scribblet

I was just going to say that, he never was a conservative though, Joe Clarke called him a tourist Tory party because of his left-leaning views. He just wants to use any political party as a vehicle for his own agenda. Actually, I thought he was involved with Joe Hugelin in the new 'progressive conservative party', but maybe not.

The CPC isn't polling that well though right now either though. Especially not in Quebec. I think we'll be back where we started if we go to an election now. I'm inclined to agree, I think we would end up with another minority conservative gov't. Harper seems to be playing his cards fairly well though, methinks he's playing poker with the softwood vote. Will the liberals blink and fold or chance another election.

I agree, but I change doesn't seem to be coming, even the CPC is reluctant to allow more private options.

There's talk of an election this fall, candidate selection and nomination meetings are being set up now. Harper has made the softwood vote a confidence vote, which puts the liberals between a rock and a hard place. I can't see the liberals wanting to force an election before they are better organized and have a leader. Not to mention they are a tad cash strapped right now.

In Ozzie - no pommies allowed.

As a practical matter, most get it through their employment, because of the tax incentives. Or they qualify for medicaid - right? Am I correct in believing that the low income people are not turned away, and are entitled to hospital care. That anyone can get free medical care at any emergency room in the country and will not be turned away? As to Canadian health care, I have a real problem at not being able to purchase some services if I wish to. I can get an MRI for my pet right away, but cannot pay for one for myself. It is ridiculous that Canadians cannot pay for diagnostic services if they wish to, but on the other hand the gov't funds abortions in private clinics - go figure.

Who translates these agreements from Canadian into Australian and back? Dunno mate, but maybe they are having too many Fosters at the local billybong while they sing Waltzing Matilda

From what has been said on other boards he could be, but must be using another IP or he would have been caught. My guess is he or someone else put out the word for reinforcements to come to this board and they have. I don't recall seeing so many threads about one issue, or for that matter, so many native posters. There has obviously been a call put out to 'man' this board.

There is a reciprocal agreement between the two countries, it seems to me there is something similar with Italy and Old Age Security. http://www.facs.gov.au/internet/facsintern...nada-canada.htm Agreement on Social Security between the Government of Australia and the Government of Canada THE GOVERNMENT OF AUSTRALIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA, WISHING to strengthen the existing friendly relations between the two countries, NOTING the Reciprocal Agreement on Social Security signed on the fourth day of July 1988, as amended by a Protocol signed the eleventh day of October 1990, and ACKNOWLEDGING the need to reflect, by means of a consolidated document, the changes which have taken place in their respective legislation since that Agreement and Protocol were signed, HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS: PART 1 - INTERPRETATION AND SCOPE ARTICLE 1 Interpretation 1. In this Agreement: "benefit" means, in relation to a Party, a benefit, pension or allowance for which provision is made in the legislation of that Party, and includes any additional amount, increase or supplement that is payable, in addition to that benefit, pension or allowance, to or in respect of a person who qualifies for that additional amount, increase or supplement under the legislation of that Party; "Canadian creditable period" means a period, or the total of two or more periods, of residence or contributions which has been or can be used to acquire the right to a Canadian benefit, but does not include any period considered under paragraph 2 of Article 9 as a Canadian creditable period;

Thank goodness we have a PM who is willing to stand up for what is right. What exactly should a 'measured response' be when Hezbollah's prescription for peace is pretty simple: Kill all the Jews. By its leaders' own admission, Hezbollah is not seeking a lasting solution in the Middle East; it is seeking a Final Solution. It is the liberals and NDPers whining about our loss of neutrality that is reckless and, indeed, shameful.

Now that NDP, and Alexia McDonnough think that Harper should have taken a 'more neutral' position on the Isreali-Hezbolla confrontation, and these MPs think we should negotiate with terrorists my question is this: *What exactly is a neutral position between a self-assembled group of thugs, mugs, and savages, whose sole mission is the destruction of the State of Israel, and that nation's inherent and self evident right to defend itself? *And how is it that the NDP can condone the actions of Hezbollah whose intent is the extermination of Jews (because that's what you really mean when you call for the destruction of a State; that you want to kill everyone in it - (.e.. genocide) while at the same time flailing out at any rightwing politician as a Nazi? I don't recall conservatives ever calling for the destruction of a state or the genocide of its peoples. Shouldn't someone in the media be demanding to know whether or not the NDP believes in Israel's right to exist. If their answer is 'No', then aren't they condoning the genocide of the Jewish people? Are they not then Nazis? Jason Kenney was quoted saying basically the same thing, that the NDP must support terrorism and genocide - Nice to see Jason still calls a spade a spade - its about time.

Aug. 22 is supposed to be the day Iran makes some kind of landmark announcement is it possible that they will say: 1) have mastered the fuel enrichment cycle 2) have created a workable atomic bomb and if the U.S. (or anyone else)tries to stop them they will use it on the West ? It is also the day that Korea could be preparing for an underground detonation of a nuclear device, the http://counterterrorismblog.org/ "What is the significance of Aug. 22? This year, Aug. 22 corresponds, in the Islamic calendar, to the 27th day of the month of Rajab of the year 1427. This, by tradition, is the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to "the farthest mosque," usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back (c.f., Koran XVII.1). This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world. It is far from certain that Mr. Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for Aug. 22. But it would be wise to bear the possibility in mind. A passage from the Ayatollah Khomeini, quoted in an 11th-grade Iranian schoolbook, is revealing. "I am decisively announcing to the whole world that if the world-devourers [i.e., the infidel powers] wish to stand against our religion, we will stand against their whole world and will not cease until the annihilation of all them. Either we all become free, or we will go to the greater freedom which is martyrdom. Either we shake one another's hands in joy at the victory of Islam in the world, or all of us will turn to eternal life and martyrdom. In both cases, victory and success are ours.""

Well, are we surprised, some Liberals and dippers want Canada to take Hezbollah off the terrorist list....talk about useful idiots. http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/is...a31&k=70860 BENT JBAIL, Lebanon - It would aid the cause of peace if Canada dropped Hezbollah from its list of banned terrorist organizations, two Canadian MPs on a fact-finding mission to Lebanon said yesterday. When asked if he was in favour of Hezbollah being taken off the terror list, Etobicoke Liberal Borys Wrzesnewskyj said: "Yes, I would be." He likened the situation in the Middle East to that of Northern Ireland, where "if there wasn't the possibility for London to negotiate with the IRA, you'd still have bombings." "Hezbollah has a political wing. They have members of parliament. They have two Cabinet ministers. You want to encourage politicians in this military organization so that the centre of gravity shifts to them." New Democrat Peggy Nash, who represents the Toronto riding of Parkdale-High Park, said her discussions in Lebanon had led her to believe "that it is just not helpful to label them a terrorist organization." "If the political parties in Lebanon who may disagree with Hezbollah, and be opposed to them and their philosophy, can figure out a way to work with Hezbollah and try to get along internally, then perhaps we should take a cue from that." Both MPs said they would bring that message back to their caucuses, and eventually to the House of Commons, when they return to Canada this week.

I take it that way (from the Margrace posting), she seems to have a personal beef with FD and writes her MP to complain and also questions him about MLW. Not sure why, But as far as I know there is no bulletin board that is actually sponsored by the conservatives. If there is I'd like to know about it.

thats exactly my point, a lot of conservatives want to do away with the CBC and Clement denies it is part of their policy. It isn't, go to their site and read their policy. I too look forward to your reply to the questions others have also asked.

Interesting on here the need to cut or get rid of the CBC. Clements says that there is no one saying this in the Conservative Party, as far as he knows When reminded of this site he conveniently ignored it and when reminded of Freedominion he was adamant that Freedominion had nothing to do with the Conservative party and was not in any way condoned. Whats your point and why would we care about Freedominion ? CBC should not be funded with taxpayer's money, particularly as it is left wing and biased in its reporting.

Actually yes it is more than I expect, I am looking forward to the result of an enquiry.

Thought you might like to read the response: Dear I will be conducting a review of Ms. Lawand's report. Once it has been completed, it will be available on the CBC website (cbc.ca/ombudsman/findings). I have attached, for your information, the response of the executive producer of The National to complaints about the report. Yours truly, Vince Carlin CBC Ombudsman =============================== Thank you for your email to CBC regarding a report aired on The National. Jonathan Whitten, executive producer of The National asked me to forward the following to you: Thank you for your e-mail of August 6th addressed to Vince Carlin, CBC Ombudsman. As you know, Mr. Carlin asked me to reply. You wrote to draw our attention to a report on the August 4 editions of THE NATIONAL that you feel is inaccurate and misleading. Specifically, you wrote that by juxtaposing a comment by a protestor with what you feel is an unrelated statement made by Prime Minister Stephen Harper in a news conference, the report misrepresented the Prime Minister's views, and made him appear insensitive. The report on THE NATIONAL Friday night concerned the Prime Minister's reaction to questions he was facing about the Middle East. The report began with protestors outside the Conservative caucus meeting in Cornwall, one of whom was seen saying that both sides killing innocent children is wrong and has to stop. The Prime Minister, meeting behind closed doors, did not hear her message (although, as we reported, she was invited to meet with the Minister of Foreign Affairs), but reporters did ask him about civilian deaths in a news conference held after the caucus meeting. He did not reply to the question directly, but he told reporters - including the CBC's Christina Lawand - that his policy on the Middle East remained the same and would not change because of public opinion surveys or protests. He said that Canadians are not neutral on terrorism and that he would not call for a cease-fire until the right conditions were in place. And, he said, when properly understood, his views represent the views of most Canadians. Ms. Lawand clearly stated those views in her report. She also included a statement from the news conference - the one to which you referred - where the Prime Minister said he is "not preoccupied in any way with reaction within individual communities." This statement was in response to a reporter who asked specifically how he felt about what seemed to be growing support in the Jewish community for his government and ended his question by asking whether he was concerned about the negative response among some in the Arab community. Mr. Harper replied that he agreed the Middle East conflict had a pretty strong resonance in some cultural communities, but that the government "can't take positions based on polls, we can't take decisions based on reactions within certain domestic communities." In the bulk of his answer, however, he explained that the issues were far larger than the concerns of some communities. These are "serious international issues, he said, "there are not only many lives at stake, there are a lot of long term strategic interests of this country and of the world.*" He talked about two major elements of the Canadian policy, about terrorist groups, both in Canada and abroad. He talked about humanitarian concerns, including evacuation and re-construction as being among the "focuses of our activity." Then he returned to where he had started his answer and repeated: "I'm not concerned or preoccupied in any way with reaction within individual communities. I think that reaction is very predictable." That was the clip included in the report following the protestor. It is logical to conclude here that the reaction he is "not concerned" with, is the kind of reaction personified by the protestor seen at the beginning of the report. Mr. Harper was talking about predictable reactions in general of which the protestor was a specific example. Some have argued that he was talking about polling within the Arab and Jewish communities, and while that's possible, he was also discussing, in addition to polling, "reactions within certain domestic communities." Far from being unrelated, as you suggest, the two are directly related. Later in the news conference, the Prime Minister was specifically asked about the protestors outside the meeting. While he did say that it is important to listen to members of the various communities (as we reported, his Ministers met with two of the protestors) he also said "they can't guide all of our decisions at the same time." Far from being contradictory to his response to the earlier question, this was restating the government position that we faithfully reported throughout the piece. I do, however, agree with your concern about the structure of the report. The construction of the piece did make it appear the Prime Minister was responding directly to the woman protester, and that was not the case. We should have taken the time to make it clear that the Prime Minister was responding to a general question, and not a specific question about the woman's concerns, and I regret that. While this does not constitute a misrepresentation of Mr. Harper's position, or the position of his Government, the program could have, and should have, taken the time to be clear about what prompted the response. It is also my responsibility to inform you that if you are not satisfied with this response, you may wish to submit the matter for review by the CBC Ombudsman, Mr. Vince Carlin. The Office of the Ombudsman, an independent and impartial body reporting directly to the President, is responsible for evaluating program compliance with the CBC's journalistic policies. Mr. Carlin may be reached by mail at the address shown below, or by fax at (416) 205-2825, or by e-mail at [email protected] Yours sincerely, Jonathan Whitten Executive Producer THE NATIONAL Box 500, Station "A", Toronto, Ontario M5W 1E6 I hope this information is helpful to you, and thank you again for writing. Sincerely, Jamie Richards Communications Officer CBC Audience Relations

LOL I don't expect much response, but the ombudsman is supposed to be fair and look into accusations of bias. Will he....maybe if enough people write he will.

Done The Ombudsman, CBC English Services Canadian Broadcasting Corporation P.O. Box 500, Station A Toronto, Ontario M5W 1E6 e-mail: [email protected]

Didn't Sandra Oh hate Harper before the conference anyway?I really don't understand why people care about his attendance. Me neither, it would not have made any difference to the outcomes, or goals, these people are using his absence strictly as an anti Harper fest. What counts is his leadership and results which is funding and working to get the Canadian plan to help send AIDS meds/ to Africa (remember the old Jean Chretien Pledge) back on track . Mind you, all the meds in the world cannot help Africa as long as behaviours remain the same. The bigger question is how to educate them.

Some earthshaking news here:, I'm shocked I say: http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/st...aa-e66236850666 Quote: Teaching abstinence reduces teen sex study: Condom use not affected Sharon Kirkey, CanWest News Service Published: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 TORONTO - Abstinence-only programs can reduce sexual activity among young teens and effectively delay their "sexual debut" without discouraging future condom use, according to a new study of the controversial HIV prevention strategy. A study of 662 African-American Grade 6 and 7 students from inner-city middle schools in Philadelphia found those taught an abstinence-only approach to sex were less likely to have had sexual intercourse at 24 months' follow-up compared to those put through a "safer sex" intervention that emphasized condom use but made no mention of abstinence. And while Bill Clinton, the former U.S. president, told delegates to the International AIDS Conference in Toronto yesterday that abstinence programs delay sexual activity but make teens less likely to use condoms when they do start having sex, the study found the opposite to be true. "It did not reduce intentions to use condoms, it did not reduce beliefs about the efficacy of condoms, it did not decrease consistent condom use and it did not decrease condom use at last sexual [encounter]," lead author John Jemmott, of the University of Pennsylvania, said. The youngsters in the study ranged in age from 10 to 15; half were girls. Twenty-three per cent said they had had sexual intercourse at least once before the study began.

Is anyone surprised at this blatent and delberate misrepresentation? This is a case for the ombudsman. http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/media080706.htm CBC caught misreporting Harper statement by Arthur Weinreb Monday, August 7, 2006 The CBC hasn’t quite come to terms with the fact that there is an alternate media out there and they won’t get away with the blatant manipulation of the truth that occurred last week. CBC showed a report of the anti-Harper protest that took place in Cornwall where the Conservative Party was holding a retreat. The segment by Christina Lawand shows Elsaadi Daad, a chador-clad woman who was incidentally on her way to meet Foreign Affairs Minister Peter Mackay, saying that burning children and killing people on both sides is wrong and "it’s got to stop". Lawand then says that "Harper clearly wasn’t swayed" and showed Harper speaking the following words, "I’m not concerned or preoccupied in any way with reaction within individual communities. I think the reaction is very predictable." The juxtaposition of the two statements, not to mention Lawand’s statement that "Harper clearly wasn’t swayed" clearly showed what the CBC wanted their viewers to see — Stephen Harper saying that he doesn’t give a damn about the killing of civilians in the Middle East and more importantly, he couldn’t care less about the "predictable reaction" of Muslims like Daad. The only slight problem with Lawand’s report is that it just didn’t happen that way. But why let the truth get in the way of a great piece by the CBC about how bad Stephen Harper is. As revealed by Blogger Stephen Taylor, Harper’s comments that were aired by the CBC were not a response to Elsaadi Daad at all. A reporter for the Toronto Star had asked Harper to respond to the fact that the Conservatives appear to be getting new support from the Jewish community and negative responses from the Arab community because of the government’s Middle East policies. The Prime Minister gives a lengthy response, only the last sentence of which was cut and then pasted by the CBC so as to appear to be a response to what Elsaadi Daad had said. It is clear from the question and answer that when Harper said that he wasn’t "concerned or preoccupied in any way with the reaction within individual communities", he was speaking about both the Jewish and Arab communities. In the context of the way the question was asked, it is more plausible that his comments were directed primarily at the Jewish community. Furthermore there is absolutely no evidence that suggests Stephen Harper even knew that Elsaadi Daadi existed, let alone that he was somehow responding to what she was saying. What the CBC did goes far beyond the liberal bias that we have come to expect from the network. It was a deliberate act of manipulation of statements made by the Prime Minister to put words in Stephen Harper’s mouth to show that he is, as Stephen Taylor noted, "cold-hearted" when it comes to the deaths of innocent civilians in the Middle East.

Hezbollah respectable lol really: They were the group which started the suicide bombings, and are well known for kidnappings, bombings and hijackings etc. You seem to forget that Israel 'occupied' Lebanon in 82 because of an intolerable sitution dueto the repeated shelling by PLO on Israeli civilians - about 5 - 6000 were in Lebanon. they came from Libya, Iraq and other places. The PLO had an arsenal of mortars, Katyusha rockets, anti-aircraft PLO also had hundreds of T-34 tanks along with surface to air milles provided by Syria. The PLO violated the July 1981 cease-fire agreement repeated, and staged close to 300 terrorist actions in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza, and along the Lebanese and Jordanian borders. Israel had no choice but to defend itself and stop the repeated attacks, if anyone thinks any country would standby while it was repeatedly shelled and attacked simply for living and being there they are wrong. Hezbolla is no charitable organization, it was founded with the help of Khomini to further the Islamic revolution, Hezbolla is committed to the destruction of Israel and a world wide Caliphate.

What are the overall numbers for cancer research? Don't know, havn't looked it up. The point is there is only so much money to go around and everyone wants a piece of the action. If we give more to one, we take away from another. Maybe the issue should be more about education and prevention of aids; because after all, it is preventable.