shortlived

Geuss you are forgetting about the billions of dollars of environmental resource and water supply destroyed by the mine. And the other 15% has no rights? I've read the James bay treaty can you perhaps quote the area you are referring to. Also who exactly signed... How many years was the land leased for? Is anyone still alive from then? If you are talking treaty #9 you are in another world if you think that thing has been adhered to by the government or even that it was a bilateral agreement. Robinson was a shill backed by business interests in the south forcing concessions from natives, little else. Indian Affairs at that time was closer to Nazi Germany than anything that would be considered legal by todays standards. I'd sooner spit on it than bind first nations to it. It is their land, the stipulations of treaty 9 have not been met by the government. take for instance hard to hunt animals in a mine, hard to fish in polluted rivers with no fish! it is their land any development that infringes their traditional capacities is a violation of treaty 9. Including mines or other development that pollute their waters, or remove their animals habitats. Do note I live in treaty 9. This is just the facts, even if it personally disadvantaged my own property rights (Which it sort of does atleast from Canada/Ontario.)

Interesting. What does lowering auto insurance rates do to the Liberal Government?

I dunno, grabing of the pants could have been to get hold of clothing to use to to remove her. Ripping the panties up though is definitely issued...................... also the grab breast part.. is sexually, but once again it may have been somewhere that he could get a hold of. a punch to the arm is relatively reaonsble use of force imo. From what I've seen so far if corroborated the assault charge is nonsense if the assault occurred after she was requested to vacate the premisis and she was not in retreat, the sexual assault charge should stand though.. but all the facts aren't out. Personally though ... I think if he wanted action he could have gotten it...but the facts are not clear. anything could have happened, people should have the chance to tell their version of the events. (you can grab a breast so hard as to leave a bruise as to cause pain to force someone to vacate as opposed to getting sexual gratification...)

Dude you don't seem to have a clue what you are talking about. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtun_people

The bloc went leftish. What is so great about the CPC not representing the view of about 50% of Quebec. Better to have people who represent the people there wouldn't you say?

I took your use of "case defined" as meaning defined in the case of the article, as opposed to "dictionary defined" being defined due to its periodic use and thus standard meaning. Misunderstanding in your meaning. We are on the same page, somewhat, but I think you may have overlooked the importance of viewing the word use in period that is the 1860's, not 2012 meaning of resident. Likewise the French verb domicilier .. it more or just means they live there, in legalize though it actually means that they cannot live somewhere else. (except for the provision of senators from quebec and those who are crown officers. This is because at law you cannot have more than one domicile at any given time, while they could have multiple places, senators who do live elsewhere actually live there, would give up their prior domicile unless there other residence was only temporary in nature. Sure there is wiggle room but the idea basically is that they are either travelling (attending to senate business etc..) or at home which needs to be in their province of representation. (This because you can only have one actual domicile and if you have your domicile in a place other than the province you represent you don't meet the qualification) now as a matter of convention I'm not sure this aspect was enforced... previously with other senators it might be worth looking at how the 1st 2nd and 3rd parliaments senators lived to get an idea on what the idea was.

This is the federal politics forum, post it to the "who the hell cares forum" Here is a link http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showforum=19

I think the key of any new purchase is that the jet be fully produced within Canada and that it is a company that pays taxes in Canada, if not produced by the government itself. I think the military jet maintenance people should be able to easily learn to put the things together and manufacture the thing. The easiest first go would be a modified cf-18, perhaps a hybrid with the arrow.

You know what they don't know anything. They make it up, that's what doctors do. Mental health is like that, the have no clue what the issue is. There are some legitimate neurological disorders, but lets just face the facts here, it is all based on the western "norm" not science. So don't even try to call a quak psychiatrist a medical doctor, they aren't, they are psychiatrists. They don't heal peoples bodies, they pump people full of drugs because they don't represent the norm. Doctors aren't god, they can stop some issues like bleeding and counteracting some body functions but they don't heal the brains of people with supposed psychiatric issues. psychiatry is in large extent just a way of forcing mind control on people who don't represent the norm. As said while there are legitimate cases 1 in 10 Canadians are not ill mentally, they are just not living the way some other people want them to. That is all there is to it. You simply don't got a clue what you are talking about. Calling gays or peds mentally ill is just nonsense. While some compulsive disorders can be neurologically caused you are out to lunch saying all peds are neurologically imbalanced and unable to control their sexual desires. You are just a f-ing sheep who thinks the doctor is always right. They aren't. PIP and most other psychiatric diagnosis methods are complete BS. The professions has been one wave of idiocy by the next since its inception. They just play on the norm to marginalize people and reinforce stigma. Drugging people to lethargy and inaction isn't curing people, it is poisoning them. A huge chunk of these illnesses are just developmental issues, not neurological. It is so utterly obvious this is a quak diagnosis that is a sham due to its basis It is an illness only exhibited in "persons 16 years of age or older" who have sex with people younger than the age of consent. LOMG SHAM diagnosis. "It occurs in 100% statutory rapists and people convicted of pedophilia" the cause of this illness is know to be conviction in a court of law, or appearing in any mass media publication as such. People with pedophilia should be confined away from society and drugged while locked in a straight jacket for the rest of their lives. Pedophilia is also known to be contagious and is spread via the internet. BEWARE! This dangerous disease can only be confined by you reporting it to police, who are immune from pedophilia contact. Is there a sex doll or vibrator mental illness? Hmm that is odd, paraphilia isn't a mental illness but pedophilia is, hmm wonder why that is? Geesh homophilia isn't a mental illness either.. that's strange. Harm is culturally assumed even if actual harm is not seen based on an age basis not a neurological effect basis. It simply isn't acceptable, even if it is not actually proven to be harmful to take pictures of naked children. Fact is, it isn't directly harmful as taking a picture of some kid with their clothes off or on has little if any effect. Likewise while some would disagree, there are people who claim masturbation isn't victimizing or self harm, others would say it is. But masturbation isn't illegal unless in public. Also masturbation isn't seen as a mental illness.. but is considered illegal in some places, and is to a large extent a culturally created practice in some groups. Even sex ed classes say masturbation is "normal". However how does masturbation differ from a hand job. It should start to be clear these are culturally defined issues, not based on science. In general many practices that are victimizing are not deemed "mental illness" people people are socially programmed to perform some of those acts. Even if in fact they are self victimization. THis basically places all "rough sex" as psychiatric illness. I think that is a load of BS. That is a pussification of norms. Its saying doing anything rough in life is illness. Fact is people have preferences, there is no norm. Doctors make norms to enforce social mores not saying what is healthy or unhealthy it is politics and little more. Sure it is criminal but people make choices. behavioural issues are just saying we don't like how they behave, it is a load of BS. pedaphilia is defined as "Sexual feelings directed toward children." This as a baseline would not say pedophilia is a psychiatric disorder but some pedophiles may victimize children, and those people like all other people who victimize people are insane..... oh hold on is it only mental illness if you get sexual pleasure from victimizing other people? what about people who just do it for kicks, or the rush, or to make money? You know those other criminals who victimize people are they all insane too? Why even have jail terms just let doctors decide every three years who stays or goes right?

It is simply irrational to call one sexual preference a psychiatric disorder, while ignoring the fact it is no different than 99% of sexual acts out there. This isn't to condone victimization but it is to say that victimization is a cultural victimization, not one brought on by any legitimate psychiatric illness.

Is this the same book that said Homosexuality was a psychiatric disorder? What do Americans know? this isn't a Canadian publication, I could pull up a copy of the khoran and it'd be perfectly fine. Ok I think that calling gays sane and peds insane is a bit of a stretch. In that case peds would have a not criminally responsible out.. This is like saying performing any abnormal sex act is a psychiatric illness, I think that is not reasonable.. the insanity rates would be incredibly high, and only perhaps the amish would be sane. and I bet there is some rule about shaving your moustache off and growing a beard that would qualify you as insane too. but at the same time with new legislation that would be an indefinite sentence anyway. ex. anal sex rates between 1960 and 1990 increased from 9% to over 27%. Is this to say that a dramatic increase of people became insane? Or is it only insane if the but is less than 16 years old? Or sorry it is still a crime if it involves someone under 18. anal intercourse is guilty of an indictable offence ---- so how is this crime able to be a crime if the person is insane and thus not criminally responsible? Or any people who have sex while still minors are insane... even though puberty hits as early as 8 years old and now kids are having sex all over.. so all these teens and youngers having sex with each other are insane. Your book is just another quack book that makes anything the author doesn't like insane as opposed to being founded on reasonable scientific grounds. There is more to behaviour than cause and effect. Personally I think shoving a piece of plastic into a body orifice is far more non-sane biologically than confused actions of using flesh. However this is not to say it is more ethical or moral.

I dunno where do you think it is? LOL do you really believe that? Some letters are switched around and a new C added and suddently it is a new party? You are just being humourous right?

You don't get tenders do you... you don't contact businesses, you put out a tender, and they contact you... you need to pay attention to the government tenders avenues. ex. http://www.merx.com/English/nonmember.asp?WCE=Show&TAB=1&State=1&hcode=DSmmOnl5zU6FVjU16CWLSQ%3D%3D None the less I think this is problematic that businesses aren't aware, and don't know how to do business with government. I do think though that doing some shopping around should occur.

The constition doesn't use the term "residency" it says "be resident in the province they represent" except quebec where the have to own property in the voting district they represent. en francais |Il devra être domicilié dans la province pour laquelle il est nommé| HE "will (needs to be) be" RESIDENT IN THE PROVINCE FOR WHICH HE IS NAMED. domicilié "In law, domicile is the status or attribution of being a permanent resident in a particular jurisdiction. A person can remain domiciled in a jurisdiction even after they have left it, if they have maintained sufficient links with that jurisdiction or have not displayed an intention to leave permanently (i.e., if that person has moved to a different state, but has not yet formed an intention to remain there indefinitely)." source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domicile_(law) " Dicey states the common law rule thus: Every independent person can acquire a domicile of choice by the jurisdiction of residence and intention of permanent or indefinite residence, but not otherwise.[2] A person abandons a domicile of choice in a jurisdiction by ceasing to reside there and by ceasing to intend to reside there permanently or indefinitely (not based on the immigration status, but based on the social & moral status ), and not otherwise. When a domicile of choice is abandoned, either (i) a new domicile of choice is acquired; or (ii) the domicile of origin revives" Every person receives at birth a domicile of origin unless adopted. "three things must exist at the same time, (a) the party must be personally present in the place which he chooses as a domicile, ( he must choose such place as his domicile, and © he must be sui juris. Read more: http://chestofbooks.com/society/law/Popular-Law-12/Section-16-Domicile-Of-Choice.html#.UTCLe9GEgmg#ixzz2MHjzmy00"

Ok when the cost of immigrants alone is $23 billion, I don't understand how a program for 2,000,000 Canadians, that provides a subsistence wage of $10/h for 50 hours per month (or $500/month on par or higher than welfare rates) which would cost 1 Billion a month or 12 Billion a year, is so hard to think could actually save money. Welfare in Ontario alone costs 2 Billion a year. The federal government spends close to 7 billion dollars on social program funding just Ontario and already existing federal program spending would equally show how this program would dramatically reduce costs, savings billions of dollars and making the country far more productive and efficient. In Ontario Welfare recipients get only $227 for basic needs. This amount would more than double funding for basic needs, while dramatically reducing the cost of program administration.. and create products and goods which would reduce government costs in other areas. Such as staffing, why spend 7 billion dollars employing people who manage people when you can spend 7 billion dollars to employ people that make goods that lower your costs. The possibilities to earn more could exist as more work was available. Although if only 5% of the unemployed workforce actually went to this program, that would provide up to 100 hours to people, which would equate $1000/month for the unemployed far higher than welfare rates in any province in Canada. This as a suplimental income for the first 2,000,000 Canadians who apply whether they are working or not gives people the chance for extra work, however a priority for the lowest income people. 12 billion a year to reduce poverty is a start, it isn't enough but as a starting point. All people should be able to live above the poverty line. We need to do this by income redistribution, it shouldn't be tax but a poverty eradication mechanism. You can pay for no work, or you can pay for work. Paying for work, pays value back into the system, something that being taxed for EI you don't have access to doesn't.\ EI needs to work as a premium based annuity fund that will give a little extra to people in retirement who don't draw on the system. It needs to be voluntary, and people need to have work if they need it. We should reward people who want to work, and giving a mechanism to those who have the least, and those willing to work longer for some extra money when they need it is far better than do nothing meaningful welfare programs and pay for nothing EI programs. This is only one position read the following to see even more http://reviewcanada.ca/essays/2012/12/01/scrapping-welfare/ No questions asked, do the work get paid. No overhead for red tape and bureaucracy. Pencil pushers and political manipulation.

In order to grow the economy you need to grow exports. Moving money from one side of Canada to the other just takes from one group and gives to another. 1st off you can't see the economy based on dollars and cents you need to see it based upon peoples needs being met. Secondarily how long the needs of people can be met based upon produce stockpiled. Other indicators are just economic voodoo.

Not at all. first off 1. EI should be optional not a forced program, so people getting the short end aren't forced to pay other peoples pogey and get no benefits. 2. Private unemployment insurance should also be available for people that don't want the government program. 3. there are duplicate layers that create waste, so rolling social insurance and employment insurance together just makes sense. It would save millions as a baseline by reducing administrative overlaps. It just makes no sense why productive activities aren't done. The EI program is one designed to be abused, now they are going to pay people to defeat the only benefit of the program, that is people who are chronically unemployed or underemployed. None the less I firmly support my concept. However, by all means explain what the problem with having people work for money is? As well what is wrong with a premium based insurance program that collects based upon the cost of running the program? Afterall why try to save money with a program that someone is going to get shorted on anyway, and a private plan could compete with as well as fill contracts and government tenders, as well as private tenders that are possible through a workhouse crown corporation. I've seen too many people not be eligible for EI because of employment times. It just isn't a fair system. People should have access to work. For anyone benefiting off the program there are a whole lot of people paying EI taxes for nothing. With work done, taxes get reduced on the flip side because government costs are reduced in the supply and personnel costs chain. EI is too often used as a government slush fund instead of what it was suppose to be used for. You need to take the slush away wherever it exists and insure it can't be slushed. There are many many 10's of thousands left to the welfare lines, well over 100,000. It just makes no managerial sense to reduce efficiency of the able bodied work force. Jacee it is clear you just don't want people to work for money. You'd rather have people who work seasonally benefit from all the other Canadians who work year round. There should be a gaurenteed work program to chronic layoffs and people who don't meet the hour threshold, or people who choose not to pay into EI. Provincial welfare should be eliminated along with transfers for provincial welfare for the able bodied, and instead funds rolled into employment programs which will set out to create resource stockpiles and government needed goods and services. Likewise they would fill government tenders, as well as private tenders, through a workhouse crown corporation. This dual system for people who meet the profile and those who pay in but miss the mark is total BS, a complete sham for those hard working Canadians who don't get the hours needed to get benefits back for what they pay into, a total ripoff and little more for government slush funding and indirect subsidy to specific industrial sectors. This program could see benfits continued to be paid into if subscribing, and thus earn work hours for program eligibility.

Are you forgetting Lucien Bouchard was a Cabinet Minister in the Mulrooney government and the original bloc circa 1991 was composed of surviving PCs there were more pcs in the bloc than in the pc party.

that and perhaps it is a semi autonomous tribal area and always has been... It is the same reason why nato forces dont need to be in Afghanistan for over 10 years, it isn't Canada or other memberstates, and nato is suppose to be a defensive organization. Afghanistan ain't part of NATO. Why are we spending money picking favorites in the region? What is the geopolitical gain I am missing? (other than training) It is only increasing the scale of civil war once the bulk of nato forces are gone next year. http://www.capebretonpost.com/News/Canada%20-%20World/2013-02-27/article-3185841/Afghans-worry-about-international-aid-vacuum-after-2014-troop-withdrawal/1

Dude calling pedophilia a psychiatric disorder is a little bit of flame bait wouldn't you say? Its like having any sexual preference is a psychiatric disorder. The issue with pedophilia is that it violates western notions of consensual sex required at law. "True sexual attraction" is largely hormone based. but sexual arousal can be programed. In this basis having a preference to thin women over fat women would be a psychiatric disorder. For all the harm quack doctors have done to people over their professed illnesses of action you seem to be jumping the gun on what simply amounts to sex without consent, due to the minors inability to have enough maturity for informed consent on a vague definintion which doesn't even meet our own historic premises of cosent, which in the past use to be clearly defined as age 12 for most judeochristian society, but moved to 16 18 and 19 and 21 to a large extent. People can enter puberty as early as 8 or 9 years old so physiologically they begin to be able to have childen at that age. The idea of sexual acts in the minds of children, could be formed at a much younger age, it just isn't a culturally acceptable thing to do so. However it has nothing to do with psychiatry and everything to do with culture. At worst it is unacceptable behaviour, which is due to psychological programming, not psychiatry. Even if there is a gay bomb I'm not aware of there being a pedobomb.

Oh and what about the addict pornwomen the feminists proports. What about sweatshop labour Should regular porn and goods produced places that pay little or no wages be banned too?

If combatants are breaking the "rules of war" then what is the issue with noncombatants doing the same? The Syrian 'Terrorists' are fighting a just cause.. while you just put on blinders when you see pages like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes or http://www.policymic.com/articles/24164/a-list-of-children-killed-by-drone-strikes-in-pakistan-and-yemen How exactly are people suppose to resist if the government has been destroyed by the invading country.. quite a bit of rhetoric here. People have the right to self preservation and defence against acts of lethal force directed at them. It just doesn't fly... kids playing by the road are a security risk so the humanitarian and law abiding west must blow them up with a missile to protect people... because the rules of war let invading countries blow up children that are standing near a road... uhm think again on your double standard here. Since when do 3 young children require marine air support? Has something changed in the fighting capacities of the US marine forces I'm not aware of? | as many as 98% of those killed by drone strikes are civilians.| can you imagine that in order for police to arrest two cirminals they kill 98 civillians.. that is so humane. Based upon that ratio in order to kill the Canadian military you could exterminate the entire population of Canada or the entire US population to defeat the US military.

1 NDPer went crossed the floor.. there are only 4 other bloc members.. (in the bloc caucus). 2011 75 4 889,788 6.0% 23.4%

.. UHM remote areas aren't totally free but they both provide public protection and let them live a non unrealistic lifestyle that prison hand feeds them. you know the 40000 people in Canadian prisons costing Canada $350 a day each that is 14 million a day.... is just a waste of money. We could be spending far less and having them create goods, provide them with an income.. even $50 a day is a very decent wage with board and lodging brought in.. mobile homes could be bought for the cost of 10 days in prison.. It is just horribly managed and not made efficient. The people just want them to sit in jail and do nothing but watch TV and socialize, and work out, free meals, free dental and medical. Why are we paying for them to do that.. they should be put to work, earn a living, and have money saved for them for when they get out so they have a chance at starting and continuing a real life free from crime. Worse yet this money is just being diverted now to US prison companies. Freedom comes from within anyway... prison just creates more dysfunction. Why just dump the money down the drain. I think most criminals would stop being criminals for less than $350 a day.

Yeah we should make "work camps" you know harvesting resources, building stuff, doing roadwork, just get RV's or something ATV's etc.. there is a low cost solution no need for expensive stuff. You know farming, raising caribou who knows the possibilities are endless... Get some monitoring bands etc.. just send them to work. I think this should really be for distributors and people who don't report the clear child porn. But if police know people are viewing the stuff the police should shut it down. People who repeatedly come up on the radar might clearly be looking for it.. I think there is a difference between being exposed to child porn and looking for child porn. But yeah the prisons are a waste of money. they should be shut down or converted to new use such as emergency homeless shelters, and government sleep overs in place of motel/hotels billings... people with medical problems could go to the infirmaries though, as well people who refuse to do the work program could be put to a block. Limit the staff to military instead of a complex corrections system.