scribblet

Nothing wrong with asking future citizens to conform to our laws and values, this might head off another attempt to bring in Sharia law. Holland is going a step further, I believe Germany is discussing it too. Holland launches the immigrant quiz Nicola Smith, Amsterdam TWO MEN kissing in a park and a topless woman bather are featured in a film that will be shown to would-be immigrants to the Netherlands. The reactions of applicants — including Muslims — will be examined to see whether they are able to accept the country’s liberal attitudes. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2081496,00.html

Well said Argus, how mindless to suggest that Martin sent in the troops to prop up a U.S. puppet, the liberals were no friends of Bush. I don't recall too much critique of Martin when he sent our armed forces to Afghanistan without parliamentary debate and approval, and maybe there should have been that debate. However, through no fault of its own, the present government has inherited this position. Maybe Harper should schedule time for Parliamentarians to express their encouragement and concerns but now is not the time to have such a debate . That time was BEFORE they were put in harms way, and that time has passed. The whole purpose to have a debate now is to allow the Libs and the Dippers to drag our new Conservative government through the mud, and by proxy, the troops with them. Not to mention getting a bit of Bush bashing in. If Jumping Jack flash wanted a debate, he should have demanded one last year, but I guess he was too busy propping up the Librano$ regime for his 20 pieces of silver. This is the time to fully, without reservation, support our troops and their mission. No second guessing, no buyers remorse. Give them what they need to do the job they have been tasked to do. To do otherwise only undercuts our troops moral, and give aid to our enemies. This is just so terribly mindless, the kind of raving nonsense one finds among many left wing conspiracy theory sites, especially in the US. I'm sure the smarter ones, the ones who are tired of all the fighting and killing, who are tired of the extremist religion and the endless poverty, have hopes we can do something better for them. But we're not, in the end, there to make Afghanistan into a great place to live. We're there to set up a strong enough government that crazies won't be able to set up shop at will.

Harper is doing what any good PM would do, support the troops. Good for Harper.

Oath of loyality to Canadian values Published: February 28, 2006 The Fraser Institute has released a position paper suggesting the federal government require new immigrants to Canada to swear an oath of loyalty to Canadian values and principles and deport those who violate this oath. What is your suggestion for an oath of allegiance? © Ottawa Citizen 2006 Hummm. for starters, Canadians respect freedom of speech and freedom of religion, and women are to be treated as equal.

Hmmm, I never did believe the deficit was really 6B http://www.torontosun.com/Comment/Commenta...11/1483552.html EDITORIAL: Is Dalton stashing our cash? Wait a minute. Wasn't the province of Ontario drowning in a sea of red ink just two years ago, according to Premier Dalton McGuinty? Didn't he and then finance minister Greg Sorbara tell us back then that the previous Conservative government left taxpayers facing a deficit of at least $5.6 billion after eight years of spendthrift rule? And yet, miraculously, the Liberals today seem to be swimming in money. Our money. A government source told the Star last week the Liberals will be hard-pressed to show they're running a deficit in their March 23 budget, which is why they're ready to announce such megaprojects as a $1.5-billion expansion of the Spadina subway line. Meanwhile, the Liberals boasted last week about their $6-billion investment (over five years) in post-secondary education -- in the middle of a teachers' strike at the province's community colleges and at the same time as they announced tuition hikes for college and university students this fall. Over at City Hall, Toronto politicians were happily suggesting a last-minute bailout by the province will hold this year's property tax hike to 3% -- as if that's something to crow about. Still, it suggests the province is flush with cash.......

This whole thing is a witch hunt on the part of the Liberals, who happily did the same thing. There's a good artile here about the whole thing which sums it up nicely. http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/...11/1483566.html snip While many Canadians understandably question Harper's judgment in elevating Emerson to cabinet, in the end it is the prime minister's decision. A cabinet may include good and bad choices, but ultimately, the members are there at the pleasure of the prime minister. Harper is right to resist any attempt by Ethics Commissioner Bernard Shapiro to question his cabinet choices. snip With all that political mess before him, why wouldn't Harper do the political thing and throw Emerson to the wolves (i.e., Shapiro)? It would be a painless, guilt-free way of disposing of him before Parliament resumes. Well maybe, just maybe, Harper is not guided by quick political fixes. Maybe he actually believes that in a parliamentary system, it is up to the PM, not a government appointee, to name his cabinet. After all, the "inducement" that is supposedly under investigation is the cabinet position. A sound review of parliamentary practice should remind us while we may not like his choices, the prime minister alone has the prerogative to form a cabinet. His judgment will ultimately be tested by the people. Do we really want a government where cabinet choices are reviewed by an unelected officer of Parliament? While Emerson's hide looks very attractive to the Opposition in the short term, in the long term, the Shapiro precedent is a kick in the teeth to parliamentary democracy. No parliamentarian worth their salt should abandon that primacy to a political appointee. What if an ethics commissioner decided that in a minority parliament, it was up to all the parties to form a cabinet, to avoid the appearance of "inducements" by one political party? The notion is absurd. The other troubling aspect of this whole investigation is Shapiro's apparent double standard. Compare the Emerson crossover to that of Belinda Stronach, when she openly negotiated her cabinet position at a dinner with former prime minister Paul Martin at 24 Sussex. At a subsequent press conference, journalists rightfully guffawed at Martin's claim he did not know whether or not her move would ensure the government's survival in an immediate confidence vote. Using Shapiro's twisted logic, keeping the Martin government alive provided an "inducement" of extended salary, perks, etc. to every MP. Yet the ethics commissioner never investigated the Stronach case. In that case, he was right. In both cases, the decision to offer a cabinet post belongs to the prime minister and the prime minister alone.

Something I've always wondered about, people fall on hard times and need a helping hand up, but why have more kids then? Bottom line, don't have kids if you can't afford them.

Oh I don't think anyone, including the mps who made the complaint, actually think there was anything in the slightest illegal or even questioniable about the appointment. It's just a way of getting cheap headlines which say "Prime Minister investigated by Ethics Councillor!" I think Harper's problem is he's not playing the Ottawa game. That game says that even if you're dealing with sleazy, lying, two-faced crooks you smile to the camera and tell them how much you respect them and then act pensive when you sigh and speak about there being doubts about their behaviour. Off camera, of course, you stick a knife in their ribs, and pretend someone else did it. Harper is being foolishly honest and taking the position that since the Ethics Counsellor is Paul Martin's poodle, who he intends to fire at the first opportunity, and will almost certainly not be honest in his investigation anyway, it makes no sense to cooperate with him. Well, yes, breathtaking hypocrisy. I agree. This complaint reeks of it. Still chuckling at I " would expect your mind must boggle quite a lot." you just made my day. Shapiro's made a real gaffe here, because it shows partisianship by his unwillingness to invesigate Liberal shenanigans. Harper campaigned on strengthening the role of the ethics commissioner in some specific ways. He has already abolished his own power to overrule the commissioner's findings. But giving more powers to a commissioner who does not seem to understand his job will not help. We need good rules, and we need capable people to enforce them. In politics, perception is everything Harper should have learned that when he had to fight an image created in Liberal war rooms. Guess the perception of wrongdoing is threatening Scot Brison, now, you know how couldn't recall the e-mail exchange, then owned up to them, but said they were irrelevant because he was not privy to insider information.

Not only that but it does point out how difficult it is to discuss some issues without name calling e.g. immigration, multicult. and Muslim expansionism/aggression. The name calling does serve to stifle debate and end discussion.

National Post Good for Harper, nothing wrong with that comment. Hope the NDP reads it.

Personally I find little difference between the everyday American and the everyday Canadian. What is distinctly Canadian is the attempt to belittle and demonize everything the U.S. does out of malice more than anything else. Our culture is not much different to theirs the only difference is that Canadians are unarmed. Their melting pot concept actually works better than our state funded multicult, which only serves to divide. Basically we all want the same thing, have the same goals e.g. a decent job, a home, one or two cars etc. , Oh and one more, we have a higher alcohol content in our beer, theirs is just training beer. P.S. I never did like Margaret Atwood that much

Gee, I think your take on this is a bit off the wall too. Mind you, I'm pretty sure the NDP would vote to cut and run.

Finally, these protestes are being recognized as incitement to hate and violence. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...8/ixportal.html Muslim protesters face arrest by John Steele (Filed: 08/03/2006) Arrests of Muslim protesters who demonstrated about cartoons of the prophet Mohammed in London last month are imminent, Scotland Yard said last night. The Feb 3 protests outside the Danish Embassy caused widespread offence. Some protesters chanted and carried placards glorifying the July 7 London bombings and threatening beheadings. Muslim protesters Muslims protest outside the Danish Embassy No arrests of Muslim protesters were made at the time, a decision by police that was widely criticised. Yesterday the Metropolitan Police disclosed that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had advised it that potential public order offences were committed. Arrests, questioning and charges are now expected in the coming weeks in a number of cases said to run to "more than single figures". A spokesman for Scotland Yard said last night: "During the demonstration on Feb 3 2006 the Met deployed specialist evidence gathers. This material has been collated and examined by the investigation team. "A file of evidence was submitted to the CPS for their consideration and we have been advised that there are sufficient grounds to arrest individuals for offences under the Public Order Act." Incitement to racial hatred is said to be a potential charge. Sources said the evidence involved a "number of identified and unidentified individuals". Operation Laverda has focused on six complaints from witnesses but the Met also received 570 complaints from people offended by images of the protests. David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said in a letter he sent to Charles Clarke, the Home Secretary, yesterday: "There is a clear public interest in ensuring that those who incite murder are appropriately dealt with and an equal public interest that there is no unnecessary delay. "Furthermore, not to take action is to let down the moderate Muslim majority."

Thought I'd put this up for comments, I liked it. http://www.readersdigest.ca/mag/2005/07/ca...y_in_canada.php 7 Things You Can’t Say in Canada Attacking our sacred cows may turn you into a pariah--but it can also be a lot of fun BY MARGARET WENTE -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Every culture has its unacknowledged taboos—x snip [b[Margaret Atwood writes some really awful books.[/b[ The queen of CanLit bestrides the literary world like a colossus. Nobody has won more awards than she has, and nobody is more feared. There is no such thing as a bad review of a Margaret Atwood book in Canada. That’s too bad, because many of her books are tedious and unreadable, full of tortuous plots and unpleasant characters. Why will no one say so? Because we’re grateful that she’s put us on the global map. And because if they do, they’ll never work in this country again. Recycling is a waste of time and money. Once upon a time it was easy to put out the trash. Today, the Garbage Gestapo rule our lives. Every household has become a mini version of the village dump, and every one of us has become a garbage picker, carefully separating our organics from our bottles and papers, and worrying about where our dryer lint is supposed to go. Don’t try to sneak a wine bottle into the wrong bag! The trash police will punish you. The truth about recyc-ling is that it’s a giant waste of dollars and doesn’t help the environment. But don’t tell your kids. They won’t believe you. They’ve been brainwashed. Only private enterprise can save public health care. Tommy Douglas, the CBC’s Greatest Canadian, brought us universal health care. But even his plan didn’t originally pay for everybody’s ingrown toenails. His primary goal was to make sure nobody faced financial ruin if they got sick. Today we have a system where controlling costs is more important than treating patients, and where ideology is crippling us. In some places, including Toronto, people go blind waiting for cataract surgery. The government could restore their sight tomorrow simply by sending them to a private clinic instead of to a hospital. The cost to the government would be exactly the same. But in Canada, private is a dirty word, and so the government would rather you go blind. Poor Tommy would be spinning in his grave. David Suzuki is bad for the environment. From global warming to farmed salmon and genetically modified crops, David Suzuki has just one message: The End is Nigh. He is our homegrown prophet of doom who preaches the essential wickedness of the human race. Like a modern Savonarola, he warns that unless we cast our material possessions into the bonfire, we’re all going to hell. The trouble with this apocalyptic vision is that people are starting to tune out. And our hugely expensive investment in the unworkable Kyoto treaty, which Mr. Suzuki tells us doesn’t go nearly far enough, will crowd out more practical measures to cut smog and clean up our waste sites. A national daycare program won’t do a thing to help poor kids. Cheap national daycare! Who could be against it? It’s supposed to give kids a better start in life, and nobody can object to that. But in Quebec, where the program started, universal daycare has turned out to be nothing more than a giant (and extremely costly) subsidy for relatively well-heeled middle-class parents. Few poor parents use the system. No doubt convenient daycare is a godsend for many. But so far there is no definitive evidence that kids who go to daycare go on to do better in school or in life. So if we want to invest billions in helping kids, why are we spending it on the kids who need help the least? snip The United States is the greatest force for good the world has ever known. Of all the shocking things you can say around the dinner table, this is the most shocking one. After all, America-bashing is part of our national identity. At best, we see our neighbour as a well-intentioned but arrogant and blundering bully that throws its weight around too much. At worst, we see our neighbour as one of the most evil nations in the world. And yet, right now, hundreds of millions of people in India and China and other desperately poor parts of the world are being liberated from millennia of suffering and serfdom. Why? Because of the United States, which has spread its idea of economic freedom—and its purchasing power—around the world. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Which widely held belief would you like to challenge—and at the same time start a good dinner-table fight?

Why should we have to do that? I came to this forum because it is well run and has a better level of civility than most. I don't come here to be told to eff off or anything else, I agree with Argus, we should all try to keep it at a mature level.

So you don't want to support the troops or what?

There is no way Belinda would have crossed the floor without a cabinet position, Harper should not co-operate until this one is investigated too. How about when parliament convenes, Harper introduces recall legislation, how can the liberals vote against it now, with all their fuss.

I agree that the war has been a costly mistake, but I also agree with Monty, toomany people ignore the facts about it, and wish to re write history. However, we cannot change the past, so now somehow, the U.S. and maybe with the help of NATO, can help establish peace and avert a civil war. If we believe that no matter what we do, there will never be peace, that Iraq cannot govern themselves or get along with out a strong arm dictatorship, then the U.S. should leave; but do we believe that, or should we give the Iraqis more credit?

You've probably seen this before, but if not, read it and weep - for Western society and the future. This is indeed scary. www.nefafoundation.org/video/protest.wmv Also Saturday March 11 Danish Consulate, Toronto 151 Bloor St West 12-1:30 PM We encourage you to bring supportive signs, Danish flags, or, if you wish, Danish products. (I certainly wouldn't mind some cheese.) For further details, please visit www.navpurewal.com/denmark.htm . If you wish to contact me, you can do so at [email protected]

I agree that a university ed. is no guarrantee of a job. What we really neeed are more trade schools and apprenticeship positions. Years ago, a student could take auto mechanics during the last two years of high school and have them applied to the apprenticeship. We need more skilled trades people and construction workers, but its too hard to get into an apprenticeship, unions have it tied up. I would rather see the gov't sponsor trade schools and apprenticeships than increase university funding. Many more students would probably stay in high school and graduate if they could learn a trade and have an apprenticehip when graduating.

Elect it or abolish it - and soon

Actually, the real problem is with the left wing double standards. While I don't like what happened, it is no less ethical then buying off B. Stronach's or Scott Brison earlier. I'll get upset about it when liberals get upset over the major breach of ethis there, and ask for a similar inquiry into Belinda. Its too late for Scott Brison, but not for B.S. If Shapiro refuses to do this, then he should be replaced. Also, you might try debating in a more polite manner methinks.

You are right. Reverse discrimination is never right, we just need to enforce the current laws against discrimination in hiring. Most Canadians abhor racial discrimination, yet support the notion of one group receiving preferential treatment based on ancestry or skin colour. All people should be treated equally, including natives, they should be full and equal citizens and not 'apart' on reservations.

Conspicuous in its abscence is any reference to actual feminist groups. The idea that there are powerful radical man-hating feminist groups out there is a strawman fantasy. D I'm thinking of NAC, government funded too, while Real Women do what they do from memberships and donations.

Nah ! Just barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen