned with terrorists, how is it that some people think we should become neutral in our position. I am glad that Harper took this stand, as it is the only stand that allows Canadians the chance to show they are against terrorists not matter where and no matter how they are supported. The protests here in Canada where Hezbola flags were flying and having Liberal MP marching under thise flags, makes me want to be sure that liberals never again get back to power as they see only opportunity to cause trouble and disrupt a goevrnment not of their own making and will even march under a terroist flag to try and achieve their goals. That type of Canadian is not my kind and while they have the right to do what they wish in this country, it does show just how corrupt the liberal still are. As far as the Lebanese people protesting. I ask why did you leave your country to come to Canada. Are you so willing to support a government that is of a terroist party, and if so, what can we do to make sure we close the hole that this kind of refugee can slip through, as this is not and will never be what Canada is all about. So yes Canada supports Israel in the fight against a terrorist neighbour who has been lobbing rockets across the border and kidnapping Isaelli soldiers, while Israel tries to turn the other cheek. They let the world try to curb the Lebanese government, and when that failed they have attacked with what I call measured attacks. It is now growing to encompass more and more, but can you blame Israel for wanting to drive back the terrorist rockets so they can not reach the Iraelli towns and villages. While the world hears about civillian casualties in Lebanon, we do not seem to under stand that while the Israelli's have tried to limit civillians, the Hezbola rockets are just loobed into cities and hit what ever they hit killing civillians. These rockets are not even tried to hit military targets just to hit populated areas to cause as much damage as possible. So to all you things Canadians, what side would you support in this?

This thread has shown me that there are some reasonable people within the native communities that have the ability to speak in an informed way about issues, of past present and future times. It may well come to pass that Canada will finally settle all claims or it may just limit these claims to a time frame that excludes them from every getting resolved. I also has seen that there are thise who have absolutely no wish to speak intelligently and are only looking for arguments. Every group has these types and Canada side in this is no different. I agree with the judge in this case that the protesters must be removed, and while the AG of Ontario may have said that the judge has over stepped his authotity for stopping discussions while the land is seized. It can also come to past that this judge can order the protests illegal and order they be taken into custody just on the fact, that they are breaking the law. He does have that authority and he may well use it very soon. So what would be wise is for the protesters to leave of their own accord, before the courts take them out and jail them for many years, under our present laws. You can not say that you could not see this coming and it would be pretty stupid to sit and wait for it to happen. On the side of the Native groups, I would say that the claims to land that you use for your way of life, should be mapped out and surveyed at your own cost and them a proper land claim files addressing the con cerns that both side would have. If this is not done,then you will be forever having this same problem. Also try your best to keep your more radical people from getting involved just as the same can be said for the government side as well. I do not ever believe that there will be a settlement for money in this, but there may be a setttlement in land for land. Since this government basically pays for your way of life and you take this each and every month and year, then you must see that if you open this too far, you will also open the support issue along with it. Todays people would be far less willing to allow natives that support then they were long ago. Just remember to open one means you are going to open it all. If that is what you wish then let it happen soon and get this over with.

I usually find that I am quick to lose my temper when I am faced with stupidness or just plain brickwalls that do not want to listen to the arguements. I have little time to live 150 years in the past and I do like to think that people in the here and now have a pretty good jude of fair play and the law. So when I see an occupying force in Caledonia, and one where the Judge has now said it must be removed, I find little sympathy for what will probably happen next. I can only hope that the police forces that go to remove these people from the land, will not have to shoot anyone. Also all that have to be forcefully removed should be jailed for the maximum time the law allows. This is Canada and you will obey our lays or you go to jail. If you do not want to obey our laws then stay on the reservation and never set foot off of it. Support yourselves and wake up the medicine man, because he is going to be needed more then ever. The native land claim will only get solved in the courts and if the natives can not live with that, then maybe they should take a long look at who it is that allows them to live the way they are. I have many friends that are indian and yes they know just how to play that fact to get the most out of it. The smart ones are not the drunks and protesting ones, as htere is no money in that. The ones you see doing this are mostly the lower end of the tribe, who have many issues with alcohol and abuse. That is why you seldon get a sensible answer from protesters. Now that a court of law has ordered the removal of the protesters, it seems that a show down will ensure. It will probably turn violent and if the police must use force I hope it is of the type of shooting in non life threatening body areas. It will be the protesters who will set the tone, by the amount of resistence they put up. As far as whether the federal government will step in and stop this goes... I do not think it will happen. If this goes one much longer I will say that my view is more and more going to go against the native land claims then for it. Maybe they need to see just how much harm this is doing their cause.