shortlived

I'm not on the Canadian no fly list. My travel is largely for health and safety reasons denial of my ability to travel damages my health and safety. None the less it is a clear violation of my right to enter and leave Canada. You are being obtuse. Money is property also property or comfort of the public; there is no doubt a restriction on public comfort by removing their mobility. It is a nuisance. Anyone should be able to see that.

Well my support is with the first nations on this. They are sovereign, especially in absence of treaty being adhered to. If the state is to hold together as a union of nations then it will be up to equalization and respect of rights, especially those rights that first nations are suppose to have including the right to consultation if their lives are being effected by legislation. IMO I think that the right to consultation needs to be protected, by giving first nations as individual nations and they are such as Mattawa first nation etc.. the right of vetoing federal legislation effecting their rights, and that only a tribunal established by both the federal government and aboriginal government should resolve those liabilities. First nations do hold sovereign powers. The current government seems to be more incline to "manage" first nations, than treat them as sovereign states,as a means to deny them their rights under international law and the constitution. The feds continuing to force subjugation and assimilation of the first nations needs to stop much like the occupation of lowland Quebec needs to stop, if there is indeed free peoples being subjugated. We are all entitled to our freedom and independence. Subjugation is a corrupt practice of the bygone colonial era. Just greedy people not wanting to loose the benefit of subjugating and enslaving people and their land for their own selfish gain. People need to wake up to the reality of a difference of a Canada brought together through mutual agreement and cooperation, or one of abuse by rule by force. The abuses are not forgotten. While I do think it is the attorney generals (or regents) job not the prime ministers or ministers of the crown. Whoever is dealing needs to have full plenary powers. The minister of indian affairs does not have that power so they are not a suitable choice. First nations have never given up their sovereignty.

don't be retarded.

I fly a couple times a year and there has been no problem with this. Only the US has been a bitch over made up reasons saying I intend to live and work in the US which couldn't be further from the truth. The federal government forced me to stay for close to a month and offered me work, which occured because they used the basis of me trying to live and work in the US as a means to deny me entry while travelling home from Mexico through the US. None the less I flew as recently as January which went smoothly even though my passport was stolen. None the less, someone less intelligent then you would be needed to believe me to be a risk to aircraft security. I'm the one who is usually placed near the emergency exit by the airline. The absence of grounds to put me on the list. It is an indictable offence. It is creating a nuisance. I have the right to enter or leave Canada, as well as the ability to take up residence in any province in Canada. You can't deny me the right to travel outside of court order, and there are no grounds to deny my liberties. It is illegal to deny liberties extra-judicially It violates my common law rights. I have equal access to enjoy liberties Canadians enjoy, any attempt to stop those liberties is an indictable offence. 180. Common nuisance 180. (1) Every one who commits a common nuisance and thereby (a) endangers the lives, safety or health of the public, or (b causes physical injury to any person, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years. Definition (2) For the purposes of this section, every one commits a common nuisance who does an unlawful act or fails to discharge a legal duty and thereby (a) endangers the lives, safety, health, property or comfort of the public; or (b obstructs the public in the exercise or enjoyment of any right that is common to all the subjects of Her Majesty in Canada. R.S., c. C-34, s. 176. 1. Everyone lawfully within the territory of a State shall, within that territory, have the right to liberty of movement and freedom to choose his residence. 2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own. 1. All persons shall be equal before the courts and tribunals. In the determination of any criminal charge against him, or of his rights and obligations in a suit at law, everyone shall be entitled to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law.

Dude if I want to walk out of Canada I can, you do not determine my mode of transport. it is a violation, you cannot say my mobility rights are restricted to boats or walking, you are being absurd. All forms of mobility are granted under that right there are no exclusions. Likewise the right of return is an international right, which is being denied to the guy. You clearly don't understand the principles of Canadian and international mobility rights. The term right of return refers to a principle of international law, codified in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and theInternational Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Canada has ratified those agreements. Article 12 guarantees freedom of movement, including the right of persons to choose their residence and to leave a country Article 12 2. Everyone shall be free to leave any country, including his own. 3. The above-mentioned rights shall not be subject to any restrictions except those which are provided by law, are necessary to protect national security, public order (ordre public), public health or morals or the rights and freedoms of others, and are consistent with the other rights recognized in the present Covenant. Any liberties deprived must be given access to the court, which is not being done, as he was denied and he need to pay to have access to the courts to protect his liberty of movement. There should not needs to pay to protect ones liberties guaranteed under international law. There has been no evidence presented that indicates he is an immediate threat to aircraft security. Where is the evidence. There is only a loose political association which was within his legal rights. How is him leaving Canada on a plane a threat to national security, public order, or heath, morals or others freedoms? this is a clear abuse on politically motivated grounds. There was no legal provision as there is no evidence of an "immediate" threat to aircraft security. Article 12 was and is being breached. This has turned into a "we want to deprive this person of their right to fly" not this person poses a risk to the safety of the aircraft. That is why it is abuse, it is to prevent them the ability to fly, not to protect the aircraft. That is why it is an abuse, and illegal. People who have him on that list need to be charged and asked, is this guy on that list because he hosted a website 5 years ago that people posted videos on that you didn't like, or do you think he is going to blow up the plane? I have the hunch it will be the first one not the second. That first one isn't grounds to deny flight because it doesn't represent an immediate threat.

ok I've established your views suck, is there anything else we should gain from this communication? the no fly list violates Canadian mobility rights, that is the ability to enter and leave Canada. you have no clue what you are talking about. the abuse is clear because there was no immediate threat and no charges laid against the guy, it is extrajudicial political punishment, which is unCanadian. it is cruel and unusual punishment without even breaking the law. The law of return is an international right, and my ability to enter and leave Canada, in Canada forcing me to be a Canadian citizen by law is violating my right to enter or leave Canada. you are just plain out of touch and in denial, or corrupt and just wrong as a person in your views. It is a violation of personal liberties, and a nuisance by denying the common rights of Canadians outside the bounds of the law. Deprivation of rights including commercial rights and international rights such as right of return, is a criminal and political motivated undertaking, and is criminal and wrong. Why exactly does this "Terrorist threat" still have a valid visa, still in the country allowed to walk around, still allowed on other transport services, still allowed in public buildings, denied the right to go back to his home country, and denied access to the courts. It is a crock of it. You are being asinine in actually trying to condone what has occurred. It is a bloody abuse.

conservatives better stock up on their heart medication. I know they don't like losing. its going to be an angry year in 2015.

Nice flame, got anything intelligent to say? bring marshmellows. if you don't get my meaning. go to hell, people like you ruin the world.

No it is my determining factor as it applies to my actions. Neither you nor I can say with any truth what will determine others choice in enforcing a no fly list. None the less the basis is "immediacy" and to return to this point it was used wrongly and continues to be used contrary to the law. There was no immediate threat, none proven, no charges, there remains no charges, the person has not had a security certificate issued against them. it is total BS and abuse of a statutory instrument, contrary to the law. It in effect is denying an individuals right to mobility and RETURN... he is not a Canadian citizen and foreign individuals by international law have the right of return to their country of origin, which Canada has denied by improperly assigning him to a no fly list that is suppose to be used for immediate air security threats, which no evidence exists indicating him as an air security threat. Anyone with an IQ over 70 should see that. US is a hypocritical state, it comes on saying we export freedom and democracy meanwhile in Canada and elsewhere it is limiting freedoms through its own abuses of process forced on other countries through extortion and blackmail. All as a means of owning other countries economies. Its export amounts to export of slavery not freedom. The point in all this is, Al Talebanni was wrongly put on a no fly list intended for immediate security threats to aircraft security. He at no point poised any threat to air security by being a passenger, especially under enhanced scrutiny and security checks. No bomb, no weapons, nothing.. it was a political attack wrongly applied for political reasons not security reasons. These political attacks are wholely wrong and an abuse of process, which should not occur in a country that allows political, ethnic and cultural freedoms. There was and is no legal basis to deny him the ability to fly, it is a political abuse.

Wrong again. Who the hell are you? Why don't you keep your comments to America, and shut up about Canada, you are spilling over bad ethics where it doesn't belong. America has f---ed up Canada more than enough for you to chime in. And yes I do. You are trying to cast me as little man when that is not the case. I have both capacity and the will to insure the safety and security of people if required. I am not impotent to communicate my concerns. It is very sad that a once proud america has been turned into incapable sheep, and now you are here trying to export it. Fact is yes I can effect the no fly list. Fact is you don't know what the hell you are talking about, shall we move on. You position is limiting freedom so your position is wrong.

Wrong. It is my call you do not usurp my personal choice. I am my authority. Pander to your police state, its not mine I believe in freedom and reason. I will be subject to no rule but just rule, not tyranny and oppression. I am the executive, if others see a breach of state that will be up to martial remedy or the courts, but no I am not flawed in my determination, and I am free to make my own decisions. Every individual has that opportunity. A society of mindless zombies is not a free society, and is unconstitutional in Canada. Maybe in America but we here are free. Now you can return to your regularly scheduled propaganda funded by your fascist police state masters.

And it returns... "Raymond Robinson" http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/04/03/manitoba-aboriginal-leader-on-hunger-strike-says-hes-ready-to-die-unless-harper-agrees-to-nation-to-nation-dialogue/ I did this in January and the first couple days are the hardest, after day 4.. without food or water it is all psychology. By day 7 without food or water it is a critical point, Generally people die some point after 7 days and less than 14 days, with potential kidney damage. This is a big deal in regard to this hitting the boiling point within a week. and climaxing some point after that if it gets to it. This is not a spence fast.. the absence of food is nothing in this after day 3... it is absence of water that will be the big point. Harpers easter vacation for two weeks will be a count down on this guys death unless he responds.

hmm, not much wiggle room left, nuclear program restarted, south korea taken out of the industrial zone somewhat. I suspect that there really isn't many more actions that can be done to heighten this and there is still about 4 weeks left before the war games end... none the less, it will be interesting to see if any further escalations happen this week or next.. imo it peaked today.. there is really no where left to go but actual war. Since any border skirmish unless backed down from will esclate it to full blown war. which I would be even more surprised to see. Oh but the issue now is, the us will use this "threat" to deny north korea any more missile tests... so the game is set that if it continues as is and the US does intercept missile launches NK has lost strategically to its R&D capacities. the next real event is if the US actually does knock down NK missiles during a missile test...and NK responds by actually attacking the US SK etc..

Jerry J Fortin, Warawa said he want to stay in caucus and values being a member of the party, so unless he is booted I would be suprised if anyone abandons ship. This seems more a "see I tried but alas they wouldn't let me". Not a "didn't do it". A bunch of em have big support in the pro life movement so no criticism and non action on those fronts would not go overwell from their supporters. Even if futile in the big picture.

I actually noticed this and was suprised. http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/04/03/liberals-sweep-past-tories-in-latest-poll-even-without-trudeau-as-leader-as-ndp-heads-for-disaster/ Can they keep it up, although I've also seen reports like "cons are not doomed to failure in next election as reports indicate" This one was surpising, election is a long way off yet, none the less, it seems that the summit has been reached for the conservatives and it is all down hill from here. Mind though that their polls can't drop too much further unless their base is eroded. I also noticed Stephan Harper doesn't wear a wedding band... The polls also dropped conservative support under 30%... of course this is just a poll none the less I havn't seen a poll release showing the conservatives under 30% in a long time. If 40% holds that is majority figures for the liberals... also the PM's moment of glory seems to be dimming somewhat with a minus 30 approval rating. (not sure how that works..) Still years away though... just felt it was worthy of noting this bump on the road.

I'm all for public insurance since it exists for uninsured drivers anyway, forcing people to pay at default and allowing them to use that credit to a private auto insurance company should be doable, it won't happen though, but I find it stupid the tax payer is stuck paying for uninsured drivers, there is free insurance, but not for you for anyone you hit. You can also get put up for a while until you recover all on the tax payer. People should have to assigned any plates as used or unused, taken on the road or in storage. They are already the ones increasing rates anyway with demerit system - read insurance rate increase system. None the less this doesn't effect me since I don't drive anything but an ebike these days and use public transit or jog or to where I need to get, even for long distance. Which does me fine, driving is an added cost I don't need. Too many people drive, imo. Public transit is too impersonal and public for people in this privatized society. None the less some people need to drive, but even needing insurance is stupid, plenty of latin american countries don't force insurance. You don't need house insurance, or walking insurance, or door opening insurance. there are civil courts for a reason. None the less, I think fewer people would drive if they faced a lawsuit if they hit someone, and you better believe they would drive safer, and there would be more incar cameras, and more road cameras. bottom line is don't force people to buy services. people shouldn't be forced to buy anything. It is ridiculous when the roads and sidewalks are owned and not publically accessable without paying a hidden toll of car insurance. Why not pay for road insurance instead, this is where I drive so my premium can be based on road safety. and if the road causes an accident then the road owner can pay. Or how about weather insurance, or prescription and health insurance, or work related sleep deprivation insurance. bottom line is, the way the insurance system works is, makes insurance companies money, every so often someone gets a good deal. insurance should be an option, even if it means road subscription. and any premium gains should go to improve road and car safety. none the less the drum beats on ... and nothing will change anytime soon. just bad resource management that does people just fine so who the hell cares. if the roads arn't safe its not the car or drivers fault, its the roads fault, or perhaps just the road designer. None the less unsafe roads to drive on is not unsafe drivers to road on.

Yeah cause court magically makes the truth appear... it is a bigger den of lies than meet the press. I bet no one involved in an event and no evidence and the court could still figure out what the truth was simply by listening to lawyers most recent fantasies about the facts. Perhaps he will just plead guilty after his lawyers statement to the press "He couldn't have done it alone." http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/inside-politics-blog/2013/04/statements-from-michael-sona-conservative-party-on-robocall-charge.html

In Canada the federal government controls money supply (the commons/government) not the fed. Canada can just create its own credit rather than issuing bonds if it wanted to, but it is pandering to the wealthy as a means of stimulating foreign investment, and overseas reserves in CAD. Year on year Canada has increased its M3, and if it wanted to it could drastically inflate the economy to raise capital, but they would rather tax than generate supply. Due to the length of longterm investment in the retail and industrial sectors. Canada could completely remove taxes if it wanted to, and largely eliminate a massive chunk of the debt by first consolidating debt in foreign currencies then inflating that cad through supply of credit basically unlimited supply in just paying its bills with money it prints rather than money sent to it through taxes. bond payouts would in turn be revenue instead of expenses. but lets get real, its not about sound fiscal policy it is about squeezing as much from people as possible for the ultra rich who control the financial sector. Its all about balancing infaltion in line with supply increase based on the trend of economic growth, steady as she goes, while it is almost gaurenteed that either taxes must increase to pay back bonds, or debt must accumulate because bonds can't be paid back or expenses must be cut back decreasing the level of service provision.. the current system has a lifespan by design, it is a trap. It is the downward debt spiral because the ecnomy is genrally a cycle and it will go down if government doesn't cut its debt massively during good times, and being in debt you can't get out of it unless you remove it beyond where you started, it is just a debt treadmill. These things are relatively set in stone under the conservatives, they are basically forced to cut because they wont take from the ultra rich. That is simply based on tax rates. They are still giving money away, still giving away tax dollars, that needs to be stopped. Taxes should go to services, not paying the rich.

The room is only so big. http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/SenatorEugeneForsey/book/assets/img/_photos/ch6d_Cabinet_Meeting_Room.jpg I count 17 chairs.. it is bloody liberal caucus. what are they going to add a kiddie table.

Posted Yesterday, 08:07 PM shortlived, on 01 Apr 2013 - 01:39, said: Read it again I think it is pretty self explanitory, when naming the province, and when saying additional by the federal government it should be clear. Education is primarily provincial in Canada the federal government still kicks in billions in funding though. As said for example ontario spends 30 billion while alberta spends 6 billion, the federal government spends about 10 billion throughout Canada. In addition to student funding it kicks in funding for buildings, research grants etc..

Now that they have turned Iraq into a debtor nation from a wealthy nation it is a growing economy, its not hard to grow from having all your infrastructure destroyed. They should offer up these sorts of port by buy a mission projects. Only handful of areas with high volume of Canadian travel should have paid missions the rest should operate on a highest bid basis. Canada under a Harper government really doesn't belong in the middle east, aside from Israel because it really doesn't like them. It only makes sense that now that 20 years of sanctions have been lifted, Iraq can start to reclaim its potentials from the 1970's and early 1980's. Iraq was the most advanced Arab state even having nuclear power capacities long before others. Of course now, it will all be foreign owned businesses..... so the common Iraqi's are forced to be slave labourors, as opposed to the owners of those industries. the whole idea out there is to keep them fighting so they can't get up. just a game of divide and conquer for the last 100 years or more.

No actually it doesn't create waste it creates byproduct which can be reused in other applications. However currently it is just stored. All that stored nuclear 'waste' can actually be reused. The issue is, it is cheaper to just use new uranium and store the old rods and materials in water. Through processing and reprocessing the materials actually can be put to use in other technologies. The real issue with all these highly destructive technologies like oil and nuclear is that they are being allowed the cheapest out and that is simply to put it in a holding area which becomes a risk on leakage. The real solution is forcing them to recycle and use the byproduct until it is in a manageable form. We need to attune industrial cycles to be whole. Suplur is a good example, CO2 is another. The industries are only going for the cash crop, all else is pointless. If it wern't about cashcrops but rather environmental safety, efficiency and waste reduction there would be a dramatic shift in what materials were used for day to day living. Its cleaner than oil and that is all that matters. Without a meltdown risk environmentalists really have nothing to complain about with lithium core systems, it is about as safe as laptop batteries. You can say time and time again, oil is cheaper, but that is only because you don't add in the costs to the environment, and health. Saying but we can make a product to fix that, why should I have to pay for what I had before you ruined it? You should be paying me for ruining it not me paying you to fix it.

You are reading from a script and really have no evidence to support your claims. wrong and wrong man, you are so wrong. please tell me your posts have become a joke, and you are just seeking to entertain. the only correct part is likely the end, not the math, but not likely to change anytime soon en masse. More people are adopting the alternative technologies though, you can't change the masses overnight without the government forcing it, they are already invested. http://hydrofuel.ca/ $1300 for 10-60% energy savings on our vehicle. say your average family spends $5000 on gas in a year, that works out to $500 to about $2750 in savings a year. meaning within 3 years this tech would pay for itself at the lowest efficiency, and within half a year at the highest. so why isn't it going to be done? municipal fleets could fuel their vehicles off the piss of residents totally removing fleet fueling costs. same goes for other government fleets and major vehicle chains like taxi's and bell, utilities etc.. oh and it extends the life of the vehicle and doesn't produce carbon.. SO why isn't it done? anyone? because they are spending your money, is that a good enough answer? got an old microwave... Do you have any idea how much water is used to process oil sands oil? That water is fuel all by itself.. more than 170 million cubic meters of water ... http://www.pembina.org/oil-sands/os101/water worse it gets stored in holdings lakes if all goes well ... meanwhile water used by HHO geneators... doesn't create a toxic waste issue.

same jet with the engine problems suffered communication failure and needed to do an emergency landing civillian airport http://everythinglubbock.com/fulltext?nxd_id=167562 on the flip side singapore is ordering over 9 billion of the jet.

what are you talking about. I read a news report about student riots in Montreal and called for free tuition. As far as my opinion/policies are concerned, they come from my thought developed over the last 15+ years when I started analyzing public policy and devising my own. None the less I'm more than willing to discuss alternative free education models such as done in France and the states. France for instance spends about 65 billion euro per year on all levels of education (primary, secondary and post secondary) poor people can get scholarships while wealthy individuals pay between 150 euro to 750 euro depending on the school and level, poor individuals also receive about 450 euro per month. It has a population nearly twice the size of Canada...\ Ontario alone spends over 23 billion dollars on education... with more than 7 billion more on post secondary and that doesn't include federal and municipal spending on education. nor the debt interest. alberta spends over 6 billion. etc.. bc is also over 6 billion quebec is over 15 billion. You can quickly see how Canada with an extra 10 billion in federal spending is spending twice as much as france and students are coming out more than $30,000 in debt.... meanwhile the french have free education , even income earning education for the poor. something is wrong there.