noahbody

Don't complain. That's better than most of Oleg's posts.

I think they should have checked the lips on his passport photo when he came back to Canada. I don't think this is the same guy:

That's something the 60 Minutes piece pointed out, even if he's found not guilty, the US doesn't have to release him. It's the mother who is the only Khadr who should be tried in Canada, for child abuse and as a traitor. Maybe a plea bargain could be reached in which the mother would voluntarily give up her Canadian citizenship and agree to move to Pakistan or Afghanistan in exchange for charges being dropped. I would even support the government buying them a home as it would save taxpayers millions in security costs.

How about 8 days prison and 2.5 months living in a hotel isn't worth $2.5 million? The impacts and suffering are exaggerated and are unreasonable. Isn't that the same government that freed Michael Kapoustin after 13 years and as his lawyer says being abandoned by the previous government? And how about Huseyin Celil? Do these count or can you just pick and choose? In your opinion, you mean. Bad press can have lasting impact. Has someone admitted to that? Arar was given far too much money, but his case was unique because of the torture element. I've been on this board for quite a while, and you haven't got anything yet, so I'm still smiling.

Why do you think this would be a good idea during a recession? Aside from Obama, I can't think of another politician who has been the target of paranoid fear mongering as Stephen Harper. I'm not making this up. Do you think that's an intelligent statement? How does he compare to Chretien and Martin, considering how they affected health care and Canadians by slashing transfer payments? Or did they care about people because they were less stiff? I don't think Harper really cares if you like him personally. He's has made a number of decisions that were unpopular politically, for the betterment of Canada. Pointing out to the world that without the major emitters participation, Kyoto was fruitless, was one. Income trusts were another. My impression of Ignatieff is that he wants a legacy. His comments about the only job of the prime minister is to unite the country point to this.

How does funding the Calgary Stampede or gay festivals have anything to do with racism?

The purpose of a civil trial is to receive compensation for damages. There is no way 8 or 9 days in prison and then living in a motel for a few weeks is worth $2.5 million. That's insane. It's up there with Arar asking for $400 million. The bad press the government has gotten over this is more than enough motivation for them to make sure it doesn't occur again. Personally, I don't want to have to renew my passport every year or two which would likely be the first and practical step to prevent this. If some looney judge awarded her a judgment it could be incredibly expensive and harmful to Canada's security. Every person who is wrongfully put on trial could use the judgement as a precedent as they could argue the same damages. It would be great for lawyers, but eventually we'd have to stop arresting people do to the cost. We could stand up for ourselves from those who are trying to take advantage of us. Two wrongs don't make a right.

Here's what you claimed: I proved to you it was false. Try to check your facts before you post. And please don't label something as fact if you don't know. Like this: That's b.s. too. Without looking, I can name Amanda Lindhout and Robert Smith. Who's on your list? Why not do some research on people the government has assisted? And this: Citation that she is a Christian? Or did you make that up too because she's white? I noticed you inferred special treatment because she was white in the comment your economist article. What's with that? (sorry for the thread drift)

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2006/07/18/e...-logistics.html Actually, you don't recall correctly. Be sure to correct your rant of misinformation on the economist site too.

Sure, compensate her for 3 months living expenses.

Well, for starters, she can say she'll donate the money to charity.

Yes the woman deserves an apology, but come on... $2.5 million for 9 days in prison. That's both ridiculous and infuriating. David Milgaard received only $10 million for 20 years of his life. She should be offered compensation based upon the amount our system would give an innocent person for spending nine days in jail. Not a penny more.

I'd like to hear your argument on this. How has he demonstrated racism? Who are "all of the victims"? Is Amanda Lindhout a victim? I see you keep spelling "colour" the American way... Michael, is that you?

Maybe Ignatieff is worried he'll be caught cheering for the Americans during the Olympics. He has considered the US his country in the past. There's no reason to think he might not during the Olympics.

No, it could only be considered brilliant if compared to the Liberal strategy. I doubt the Liberals will offer much in the form of hair-brained ideas, so I'd agree there.

I'm not sure how one can even compare those two situations. As "but the conservatives" attempts go, that one is pretty weak. As for Harper's platform, the main plank was that he wasn't going to throw the baby out with the bath water. In other words: no Green Shift. Where do you think Canada would be if Dion, Ignaieff and Rae (they did run as a team) got elected to government? Do you think Canada would be in a better position?

So the country has been in crisis and Mr. Ignatieff has had better ideas that he chose not to share?

Would you agree that a segment of the Islamic religion is uncivilized and incompatible with Canada?

There is civilized muslim faith and uncivilized muslim faith. The latter is what is not compatible to Canada. The problem with Canada is that it's too politically correct. There's this notion that it's wrong for immigration policies to discriminate based on religion. I think it's unwise and dangerous not to do this. I, like you, see this as a problem, but it's even a bigger problem for moderate muslims. Not just because there are people who still stereotype, but because they surely don't want their children exposed to the radical side of the religion.

Firstly, that documentary came out in October 2007. To give Hawking the benefit of the doubt, he might have made those comments before the NASA data error was discovered in August of that year. Regardless, the new study suggests the worst case scenario would take six times longer to occur. What Hawking has said this year is that global warming isn't the biggest threat to our existence. He believes it is asteroids. Maybe we should take that trillion dollars and put it into George Bush's Star Wars. We just need to rebrand it as Obama's GreenStar.

He likely would've gotten away with it too if he hadn't written "Fixed it for you." Since little boys haven't been making their beds, the earth has been warming. I think you're on to something.

Can you name one who was released into the country he or she was fighting against while the war was still on?

Monkeyman, looking through your posts you generalize often, on everything from religion to TV. You've even made a judgement on Argus's family. I have muslims in my family who left their mosque because it was becoming too radical for them. As a non-practicing muslim, you might not have been exposed to this, but it is happening in Canada. There are many variations of the Islamic religion just as there are of the Christian religion. Christian variations have been able to define themselves in Canada (i.e. United Church, LDS, etc.). For the purpose of this discussion, it would help if there was a Radical Church of Islam, because that is the variation moderate muslims and other Canadians have a problem with. I'd agree with you that we need to blame the individual, but in my perspective it is the individual variation, not the individual person. If a person gets high and goes out and shoots someone, you won't say the cocaine didn't have anything to do with it would you? As far as immigration policies go, I have no problem discriminating against the extremist or uncivilized variations of any faith. Canada doesn't need to embrace people like the Khadrs, people who want to burn you wife because they think she's a witch or people who want to sacrifice their children by throwing them into a volcano.

Monkeyman, looking through your posts you generalize often, on everything from religion to TV. You've even made a judgement on Argus's family. I have muslims in my family who left their mosque because it was becoming too radical for them. As a non-practicing muslim, you might not have been exposed to this, but it is happening in Canada. There are many variations of the Islamic religion just as there are of the Christian religion. Christian variations have been able to define themselves in Canada (i.e. United Church, LDS, etc.). For the purpose of this discussion, it would help if there was a Radical Church of Islam, because that is the variation moderate muslims and other Canadians have a problem with. I'd agree with you that we need to blame the individual, but in my perspective it is the individual variation, not the individual person. If a person gets high and goes out and shoots someone, you won't say the cocaine didn't have anything to do with it would you? As far as immigration policies go, I have no problem discriminating against the extremist or uncivilized variations of any faith. Canada doesn't need to embrace people like the Khadrs, people who want to burn you wife because they think she's a witch or people who want to sacrifice their children by throwing them into a volcano. You can learn a lot on TV by the way.

There were no mineral rights granted with the Haldimand tract nor were the Six Nations ever granted the land fee simple. They were given the opportunity in the time of Joseph Brant and again during the time of his son. At the end of the day, they didn't want to be more than Canada's ally, a decision I can respect. The King, however, wouldn't grant the land fee simple without allegiance. It's pretty much a mess after that.