watching&waiting

If we were to look at this as something more close to home and near to our own way of life. For example: What if the FLQ from in Quebec were to become an active terroist group who lobbed rockets across the Quebec border into Ontario, and were not actively being stopped by the quebec government, and after a while Onario decided enough was enough and started going after sites along the border that were being used as launch sites. Would you be more inclined to side with the people of Quebec or the people of Ontario? This is much the same as the situation is for us here in Canada when we look at the problems over in Lebanon. I do not thinki it is a hard decision to side with Israel in this as they have themselves turned the other cheek many many times. The very unstable nature of the Lebanon govenments are more then a small factor in all the troubles they have there. What is needed is a term of stable overseeing for that country, to rebuild and get back to a stable life without the constant banter of death to Israel of the terroists.

The ifastructure that have been destroyed are most of the kind to do with transportation. It is rebuildable in relatively short times but also there are many temporary bridges that can be setup quite quickly one hostilities cease. It looks like the Israelli army will be staying around for a while and I am sure they will make sure that there are road ways from Israel to where they now are that are open to all and the necessary food and commodities will get through to thise areas. The infastructure ahead of these troop positions will also be temporariy setup up and I am sure that goods will flow once agin through there. Most of the Bridges I saw were over dry river beds and I am sure that they will easily get past most of these with a few days of bulldozing etc. I giess it all comes down to where the line is drawn for where the Israelli troop are dug it to.

The idea of society in its self is where a group oof people are lead by a leader to form a place where the agreed upon rules and ways of life are set forth by the leaders. As these leaders change so will the directions of that society. I would wonder at earlier times when some societies were small and unable to defend themselves from the will and ways of larger societies, and then these were assimilated in to larger group. It does not mean it was the better group only the more pwerful one. If all of Europe were to suddenly have the same thought s and societal views, it would be possible to amalgamate them all into on country and one system. They are growing toward that, but have a long way to go. One day there may be a person who would be seen by all to be a natural leader to all of them and maybe then. But to answer your staement about peop,le running around leader less, yes that did happen I am sure but very long ago. The very nature of society has always been based upon leadership of one or even by concil of a few. There are no one man societies that I can think of.

You do not understand this very well, so let me explain it for you. DTV has no rights to their signal here and by law it is abandoned by them as they would need a braodcasting license to send it here. There is not theft for picking something out of the skies that has no legal right to be there. DTV if it wished could footprint their signal so as not to encroat on Canadian lands, butthat is expensive but do able. They choose not to. Also they chose to use a encryption system that was to say the least cheesy and easily broken. They could have gone to the higher encryption cards and not have had this problem. So while I can see your position about the law is the law and payback etc. You need to also understand that if it was not for the money and loobbying of the Bell and cable companies the law under which they charge people would not have that interpetation. You must remeber up until April 2002 18 judges had ruled all this was perfectly legal, and even with the April 2002 ruling it said their could well be an issue of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Since then everyone who has tried to go that route has found costs run up by Bell and Cable have caused all cases to settle before they could be ruled. That means that you need to beat the big guys at this. There used to be a ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada that anything that arrived on your property without your permission or consent, was yours to do with as you wished, and that included TV and Radio signals. Since these are bombarding us every day, do you think that if we should they are a health hazzrd that the companies will step forward and pay our health bills? They will simple say that it is not their signals as they only broadcast to the USA. So to make a long story even longer, while I can and will respect you view that you believe it is theft, I again will point out this is much like the baker trying to charge for the smell of his products. Even though they give pleasure and a feeling of wellness to all who breath them in. Also if DTV wanted to come after me they have that right, but as I said I will declare personal bankruptcy within the next couple months and what the hell, I may well name them, just to put that to rest also. In the 25 years I was in satellite I would say that less then 30 % of my income was from the so called piracy. I also paid taxes on each and every dollar I made whether it was from piracy or from other sources. That I guess is why I am here in this as I was running a legal business until Bell and Cable dedided they wanted the whole ball game. I am not ashamed for what I did and as I said I had many a well known person as customers. The ruling as of april 27 2002 was very suspicious and yes over turned 18 other judges, but I repeat it left open the door of a harter issue as said by the Supreme Court Justices, but Bell and Cable will never allow anyone to take that road to its natural fruition.

Just to clarify some things here. I have been involved with satellite dishes since early 1980's and have over the years had One Prime Minister, Speaker of the house, one Supreme Court justice, and many police officers as customers. It was only when Bell and the Cable companies decidecd they wanted an monopoly that there were any efforts to make a different interpetation of the law. Even now that Law even after ruled on said there could be an issue with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Because to present interpetation say that it is more likely then not that the drafters ment it to be all encompassing, and because it is civil you find people taking plead bargains. They can never win a criminal case on it as the wording would have to stand and then there would be once again free and open skies. But much to my chagrin I found out that a Charter Challenge such as this would ost $250,000 for all levels of courts. So now you know why the area is still grey. The RCMP will nevefr allow it to go Criminal and Civil plea is the cheapest way out. Nowon to your other thing about the taxes. The RCMP had proof of exactly what I made and I paid tax on all of it. So they just decided that my books must be wromng and I made $2,000,000.00 more then said.After five years if complete idiots at Rev Can we were talking less then $200,000.00 and even that was off by atleast $180,000.00. So we were going to go to court or so I thought as we had a winning case, but lawyers wanted anoter $40,000.00 more then the $46,000.00 I already paid them. That is why I dropped it and decided to go bankruptcy. It has nothing to do with proceeds of a crime as this is a summary conviction, and not criminal. Even though it is against the law for the RCMP to give evidence to Rev Can, especially evidence that is still before the courts, they did. Their answer to this so what, you got the money to sue us for it? Maybe now you will start to see when RCMP officer are killed in the line of duty, I quietly smile. I know I should not but as far as I am concerned there are paid to be there in the front lines and so it should not be a big things when that costs some lives. As I said I have been sought concselling to help me with that and also the feeling that Rev Can is going too far. I will await Tommorrow where I will call the person from this net worth audit, and explain quite quickly that he has taken numbers out of context and if he uses the right ones all adds up to be within One hundred dollars in my favour. But I know this game and there will be one year of arguing at this level, then one year arguing at the next level, then a third year arguing at a third level, and then 3-4 years to get to court. The arguments will be over what it costs the wife and I to live. We have no mortgage and can show that all bills with utilities, food, gas etc Comes to $17,000 per year. We have copies of bank records for all the years. They said in the net worth that it comes to $48,000 per year. The funny thing is both my wife and I do not drink or smoke and he has $2400.00 for alchol and tobacco. This is the stupidness of it all, and it was all done because we built a building on our farm that cost $138,000.00, and we paid for it as we went along the 5 years where there is a $31,000.00 difference makes $155,000.00. As I said I have been here before, if you think this would be straight it is not. Rev Can does not do math as 1+1=2, They say if you had one you must have hidden 4 and that next one must have hidden 16 as you got better at it so their way is 1+ 1 =20 and it is up to you to show how we are wrong, but do not do math to do so. Also to address the money and DTV etc, you say that the money should go to them, but they do not have the right to sell here in Canada, therefore they has suffered zero loss. They also did take many Canadian customers subscription thru credit cards knowing full well they should not and they never gave back any GST and PST, so they are actually the crooks here. As far as an audit being painless with books goes, that is crap. I should have listened to people before about audits and just ingore everything and let them come up with the fiction. I am off on a disability pension for stress and depression. I believe it comes from my forcing myself from just grabbing the auditor and .... That is why they always have two in the room at all times. So that all being said I will get my meds adjusted by my doctor and once again go and try to teach math to Rev Can. Oh yes I want to thank you all for allowing this thread, as it does help to relieve some of the tension just typing it but it get hard on the keyboard.

I said it before and I will again the indian nations were pretty much a conquered people, and yes that can happen also with treaties etc. You have never owned the land in Canada and there fore have no rights to it after the nation of Canada was declared. You have ever right that other Canadians do plus many that others do not. That is the extent of the whole issue of land claims in my eyes. If the Native people wnat to try and stop things being built they have the courts, but when they take it on themselves, then it should be the jail system. If ever a weapon is fired then it should be upon them to bring that offender forward, or suffer punishment as a group. I will fight tom the death nto make sure you have all the same rights as the rest, but also will fight to the death to make sure it stays equal in the eyes of the law. If you do not like that then go else where becuase Canada will not be divided along these lines ever. It has been over 15r0 years and the gravy train is about out of extras and goodies. Either remain on your reserves and maintain your old ways, or become modern and update your traditions, but do that at your own expense. So yes you can say I support the natives right to the choice of life, but not at the expense of the rest of Canada. If it takes force to enforce this then that is what will need to happen. It would be sad for it to go that way, but it looks like that is the way it must be.

I guess the first thing we need to do is go back to lok at the time all this was happening. All of North America was up for Conquest by the European countries. The native indians along the way did make treaties and allinaces, that still have some effect today, but the insistance that all the land belonged to the native people is wrong. The natives were small in numbers and occupied very little land in North America. Many of these native people were a conquered race and made treaties and deals to be able to live their own lifestyle within certan areas givenb to them under treaty. I find it hard to believe that the lands given were of the lush forests or good agricultural land, as that was not the habit of the times. Also this land was given for use not for ownership. The land with all its borders was Crown land and was given meither in lieu of settleing homsteads, or purchased from the crown some where along the time. Modern society has given into Indain land claims far too often and that has lead to us changing the very ways we do things today. Modern land deals do not transfer the oil and mineral rights to the proerty you believe you own today, as of acouple decades ago they seen that this was the way to make sure then that the Crown or Gov still had all rights to anything even if it was under your home. We have been very rough shod in the treatment of our own people, and far too lienient towards the native people. Today we need to redo the native claims by saying the land must be occupied regularly either as habitat or hunted and fished upon. Any other usages would be forfiet back to the crown. This will stop the crazy claims where natives say it all belongs to them. It never did belong to them and only under our system were there any property ownership available. Back in the old days indians hunted and fisdhed their own territories and the only way things were ever set was if the fought another tribe and took that land. Well under the rules of that same time the Europeans came and fought and took the land away from the indian. Just like the British took Quebec from the french. It was called spoils of war. All the land winthin the domaine of Canada at the time of its becoming a nation was then goverment owned lands any land that was not deeded but surveyed to be within Canadas borders. We as a society have given Indians very special status and granted them hunting and fishing rights in many areas that other Canadians can not go. We support any native who lives on a reservation and even many who are not living within the reserves. I would gladly support a bill that would set out direstly that any land that native people have built communities on or have had worked the land is the land mass they can call their own. The areas that were granted for hunting and fishing, should not be developed by the people of Canada unless for a transportation route. If that land is to be developed it must be replaced with equal land from another area with the same access to it. I would not let protesters get out of hand with demonstrations and as soon as a group attacked a car or person, they should be arrested and processed in the courts. The laws of Canada stand no matter if you are native or not. If force needs to be used it should be with in the confines of only the amount necessary to achieve the task. No one is above the law and no one should be ableto get away with this.

That sounds like blind reflexive prejudice to me. How much condemnation do they have to do to avoid your punishment? Their religion does stay with the laws of Canada and you are punishing them for the actions of other people. Therefore, yes, that makes you anti-muslim. I am curious to know: what are your thoughts on atheists? I am not blinded by my positions held because of a group who always seems to be whining over little things and making them much more then they are. That is the reason for my opposition. I follow the rules of my past experience, and use that for how I deal with future incidents. That is not racist, that is just following lifes lessons. As for how much condemnation would be enough? I would say at least some public showing of rejection for these acts would be the easiest measure. Also not preaching that Jahids are for the good of the religion but that, tolerence should be given as much as it is expected. That does not make me anti-muslim but it does make me tolerent of their religion as long as it stays within the laws of our country, and when it steps outside those laws I say we must be reactive to it within our laws. That is what good citizens do. Atheists are simple non believers in god. To me that means they still obey the laws we have set for our country and they are welcome to their beliefs. Now if their beliefs were to break our laws then we would have an issue, but since not then we will not. I do not try to impose my beliefs on anyone and I do not believe I am better then anyone. Can the worlds religions say the same? If you look at all the wars being fought at this moment, is there one that is not based in religious differences? It is time to say religion needs to be seen for its peaceful side not its uglier side of being better then the next guy.

I am glad this has again been brought to topic. I see for the most part a trigger happy group of people who are all too willing to use the racist card when ever things are not going well for their side. I believe that there are several organizations that are all too willing to bring these small things forwar to make them much more then they are. The Benaibrith (sorry for spelling ) is one jewish organization that I as a Canadian would like to see gone, as they are as much a instigator in many things and I do believe that they do nothing but cause trouble with their whining all the time about small things and the tniest act against them and make it into a cause of huge proportions. I am sure they probably have a better purpose some where in their position, but I as a Canadian do not see it and No I do not want a long winded explanation of how it comes tpo being. Save that for those who care or follow your religion. I just see from these places, their very narrow views and constant whining about little things. Does this make me an anti-semite? No, it makes me normal and the constant whining from one source all the time makes me want to remove that source, but since the laws say it is ok, then it has the right to stay. Even though I strongly get my hackles up as soon as this group says anything. I find that yes I will purposely take opposing position just because of the way I feel. Since I do not feel this way towards jews as a race, I would say that makes me less tolerant of the BS this group has to say on anything. The other side of things I see are the Muslim Imans, who almost never condemn any act of terrorism and for the most part preach in a way to almost guide a young man who is not certain of his way yet in life to seek out this darker side and see what it is about. That is dangerous and I believe it supports the terrorist cause. If I had my way every Iman who does not condemn the acts and recruitment of terrorist or religious wars, should be removed from Canada, because this not only goes against our laws, but it is allowing recruitment from right here in our country. Now does this make me anti-muslim? Of course not, it means that I will openly accept muslims as long as their religion stays within the laws we have in Canada. If they can not then they need to go else where.

It took me some time but I got the population for Israel for 1995. It is funny that such a simple inquirey brings you so many other answers by seldom just a plain population number. I got this number here: http://www.worldinfozone.com/country.php?country=Israel The pop was approx 6.4 million. 80% jewish the rest arabic. This would mean that today in its rough form, there are 4 jews to every arab in the country of Israel. I do not though see where this is addressing the thread subject of whether Canada as a whole is anti-semetic? Which I personally do not think so. We may at some times be against Israel for its actions etc. but I do not believe that we are against the jews as a race. I can say though that many jewish people I have seen posting do have a thin skin, yet every jewish person I have met has had a thick skin about being jewish and in some cases they themselves have been more anti jew then I ever have been. So I guess it is just the same as you see in life, some will pick a stance and raise it high, but seldom is the levelk raise to, the true indicator of the feeling held by the majority.

I have been fighting with Revenue Canada for over 5 years and finally I figured I would just give up and declare personal bankruptcy, and then I get even more crap from them in the form of a Net Worth audit, that is just so stupid it is not funny. Now I will fight it again but this time I will have to do so without a lawyer, as I spennt $46,000.00 on the last one and it was going to cost me $40,000 more to keep going. I will admit to being one of the many satellite pirates that were around when DTV was a grey thing here in Canada. I also made a living off this but no where near what Rev Canada thinks. Hence the problem. I was raided by the RCMP and charged under the Radio Communications act. They seized everythin g I had that day with me including the wifes car. Any way to make a long story short I figured that this was a good thing as now since I could show the number of people I was taking care of times the amount per year I charged, and then they could see what I reported was true. Or so I thought, It just came down to not being able to afford lawyters any more so I took a lea on the charges and I have a $20,000.00 fine and 18 month probation. I figured since this was all against me only that I would just declare bankruptcy and end it there. But the RCMP I guess mad that they could not get a criminal charge then asked that Rev Can do an net worth audit. It is reall stupid and the errors are really crazy, but if they are anything like the last auditors they will just look like they do not understand and waste time. I really wanted to fight all this but as I said I can not afford the lawyers anymore and I am on a disability pension for stress and depression etc. The thing I do not understand is the stats say that Rev Can loses 98% of all cases going to court, then why are we allowing them to keep do this. I knwo that most people do just go bankrupt and end it, but that is like letting them get you even thought you know you are in the right. I must admit that declaring bankruptcy will not really harm me and may even help my depression and stress problems. The problem is though even though I paid my fair share of taxes and I have always made all payments on time, I will have to just say screw it and file. These guys do this on purpose and they have always made sure they snd you papers for stupid things on your birthday and the Christmas holidays. They say they do not but since they have every year for 5 years, I say BS to them. Any way now that I git that off my chest, my question for all of you here. What do you think about the powers that these guys have and the fact that you are guitly until proven innocent. My wife and I used to have a disposible income of $60,000.00 each year but now that has dropped because I am on my pension etc to approx $48,000 per year. The home was in my wifes name a decade before we were married and they can not touch either way. But when is it enough and where does it need to stop. I and told by the tax lawyers that most cases that go to court run the person $60,000 to $75,000 to do so. How many of you can afford to do that? I would like to know if anybody has found a way that would be cheaper, and if so what was it.

The fact that dad and mom split is just one small thing in the matter of this. The Children can never be divorced from either parent, and the law backs that up. So if one spouse or the other has a lifestyle greater then the other, they deserve to have that same lifestyle until they reach the age of majority. We all too often forget it is about the kids and has nothing really to do with what the parents think is fair. If mommy is a multi-millionaire and daddy digs ditches, then the kids deserve the lifestyle of the richer parent. If the kids live with dad, then there will be a large monthly check from mom. if it was the other way around it still would be the same ruling. So yes there is truly a limit in what dads and moms should be responcible to pay, but that limit shoulkd be to set the lowest value. The other end is wide open, as it should be.

Even in sleepy Canada there are not many people who would say that the Israeli and Lebanese people are ever going to be good friends and neighbours. I think we all recognize that there are too many long standing arguments going on in this was between the two, that no one is listening to the people of Lebanon or the people of Israel. The fight is going to rage until one or the other has the their opponent beaten very close to submission. Most here in Canada can see that it will most likely be the Israeli army who will be the victor, and then that makes a case for mnay to take sides with the under dog. The trouble is the under dog is a rabid pitbull, and probably needs to be put down anyway. I am more of the mind that we should just let Israel go about doing its business and finally put an end to this once and for all. To me I would believe that if Israel was to over take power in Lebanon, it would govern the lebanese people far more fairly then their past leaders. Also I think Lebanon would thrive under Israelli governance, and it would be a much safer place for people then it has been in a long while.

I really do not think that anyone really believes what polls say from day to day especially between elections. I do believe that Canada always had a role to play in Afghanistan and I am glad we are playing our role there. Yes there are many other countries that also play roles in that and that bshould make Canadians proud. Those who are always belly aching about it should go find some country that suits them better. They are the underside if Canada's belly that we polite Canadians try to hide. Much like the way we hide Liberals and are always apologizing for their behaviour in advance of anything. The Liberals will never see a win in this country for decades and that is just how it should be. Especially after being proven that they were theives and liars on the grandest scale ever known to Canadians. Hell even the Liberal party leaders hopefuls do not know how to approach things so they are having so many leaders from so many different ways in hope that one may be right. So far I see no leadership skill in any of those running. In 2007 they will still not be ready for an election because the country is doing quite well without them that people are not going to want to rock the boat. Even if an election was called they would not win and the PC would probably get the majority they seek. So yes 2007 will be a good year for the PC and the People of Canada.

I believe that if the two sides truly want peace then they should be willing to sit and talk about it reasonably. That to me would be the only way I would say for our troop to go into that situation. Yes I know that there will be terroist cells always trying to break that peace, but if both main parties agree to agressively go after these cells and curtail them, then maybe we can see a lasting peace that will stand the test of time. I see where the Hezbolla has engrained itself into the fabric of the Lebanese people, where they hide and claim foul at any attempt to oust them. It is that very thing that must be beaten into submission before any serious talk of peace can exist. It will actually take the people themselves to cast out these so called freedom fighters, as they are the ones causing the lack of freedom. To me it is time for the Lebanese people to show they really want all this to end. When that comes to past, then there will be lasting peace in their countries.

Canada should onlysupply troops for peace keeping in Lebanon and first and foremost they should ask themselves if there truly is a want for peace. There must be a certain urgency for peace from both sides not just a break in the war to rearm themselves. Their needs to be a willingness for both sides to be able to talk and listen equally on the issues that would form the peace. Then and only then should Canada agree to send troops. If these things are not in place then no we should stay clear of any involvement.

I find the whole idea of having to force child support upon husbands and wifes, just too crazy. I have no children of my own but I raised a nephew from age 10 to adulthood, as my own. I never even thought about the costs, but yes they were there and fully taken upon by my wife and I. The childs parents never once gave anything towards his needs. This has only made them behave the same as those who I think believe that they can some how just walk away from the responcibility of being a parent. I have a neighbour who has two kids and he and his wife just split up. He made over $100,000.00 per year with Ontario Hydro. He has now taken to never accepting overtime etc and so he only gets $88,000.00 dirct salary. He has done everything to make it so his wife gets nothing ( she was a home maker). I used to like the guy but I find that now he is of the mind of either you are for him or against him. I am against him trying to wiggle out of his child support and he does not see that, it is really the kids that suffer. He is just plain mad about it all. To me that is the reason the SC ruled the way they did. While this guy is hiding roughly $30,000.00 per year from the tax man and the courts, he will sooner or later get caught and then watch the fireworks. He is mad now that the lawyers have caught him causing damage to the house, to try to make the value less, and he has ignored judges orders to pay his child support and spousal support on time. It takes 6 months to setup wage asignments. I have had to step in and help out a bit financially. This guy just goes totally blind to anything that does not benefit himself and while he says how much he loves his kids, he lets his hate for his wife get in the way. That is why the SC has ruled as they did, because like this neighbour who was just as normal as you would ever think someone to be, just turns totally crazy when divorce happens.

I am all for castration after the third offence, but that only addresses the physical side of the problem. The state of mind of the pedophile is a much harer thing to address. If I had my way chemical castration after first offence and all during his realease on parole. If a second offence happens we would need to use chemical castration with some othe mind satblizing treatment. If third offence then physical castration and some kind of mind adversion therapy. I do not think that anyone should be released after the third time, with out full screening to say they have gotten beyond this. If they can not be sure then they should stay in jail until they can control all their tendencies. Fouth offences would just mean jail for life without any chance of parole. The only way they would leave would be in a casket.

Why would you need to ask if Israel is out of control? They had several acts committed upon their nation that were Acts Of War, done to them by the Lebanese government, mostly by their unwillingness to even try and stop these acts. So why would it be any surprise that war was declared upon the Lebanese government and its people. Now yes it would be real nice if war could be made real nice where only the the soldiers would face each other and no civillians would get hurt. ut that only happens in a world of make believe. There is no reason for in terference from any outside bodies, as this war was sought out by the Lebanese people, and now they will have to face just what that means. I guess the Lebanese government thought that they would some how become a rallying point, for other nations to come to their aid, or that the UN would actually have some power over this and put a stop to it. Because it just does not make any sense for starting this war, unless they thought they would stand a chance of winning it. Even they should have seen that the Israelli army was way more powerful then their own. I think the offer to stop the bombing so innocent people can leave, is a good thing for Israel. They alos have dropped warning pamphlets telling people to leave areas because terrorists were embedded within their neighbourhoods. These people should have left or forced out the terrorists. It is that simple. So for them to cry foul over this is falling on deaf ears as far as I am concerned. Now do not get me wrong I do think the Israeli forces can go too far in this, but my view of too far has not been reached yet. It can all end today if the Lebanese people and government want to surrender unconditionally to the Israeli forces. That would only leave the extremist to carry on a fight and if they find that they have little or no support left in Lebanon, they will soon flee or die in the attempt. If this was done then it would be Israel who would have to rebuild the infastructure and make it a vibrant place with a working economy. Something Lebanon has not had for at least the last 40 years. I do not see Israel restricting anyones faith within their own borders and I would belive the same would be true if Lebanon was captured by them. I would even think that you would probably even see elections in this. So to me the best way for Lebanon to win in all of this is to capitulate to Israel and let them start spending the money to rebuild it. That would probably do more for keeping Israel reined in, as there would be less money left for building stronger armies. I would think that the way of life would be much better this way, then it has been in a long long time.

Why is it that people try to shift the blame for who started this war. It was the Lebanese that kidnapped Israeli soldiers that set thing going and then the Hezbolla firing rockets across the border into Israel, with the Lebanese government doing nothing to stop it. Israel responded and now we have all out war. If the Lebanese people would have done more to make sure terrorist groups were not allowed into their lands and maybe if neighbourhoods started turning in captured groups of terrorists hiding in their midst, then maybe thiswould all be for not. But this war has now gone well beyond that and I think it will keep going until Israel has killed or captured all the known Hezbolla fighters. I do not think that stopping before this is done will bring any peace to the area. Many here think that there is a diplomatic solution to this war, and I could not disagree more with that. Been there before and done that, and it has never lasted. Maybe there could be a cease fire if the Lebanese people agree to pursuing all known hezbolla fighters and having them stand trial. Along with the agreement to return the kidnaped soldiers and recognize Iraels right to exist. Anything short of this and I would say let them fight it out to the very end, and Israel will then annex the land of Lebanon to be governed by Israeli rule. I think when the stakes get raised to this level it will soon put things on the table that they never would have been before. As far as the UN goes, I say they should stay out of this as they are pretty much useless in a war. know that I would not want any Canadian troops in this area as peacekeepers as we all know that both side would never really want to keep the peace. It is time to just let it go and come to its natural end. This will put the Muslim extremists in the place of having given a country to their enemy Israel. So they may well need to think twice before ever again using a country in that way again.

I would have to say that if Israel ever did use nukes to respond to lebanon, there would be no need for a responce as there would be no one left to respond to. We are talking here about countries that are tiny in area and one or two nukes would wipe all the people from most of the countries from the face of the earth. So, when Israel gets to the point of using nukes I would say that they then would have chosen an all out use of force and the measured would be long gone. Yes I know you were just posturing when you said this, but what most people need to understand, is that Israel has many times just turned the other cheek, and many times they did respond in small measures. They know that never really worked, so now they respond will growing measure, right up to the time it takes for the Lebanese people to force their leaders to give up the attacks on Israel and recognize Israels right to exist. It really seems sad to see things having to go this way but the fact that it has, and it is going to continue until there is a final finish to it. I do not think cease fires are the way for this to go. I think this time we should all just let the two countries fight it out to the end. If that means that Lebanon is totally destroyed, then so be it. But for others to step in and force cease fires, is to condemn the area to many more years of small attacks and skirmishes, until it finally ends with the all out war. I think it is far better to let it run its course now then later when nukes will be the defining moment in it all.

I am with Harper on this measured response, because if Israel really wanted to they could simply start at the south and proceed north killing everything and everyone who is not on their side. They have that capability and the fact that they have responded with much less power, makes it a measured response. All the Hezbolla have to do is return the kidnapped soldiers, and surrender with acknowledgement of the fact that Israel does have a right to exist. But if the Lebanese people are so stupid to keep enticing the Israelli war effort, they may well see what a full response might be like. I have no sympathy for the Lebanese people, or their leaders. They voted into power a terrorist government that has done nothing but cause war and strife for the country of Lebabnon. This is all part of what grows from the seeds you planted. Either totally recant your own terrorist government or watch it be destroyed along with the many innocent people. It is time to make sure no terrorist groups are hiding in your neighbourhoods, or you will soon have a flat neighbourhood. It is not going to to be a good day for Lebanon either way, but at least you will be alive. As far as the UN goes, they will have little or no power to stop any of this. Koffi Aanan is nothing but a thief and scammer and needs to be gone from his posotion there, as he only make the UN have less appeal in the worlds eyes.

Once again Harper has hit the nail on the head. There were no good reasons for keeping that Un post manned and since we were already telling all Canadians to get out of Lebanon, it is just one more signal for the UN to get out as well. The blame for the post having people there to be killed is the UN's own problem. They simply just do not know when they are not needed, and in fact they should have been removed months back. There is no garantee in war that your position even if neutral will not get bombed and people there die. Yes I am sure the Israelli commanders will apologize for this time and time again, but the question now should be are there any more UN troops with feet on the ground in Lebanon and if so, how we get them out of there asap. Koffi Anan can try to deflect the blame for the UN's lack of ensuring that old posts that are no longer applicable in a war zone are evacuated and the troops brought back to cover. Harper should show his leadership skills by making that request of the UN immediately. I see Harper gaining more and more support for his view of things every day. Only those who are inclined to find fault with everything he says or does seem to be trying make more out of this then it really is. He will come out of all of this shining and the others will have the egg on their faces.

I really do not care what the reaction of the countries where these UN observers were from. I still agin ask the question why were they still there after war broke out? It is not as if this was a secret or something. They could not observe any peace and so they should have been pulled by the UN long before it came to this. The fault as far as I am concerned is with the UN. If they would have done their jobs properly there would not have been anyone there to get killed. Yes Israel should try not to target the facility, but this is a war where precision bombing only happens when it is convenient, not something that should be expected. Which is another reason why the UN should have pulled out all observers completely. I give Harper credit for seeing just where the true responcibility lies and for having the balls to say so. The UN should make sure that there are no other members within the borders of Israel and Lebanon. Anan is just trying to deflect the blame that rightfully belongs to the UN. As far as any more people from Canada being there goes I have to think that most did not want out, as yesterday only about 50 Canadians were there to board the ship Canada chartered, so many others from other nations were allowed to board instead. It is time to see the writing on the wall, and it seems that for now its is all in hebrew. That will only change when the Hezbola start to see that they have to recognize Israel for what it is. Otherwise there just will not be a Lebanon as we all knew it from the past.

Anyone or any group who enters a war zone during active operations runs a chance of getting killed. Whether it be deliberate or by mistake. The U.N. must take much of the responsibility for sending their people there in the first place. You do not see anyone agreeing with the U.N. on anything so far do you. So why do they think that it is ok for them to stroll into a war zone and claim they are not to be targeted as they are only observing. The fact that the post was there, I would imagine that it was also used by the Hezbolla as a place to launch an attck from it etc. As any thinking person would be sorry for the losses, I also have to ask why they were there at this point in time to begin with. I see no reason as yet for them being there as it seems that both sides still are far apart in much of what is needed. I sympathize with those who died, but when sitting in the middle of a war front, even if you are neutral is not ever going to be a safe thing.