scribblet

Maybe the U.N. should concern itself more about the real racism and human rights abuses in places such as Zimbabwe - the U.N. has a nerve IMO http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/st...2989a97&k=18408 Canada told not to use term 'visible minorities' UN watchdog calls words 'racist,' but offers no alternative UNITED NATIONS - Canada's use of the term "visible minorities" to identify people it considers susceptible to racial discrimination came under fire at the United Nations yesterday --for being racist. In a report on Ottawa's efforts to eliminate racial discrimination in Canada, the world body's anti-racism watchdog said the words might contravene an international treaty aimed at combatting racism. Members of the Geneva-based Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination also questioned other terms used by the federal government, among them "ethnocultural communities." Other highlights of the report include a call for Canada to provide welfare to illegal immigrants and failed refugee applicants; an expression of concern about "racial profiling;" and a recommendation that Canada pass laws to prevent Canadian transnational companies from trampling on the rights of indigenous peoples overseas.

If it were Christians wanting to pray in a public square I imagine there would be a huge outcry, at least in the U.S. Heck even the easter bunny is now under attack. Easter Bunny Banned ST. PAUL, MINN---Peter Cottontail won’t be hopping down the bunny trail at St. Paul City Hall. First there were the attacks on Santa Claus and Christmas and now it’s the Easter Bunny. A display featuring a toy Easter bunny, pastel-colored eggs and a sign with the words ‘Happy Easter” was removed from the lobby of City Hall this week by the city’s human rights director because he said a citizen had complained and he was afraid it might offend non-Christians.....http://www.northcountrygazette.org/articles/032406BunnyBan.html

Michael Coren was talking about an incest case on his show the other night when he asked the panel whether it should be legal or not. He says people might be able to challenge the law (re: SSM redefinition of marriage) The new and revised definition means that any two people can qualify for marriage. So that really could cover polygamy and incest ... Wonder when we'll get the first challenge. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6379785.stm Incestuous German pair fight case

Guess all people who write articles have too much time on their hands. - but actually Hagopian has written other articles and journals on native affairs. Ottawa has allready told Six Nations they don't have a leg to stand on and this land claim would fail in court. (Globe and Mail back in January) They also made their position clear in a Department of Justice report presented to Six Nations negotiators. Problem is if the truth isn't politically correct, people don't want to hear it. Apparantly crime does pay in Ontario - http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/004370.html

I am utterly appalled at the insensitive, disgraceful and tacky comments of Michael Ignatieff. How on God's green earth does anyone get away with calling the presence of the families of the 9-11 victims at parliament a "side show", for Pete's sake and why does Dion have this guy as his deputy - 9/11 victims - a side show !! How low can you get?! Ignatieff is a disgrace - but maybe he is representative of Dion et al. from the http://www.thestar.com/News/article/186476 A vote against the terror bill knowing it closes the lid on an investigation is unthinkable.

All sources I've seen say he's been cleared - who's Tory Guite ?

You have no proof that it is a deliberate legal misrepresentation, the article is presenting the facts of what is happening. Simply because they don't buy into native harassment and intimidation doesn't mean they are not correct.

Chuck Guite was nothing but a minor civil servant during Mulroney's time just more hyperbole - and Mulroney has been cleared - but of course you know that

It appears that Dion will be punishing the Liberals who voted against the gov't http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/st...cb-0b4d5b55c28e Liberal MP Tom Wappel will face unspecified "consequences" for breaking party ranks and voting with the minority Conservative government on an anti-terrorism law vote, Liberal leader Stephane Dion said yesterday. However, several of his colleagues, including three Liberals who also sided with the government but abstained from voting with Mr. Dion's blessing, say they do not believe Mr. Wappel will be, or should be, disciplined. B.C. MP Keith Martin said Mr. Wappel should not be penalized and that MPs should be allowed to vote freely on such contentious issues as national security. "Canadians are divided on this issue and Parliament should reflect those divisions," he said. MPs are not "potted plants who park their brains at the door." Mr. Wappel, a social conservative who has represented the Toronto- area riding of Scarborough West for two decades, was the lone Liberal to vote for the government motion to extend two anti-terrorist measures for three years. The motion was defeated 159-124.

Obviously there's a difference between federal and provincial pension legislation and surpluses. A few years ago Ontario decreed that anything over a certain amount of surplus had to be distributed back to the employees and retirees. (retirees got screwed, another story) IMHO it was a mistake as the markets dropped and changed the surplus status. However if gov't guarantees the pensions, the employees aren't losing anything, it is the gov't which is on the hook for the unfunded liability - right? I still think it is wrong for any employer to raid the pension plans as you can never tell what will happen to the markets and investments. This reminds me of the teachers pension plan which had a huge unfunded liability back when Rae was Premier. Bob Rae decreed that the taxpayers should kick in a billion or so so fund it.

I admit I don't read many of your posts at all, but went through that page and saw nothing proving anything.

I was linking to Bourques on line leadership poll, I didn't notice it posted here beforel Not only that, the Conservatives are leading liberals 40% to 38% in ONTARIO - the CBC folks are apoplectic - Liberals could see their numbers go down even more because of the terror vote, so maybe they will have to support the budget and ward off an election.

http://bourque.org/ has a poll on that today, I bet they are gnashing their teeth over the choice of leader now One thing I think this recent poll tells us is that people who post on line, or at least the radical anti Harper variety of which MLW has at least two, are not representative of the general public. I would think that much of the rhetoric we see posted here is not representative either, and most people don't buy into it, they are more reasonable.

In that case you'll be willing to give your home back now and go somewhere else? It appears that the renegade Mohawks have no claim, after all, and I guess we should just forget the 70 charges mostly against native protesters, for assault, vandalism, obstructing roadways, uttering threats and the attempted murder of on Ontario Provincial Police Officer. http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/ed...21-06f3e5f9b14b Members of the breakaway Mohawk group behind the occupation have at best a dim grasp of the facts, coupled with unrealistic expectations of the settlement they might receive. For instance, when the squatters insisted the disputed land had never been transferred from the band to the Crown, Ottawa produced documents showing that indeed it had. To this, the squatters countered that the transfer had been meant as a lease, only, rather than a surrender of title. But federal negotiators had notes of the 1844 transfer negotiations that showed clearly the Mohawks' ancestors meant to transfer title, and furthermore fully understood the difference between a sale and a lease of land. Now, the Mohawks are insisting all this is irrelevant, because their people's leaders at the time did not have the full backing of the community for the deal, so the transfer amounts to a theft of land perpetrated by the Crown and their own elders. -snip- Much of the stalemate, though, stems from the unwillingness of the three official sides in the dispute to enforce the rule of law. The squatters have no standing in law to demand anything. They have not been officially delegated by the Six Nations council to act in its stead (although the council has timidly refused to assert its jurisdiction over the squatters either). And there are at least three federal court orders demanding they be removed from the subdivision. If Ottawa, Ontario or the Mohawk council had removed the squatters last spring, it would have ended their fanciful protest. By continuing to negotiate with these deluded dead-enders, the true parties to the dispute have fed the squatters' belief in their own distorted view of events. Until someone removes the squatters and calls a halt to negotiations, the people of Caledonia will have to live with this potentially volatile situation on their doorsteps.

Not true, as stated and as shown

What utter rot, more spurious assertions - nothing but drive by smears.

I guess this is an example of how the Liberals balanced their budget, this is huge as it could effect the whole budget if the gov't loses. If this is true, they stole from gov't employees pensions. It could also result in a loss of jobs as they might have to be scaled back to pay for this as their pensions are guaranteed. Canadian Unions Seek Return of $26 Billion From Government By Joe Schneider Feb. 26 (Bloomberg) -- Canada's government wrongly took more than C$30 billion ($26 billion) from employee pension funds to spend on programs and help balance the country's budget, a lawyer suing on behalf of the workers said at a trial in Ottawa. The lawsuit, over funds seized in 1999, was filed by 18 unions representing 670,000 federal workers and retirees. Their pensions accumulated C$30.2 billion surplus, partly because worker contributions were calculated to include annual pay increases, the workers claim. Their wages were frozen for six years in the 1990s. In 1999, Canada's government passed the Public Sector Pension Investment Board Act, allowing it to use the surplus for general spending and balancing the budget. The government is exempt from the Pension Benefit Standards Act, which limits employer access to federally registered pension plan surpluses. -snip- A loss by the government could erase Canada's budget surplus. According to projections by the Canadian finance department released Nov. 23, the fiscal year ending March 31 is forecast to show a surplus of C$7.2 billion. The surplus is forecast to rise to C$7.3 billion during the next fiscal year. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has said his next budget will be released March 19. http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...ps&refer=canada

Talk about not having any shame LOL It apparantly only bothers them when the CPC is alleged to be doing something they don't like.

The 'Bush family' did not back Hitler, one of them may have had some banking ties, which does not implicate his descendants. Hitler is a pretty convenient metaphore when all else fails. As for the CPC 'ties to neo-Nazi Paul Fromm' - more malicious propaganda I don't think I've ever read so much drivel and drive by smears with no basis in fact. Both the original Reform and Canadian Alliance parties consistently made it clear that there is no affiliation or connection. If Paul Fromm and his ilk choose to announce that they support a particular party, it doesn't make it so.

It is now a case of whipping up the sheeples into mass hysteria; manipluating them for political ends. Its amazing what the media can do with a message they buy into.

Your reading Mad Magazine again, completely ridiculous and most certainly a malicious unfounded comparison. Invoking Hitler renders your arguments invalid and without credibility

There was a bill to extinguish those who did not vote or who were absent ? - say what I know the bill was whipped but that's a tad extreme even for the Liberals. There were 12 Liberals unaccounted for, one who abstained and one who voted with the Tories. Too bad they chose "internal caucus politics over the national security of Canadians." Supreme Court did rule that these two provisions are constitutional, in fact the Mounties attempted to use the provision once in the past but its constitutionality was challenged by the wife of Inderjit Singh Reyat, the only person ever convicted in the Air India bombing. The provision was eventually upheld by the Supreme Court of Canada.

They only apply to common folk, heck, when these live earth concerts go on tour they are not using acoustic guitars on stages lit with candles and Suzuki isn't tooling around the country on a bike. These stars don't fly coach class they use private jets and fleets of massive stretch SUV limos . It just says it all doesn't it regarding the personal morality and integrity of those Gurus of Global Warming; did they really seriously believe sceptics weren't going to check up on their personal Kyoto Compliance? Surely to goodness, one would think that those who throw rocks at the rest of us for our sceptism would at least make sure they weren't themselves living in glass houses, or mansions in Tennessee, or driving smog-spewing CO2 belching behemoth buses.

Inexplicably the Liberals along with BQ & NDP are painting themselves into the corner marked 'Soft On Terrorists'. (Also soft on criminals etc.) It will be up to them to explain to Canadians in the coming election why they voted for terrorist's rights over the desire of Canadians not to be victimized by terrorists. It's a sad day for Canada. What will be interesting is the American take on this, if they thought we were soft before, I can imagine what they must think now. Just watch the American media pick up on this; you can probably forget using simple driver's license scrutiny at borders next year, there will be no compromise now. Fortunately Canada so far has been spared the horror of suicide bombers, vehicle bombs, and attacks on our transportation systems. Lets hope it doesn't take a loss of life for this legislation to change.

Aids isn't ALL the man's fault, but certainly the majority (well IMO ) Do Muslim nations have the same problem, from what I've read they don't, and if not why not?