shortlived

Au contraire your fantasy is fantasy. What in there don't you see? It is absolute genious, my fantasies arn't fit for this board, my advice is. No argument, nothing to argue against, other than to represent your corrupt and shortsighted position. Lets look at it again, this time think, maybe take few breaths and get some circulation to your nogen.

Well apparently the cia gave Chavez cancer, what if the NDP win,.... you never know what the US might do.... sure if the us wanted they could do many things, but I think expecting individuals to not have ulterior motives, who knows what the guys background is, did they do a security clearance on him or the employees... its not just the government plotting everything. Have to note the people who did the WTC and pentagon were apparently living in AMerica what if terrorists did a plot against canada from the us... anything is possible right, why even do a security check at all right, it is from america, there is no crime in america right. I'm just saying that is a whole lot of bricks for damn cheap. Its practically dumping. Yeah cause crime has never infiltrated GC projects.. like the hells angels front who renovated parliament, and the mafia who built the trans canada in northern ontario and quebec..

Not as cheap as it was 4 years ago but still 1/4 to 1/8th the cost of the south or more. Just expect to be using greenhouses if you want to grow your own food in quantities and variety. Of course hunting and fishing and natural harvesting can carry you for. Remember though ocean levels are suppose to rise by a meter or so over the next 50 years. so don't buy too close. If you can do a high altitutde island do it, easier to manage fire risk. My advice is 8 to 78 meters above sea level.

they are doing up the mammoth in japan but I think this callogen cloning may provide for replication of camel bones, I don't know enough about cloning to tell you if so dinosaurs can also be cloned. Now we were to find a frozen giant camel frozen with biological cells still live then yes for sure. tell me what you can get from this http://endo.endojournals.org/content/142/3/1341.full.pdf The missing element is an "incubator" Putting a giant camel into a normal camel might be a little mean. it would probably need to be a really large female camel to incubate. Notice how there was no arab joke about growing bones in camels... The cloning project would probably pay for itself if cloning from bone callogen were possible.... ^^^

forests are good for carbon sequestration (but so is peat) which the north is doing a lot, they are not good for forest fires, which will effect a larger area than the arctic like the area of "central" Canada covered by boreal forests. They arn't good for cooling things down though, but they will help to capture carbon, planting trees can go a long way but they need to be planted in a way that minimizes fire risk. (do note though that the arctic is traditionally very arid) It will continue to hit the local species hard. arctic fox, caribou, polar bear, etc... http://www.allaboutwildlife.com/endangered-species/species-most-endangered-by-global-warming/4256 The impact is the the TEK will be jepordized, as northern areas will need to switch over to agriculture, more, as animal food stocks of the north become jepordized. Waiting until they are gone is too late. There should be reindeer farms and hydroponic operations opened up in the near future rather than waiting 10 years from now.

Yes, what type of security risk can be introduced by importing the building materials from a foreign country, afterall the building just intends to be used for high level dignitaries and high profile Canadian politicians..

Read what I wrote before posting that sort of nonsense. First off do the math, it does effect how much everyone pays because the people who participate in the program end up paying for future years students. People who don't participate year on year pay less toward post secondary education. 1% per 3 terms. people graduate after 3-4 years for a bachelors. This equals 2.6-3% of income per annum back into the fund. Masters may be 4-5% Someone using the program for a doctorate may be more. It is peoples choice to pay any fee that is levied to them by the government. If they are working in Canada wage garnishment works. I think the number of Canadians who skip country and drop their Canadian citizenship will be minimal. Sure it might account for some costs, like will participants who die early. But yes it will pay for itself, the question is how many years will it take. The concept here though is that people who accept the system pay for it not the other way around. And the reason I know this works is because it is founded on solid principles that come right out of pyramid schemes and MLM.

Put up the place where the natives signed with the federal government in all those treaties? No a head of state has reserve powers. Letters patents such as those granting foreign diplomacy powers, or even alloances for settlement West of Quebec and the conditions there were all crown prerogatives. The Monarch is the "chief executive" they do not take orders from "the government" that is parliament. Parliament drafts laws, and those laws are effectively put into force. Now ministers, ministers who are crown officers, serve the crown, not the other way around. (while there are duties owed by the monarch, they go to all loyal subjects not to the minister themselves, that is why reserve powers exist, to exercise the individual and collective interests of Canadian subjects.) You simply have some convoluted republican concept in your head that doesn't reflect how things are suppose to be done. The treaties are with the crown, who in turn can issue orders, which they take in deliberation with the privy counsel, which cabinet represents the "foremost" of privy counsels, but advice can be taken from any member of privy counsel. You like to water it down so that power is more republican based but that is just a form of passive treason. Federal government is not Canada and is not the state, it is an apparatus, any connotation of the federal government being the state is a false misonomer, drawn from a very closely interbred function of the crown, the governor general, privy counsel and the federal government as exercised through cabinet. Cabinet comes to the crown not the other way around, parliament comes to the crown through the senate not the other way around. The crown in turns is the body to which executive government functions. The corruptions which you speak of end up causing problems because of incorrect function. So many mistakes have totally blurred function so that correct function becomes impossible. Improper or negligent exercise of treaty with the nations of the first peoples of Canada is just one example of this.

Meh. Nice words, where is the substance? Mind supplying some evidence? There are still ways that an election could occur early, such as *gasp* non confidence from within the party, perhaps spurred by a party fracture of some sort like a resigning PM, or a handful of by-elections due to retirements not going to the conservatives. It would take something like 12 by elections, there are over 12 conservative mps in their 60's and 70's any number of these guys might even not want to go another two years for health or other reasons, or even run in the next election due to being past normal retirement age by the end of the next term or already Boughen, Ray Conservative Party of Canada Saskatchewan 1937.05.25 75 O'Connor, Gordon Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1939.05.18 73 Oliver, Joe Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1940.05.20 72 Tilson, David Allan Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1941.03.19 71 Fantino, Julian Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1942.08.13 70 Kent, Peter Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1943.07.27 69 Schellenberger, Gary Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1943.09.15 69 Lauzon, Guy Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1944.04.06 68 Harris, Richard M. Conservative Party of Canada British Columbia 1944.09.06 68 Goldring, Peter Conservative Party of Canada Alberta 1944.12.12 68 Payne, LaVar Conservative Party of Canada Alberta 1945.02.23 68 MacKenzie, Dave Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1946.06.12 66 Davidson, Patricia Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1946.06.30 66 Galipeau, Royal Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1947.01.05 66 Smith, Joy Conservative Party of Canada Manitoba 1947.02.20 66 Hawn, Laurie Conservative Party of Canada Alberta 1947.05.11 65 Kramp, Daryl Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1947.06.14 65 Shipley, Bev Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1947.06.22 65 Kerr, Greg Conservative Party of Canada Nova Scotia 1947.10.08 65 Norlock, Rick Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1948.03.07 65 Mayes, Colin Conservative Party of Canada British Columbia 1948.04.11 64 Wong, Alice Conservative Party of Canada British Columbia 1948.06.30 64 Duncan, John Conservative Party of Canada British Columbia 1948.12.19 64 Chisu, Corneliu Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1949.02.13 64 O'Neill Gordon, Tilly Conservative Party of Canada New Brunswick 1949.02.16 64 Ablonczy, Diane Conservative Party of Canada Alberta 1949.05.06 63 Aspin, Jay Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1949.08.19 63 Albrecht, Harold Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1949.10.15 63 Komarnicki, Ed Conservative Party of Canada Saskatchewan 1949.11.18 63 Flaherty, James Michael (Jim) Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1949.12.30 63 Warawa, Mark Conservative Party of Canada British Columbia 1950.05.07 62 Obhrai, Deepak Conservative Party of Canada Alberta 1950.07.05 62 Benoit, Leon Earl Conservative Party of Canada Alberta 1950.07.07 62 Leung, Chungsen Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1950.07.14 62 Bennett, Carolyn Liberal Party of Canada Ontario 1950.12.20 62 Sopuck, Robert Conservative Party of Canada Manitoba 1951.07.11 61 Ritz, Gerry Conservative Party of Canada Saskatchewan 1951.08.19 61 Lunney, James Conservative Party of Canada British Columbia 1951.09.05 61 Lukiwski, Tom Conservative Party of Canada Saskatchewan 1951.10.05 61 Carmichael, John Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1952.02.14 61 Menzies, Ted Conservative Party of Canada Alberta 1952.02.18 61 Valcourt, Bernard Conservative Party of Canada New Brunswick 1952.02.18 61 Ashfield, Keith Conservative Party of Canada New Brunswick 1952.03.28 60 Nicholson, Rob Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1952.04.29 60 Young, Terence H. Conservative Party of Canada Ontario 1952.07.24 60 Toews, Vic Conservative Party of Canada Manitoba 1952.09.10 60

Nope you got it wrong that was the cost of transporting MPs and ministers, and other government officials by replacing challenger jets with small personal aircraft that cost 1/200th to 1/500th of the cost to buy and operate. The arming part was only using bomarc missiles as an area effect against any type of invasion or large scale attack. Many planes and missiles is far more effective against a mass launch than 50 planes based at 2-3 points in Canada You don't need fast planes, you need fast missiles or energy weapons. The light personal jets were a solution for challenger replacement not cf18 replacement although 1 or 2 f35s would be sacrified to fund the program for 400 or so jets and second hand aircraft like helicopters and turboprops to be leased for commercial purposes such as air cargo and flight training amongst small scale transport. for cf 18 replacement, was to be done with a variant CF-18 with an autoflight and remote flight function amongst other tweaks which could be physically engaged. via a physical bridge, rafale for eastern Canada and quebec, and eventually f35's or their successors or something like the j31 when the programs mature in 5-10years. The personal jets and other craft would be used primarily for Canadian Domestic flights, while the remaining challengers would be used in concert with commercial flights where available or non emergency in nature (of course it would be on economy flights not VIP/ business or first class as ministers often use.) military personnel would use military jets and civilian and military flights would only intermingle during emergencies. some deployments of personnel overseas would be done through commercial flights were available. Only equipment transfers or emergency operations might require military aircraft. However civllian government should be use to flying economy class while the government has a debt. Its ultra contemptuous for a company running year on year losses for 10 years while also being in debt hundreds of billions of dollars would be so thieving as to live in luxury while they drain money from the taxpayers. If they want luxury and VIP treatment they should pay for it out of their generous salaries (generous for incompetents) This navy issue though, needs to address the realities of the future. A strong arctic capable merchant marine with the ability weaponize at a future date. This buy really expensive equipment that can be built for a fraction of the cost BS is nonsense, get technicians to build it, stop paying prices garnered by IP blockades. Build the tech by techs, get our ship builders to be able to build arctic capable hulls and equipment, that's all you need. aside from ships able to intergrate energy weapons, perhaps super caviated torpedos and some supermachine gun mounts. Canada doesn't need big ships it needs small craft capble of performing in the arctic as well as in the great lakes which could act as ferry boats or inter great lake cargos, plus cargoes. Some boats that can operate on the mississipi might be good too. Big ships are big targets. The only big ships should be freighters/cargos able to be converted into use as helipads and aircraft carriers. That way they can earn their keep and still be used for emergencies. These acquisitions should not be looked at from a solely military standpoint, they should primarily integrate the commercial use and secondary military function. The key is instilling in the CF/navy an ability to build and maintain its own electronic systems. Also rolling the navy into the coast guard should also occur, perhaps just calling them Maritime Forces, if deployed outside Canada they could be called NAVY and if deployed within Canadian seas Coast Gaurd. ex. http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/marpac/0/0-w_eng.asp This merchant marine aspect would provide much better global deployment of Canadian forces to points of economic interest to Canadians by default.

Well Canada wouldn't want to upset up all those US arms manufactures and shareholders. What would they do if they couldn't bid on contracts?

0.1% OF GLOBAL EMISSIONS IS ALOT This is pretty much just an industrialized countries issue though. The G20 would need to address this issue themselves since they are pretty much the source. If there are no pressures there is no change, because it is cheaper to do less. Even Sudbury improved their smokestacks. The only initiative that needs to be taken is to kill the use of fossil fuels uses which account for over 95% of all co2 emissions. This can be done by simply making co2 processing plants run by the government and billed to fossil fuel companies. This would mean converting all co2 creating combustion points into a system that had to incorporate a compressor and these compression tanks could be flushed at gas stations etc.. or exist at the industrial sites themselves. Smaller combustion things could be converted to electric most of this stuff is from industrial plants though so simply requiring conversion plants is what needs to be put into law. Forget everything else for the co2 problem.

Or maybe even the great green south or great green east or great green west. At this rate it'll have to be renamed the great green north... green captures more heat than white.

Flarehty seems to agree http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/flaherty-warns-of-significant-hit-to-federal-revenue/article9518448/

Liberals raised environmental "respect", through initiatives like agreeing to kyoto, and instilling a positive environmental image I think that they grew on the environmental awareness issue.... --- copps???? ????Marchi is currently serving as a Senior Fellow with the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, in Geneva.????? Stewart headed the Canadian delegation to the Kyoto climate change negotiations and signed the Kyoto Accord on behalf of Canada.[5] She pushed for action on the Kyoto Accord, improvements in the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, the Species at Risk Act, and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act Anderson worked for strict conservation measures to protect fish stocks getting an agreement with the United States under the Pacific Salmon Treaty to conserve salmon stocks and to end the destructive competitive fishing by the US and Canadian commercial fleets. Rio Summit conventions on biodiversity and climate change. He was successful in getting the Species at Risk Act passed by Parliament and signed into law (2004) Canadian ratification of the Kyoto Protocol in December 2002. mproving air and water quality and established improved federal provincial cooperation on environmental issues. , Anderson was the first Canadian elected as president of the governing council of the United Nations Environment Programme, a post he held for two years Anderson has received a number of environmental awards, including the John Fraser Award for Environmental Achievement from the Sierra Club of Canada (2005), the Dr. Andrew Thompson Award from West Coast Environmental Law for his lifetime contributions to the environment and sustainability in British Columbia (2004), and the 50th anniversary International Conservation Award (1998) from the Atlantic Salmon Federation. Dion was very well known for his enviornmental programme a Globe and Mail article described Dion as being "bent on transforming the environment dossier from the traditional tree-hugger's last stand into a forward-thinking economic portfolio.".[34] Dion championed a "new industrial revolution" focused on "environmentally-sustainable technologies and products" What has the CPC done to improve the environment over the last 8 years? Unprotecting 99% of Canadas waterways? Blocking climate change measures, and blindly standing by as industry grows and fails to modernize its technology to protect the environment?

Did he get another job in the public service. I think it may be more correct, he was a public servant. I applaud him, more stooges should speak out against faulty government reasoning including opposition MPs you state should. but *gasp* perhaps its not in opposition MPs interest to raise red flags for machavellian or personal inclinations. So what is the public left to be devoured? Or should they be given a sign of warning?

The key is to switch to renewable resources, and to create 0 emissions production systems. This also means setting up waste chemical banks rather than dumping into the water supply or burrying toxic waste, that is actually processing and reusing industrial waste. This means creating complimentary processes. For instance you have lots of sulphur from oil extraction, so you need to put sulphur to use somewhere else or bank it, but it should be local. Also its not about the "Cheapest goods" but managing the cycle efficiently since money is profit not effectiveness or sustainability. Its not complex, people just cut corners because it looks good enough (but it isn't) If 6% of unemployed people took on 6% of GDP to be employed in making sustainable renewable cycles of industry then the economy doesn't suffer, it improves, it is just who has the hoards at the end of the day. flattening out the super rich a little to give 6% of the population who is unemployed jobs is not a disservice. example of complimentary industries to tar sands oil is growing natural rubber, making explosives, and health products. If those industries arn't developed the economic cycle is not developed. Its not just making stuff to make stuff.. but if you can use sulphur as a disinfectant rather than silver then you use sulphur if you produce sulphure locally. If you want to see strong economies you have to look to how countries under sanctions like Iraq, Cuba, North Korea or Iran have faired, and how they have coped economically. Sure they tanked but they didn't tank so hard they were unsalvagable, they also refined their ability. Look to patriot or victory goods.. of WWII these are efficiencies that can also become environmental efficiencies. The problem is the economy is developed and the people who run the economy are resistant to change. because they don't give a damn about the environment. They don't care how it is left if there is no law suit at the end of the tunnel. Refining Co2 is the sure fire way of reducing emissions, and this means developing industries like nanocarbon fibre production, like a giant space elevator or tenis racquets, or tools, or even building materials like walls and support beams and body armour, and so on. Oxygen can be added to the atmopshere used in various pressurized uses like welding and so on, you just need to catalyze the oxygen from the carbon before it goes out. then use the carbon and use the oxygen. Its a real no brainer. You just insure that industries have all their airborne and liquid wastes converted to usable materials through micron and submicron filtering and catalytic conversion. This is just one example. http://www.rsc.org/chemistryworld/News/2009/October/09100901.asp Investing in micronuclear reactors at large industrial sites is a way of insuring enough energy is there from clean sources to fuel these processes.. With a reactor getting that it takes 393.5 kJ/mol. isn't nearly as difficult as it seems. or how about heat CO2 over a catalyst of iron doped zeolite and hydrogen to produce water and ethylene or all of the above isntead we have dump co2 crap into air warm planet kill polar bears... meh. oh and the give people cancer. my gosh just think, alberta could start refining its own oil instead of transporting it 1000's of KM to be refined...!!

Yeah but they are suppose to start balancing the deficit in their last year.. there is a point when debt to gdp ratio means there is no governmental spending, how can Canada afford another Harper Government majority? Who wants to run a government with no tax payer money to spend? If it went from 66% to 99% over 5 years that would put the debt to gdp ratio at 130% by the end of the next Harper government term. Ok well it probably won't go that high without major spending on airplanes and ships and stuff, or a war in iran or something, so it probably might only go to 115% or something like that, but hold on the deficit is going to be balanced right. Hell it only costs 5 billion dollars per year to pay the debt interest right whats another couple billion for another harper government term. ra ra! go fiscal conservatism, show the left how it is done. LIke what is 9 billion dollars a year going to buy that Canadian tax payers want right.. They'd probably just be corporate tax deducations anyway not tax reductions for the common canadian.

bemused.... http://www.zdnet.com/cn/china-commercializes-3d-printing-in-aviation-7000011377/ mi hao hao sheishei off to learn chinese to audition for survivor. wtf.... http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/766216.shtml

Having to face Trudeau whenever they are both in the commons during QP?

leaving them up there to die isn't a solution either. Its not like you are going to refreze their habitat. Unless there are programs actively feeding these things this is just how long they last. The only real solution is to build fishing platforms for the bears I can think of. And fridge stations.

Kenny reminds me of that old chief of security for Chretien.

Ok how is he not? The PBO is a critic, that is the whole premise of the accountability act, to have a counter weight to parliament to provide independent insight, not to only research facts for parliament look at the accountability act and come back with some clarity on what you are talking about. Why is it that government needs to operate in secret on matters of public interest? What exactly are you trying to hide from Canadians, and why? It is clearly indicated that the PBO is to serve both Parliament AND CANADIANS. --- if you don't believe this say but it is well documented. This MacLeans article is only one point of reference of this fact http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/02/24/toward-a-stronger-parliamentary-budget-officer/ That is a statement echoed in government literature. It seems odd that when the auditor general and PBO start to inform parliament and Canadians of lies on the part of the government that the government wants them muzzled, strange isn't it? Wonder why that is? Why is it Argus you want government invovlement with Canadians confined to paper and QP?That is sort of a gov tied very closely to dumping of stuff of little value. see also http://www.parl.gc.ca/PBO-DPB/documents/2009-05-14_Statement_to_BILI.pdf http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=3993042&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=40&Ses=2&File=18 http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/oag-bvg_e_35345.html http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=5045004&Language=E&Mode=1 and so on... all to serve Canadians not just give a hand to parliament. Although page does seem incline to say he was serving "tax payers" as opposed to all Canadians.

I think being beaten by Trudeau would be a bitter end but I'm not sure he has much of a choice, unless there is a viable replacement. McKay has the F35 boondoggle hanging over his head, and I'm not so sure anyone who should still be around will have much seniority to actually play PM. I'm willing to bet $5 he doesn't, but polls are showing if Trudeau wins the liberal election he will go on to lead a minority Govt after the next election. There are of course options but I'm not too convinced they will be able to be sold federally or with as much fanfare as what Stephen Harper once possessed.

where are you getting that from? s. 42 clearly indicates section 38.1 38. (1) An amendment to the Constitution of Canada may be made by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada where so authorized by (a) resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons; and (b) resolutions of the legislative assemblies of at least two-thirds of the provinces that have, in the aggregate, according to the then latest general census, at least fifty per cent of the population of all the provinces. 42. (1) An amendment to the Constitution of Canada in relation to the following matters may be made only in accordance with subsection 38(1): (b) the powers of the Senate and the method of selecting Senators; An absence of powers and the ability to select them precludes where they are coming from.