noahbody

Some on the left might be pedophiles who believe instead of prison they should get to serve their sentences as mascots at Disneyland hugging children.

Actually do this: Go to Wikipedia and click on the ahmed or Abdullah (these are the only two I reviewed but I'd imagine the others are the same). Then click on history at the top and compare the original versions with the latest, which I had noticed both appeared to be written as pro-khadr propaganda with links to the family website. What you'll find is the condemning facts have been edited out, such as:

Intelligent comeback.

Like Arar's mistake revealed he had relationship he wished to hide with a suspected terrorist? Back to the topic...

I think it's common sense that you don't release into your society someone who has been raised to be a terrorist and has proven himself to be your enemy in a war that is ongoing. I also don't think it's unreasonable to believe that he might want to revenge his father's death. If you want to have sympathy for him because he was 15, that's fine. But release him to Pakistan. Canada will never be able to rehabilitate him, because being crazy is protected by the Charter.

You have them all wrong: http://www.thekhadrlegacy.com/

How exactly do you come to that conclusion looking at this data?

A candlestick registry would make the game of Clue a lot easier.

Arar made himself look guilty, specifically by forgetting someone he claimed to meet only a few times signed his rental lease. He provided incorrect information, just as did Canada. Compensation should have been a fraction of what is was. Instead, he received more than David Milgaard. That's crazy.

Citation? As far as I'm aware that is possibility not a fact.

I'm more interested to hear Ignatieff's opinion.

Has the registry changed since 2006? Have gangs started to register their long guns? There are police on both sides of the issue. It's a very deceptive statement. Police officers are not making direct requests to the registry. It's just automatically checked. A more relevant question would be "how many times is it relied upon?" If the answer is above zero, then it's endangering officers lives. There are several reasons. None of which change the fact that the registry isn't targeted, reliable or cost-effective. With the current cost you could offer twenty-five rewards of $1 million. Which do you feel would be more effective? I'd love to debate a police spokesman on this.

Sk police officer MURRAY GRISMER, SERVING POLICE OFFICER IN SASKATCHEWAN CALGARY POLICE ASSOCIATION PRESIDENT AL KOENIG SERGEANT BOB COTTINGHAM http://marginalizedactiondinosaur.net/?p=3644 We'll see. If you continue to use "The police say..." as an absolute, it is clearly you. Doesn't it speak volumes that members of the police force would speak out against the registry? That's right up there with the 5,000 times a day propaganda. Again registered long guns are only used in 2% of gun related homicides. I would assume most of these are domestic and don't require an investigation costing $2 million. What do you think? That incident was included in the 2% by way. Has there been another or have we spent over $1 billion to arrest two guys who gave a guy a ride and a gun that was never used? For that money, the police could have offered a thousand rewards of $1 million dollars for tips solving major crimes. Which do you think would have been more effective?

The police also say it is useless and dangerous. But keep on spewing the propaganda. See above And useless. Maybe they have common sense. I fully agree. $2 million per long gun homicide, based on maintenance costs alone. Genius.

I think Boston fans should throw frogs on the ice after every goal.

That's how you'd like to spin it. A truer statement would be that the opposition has been opposing practical cuts because they can spin them for political advantage. Or is Holy F**K a necessity? As far as science funding goes, there are areas in science such as stem cell research in which I believe we should put more funding. I would cut funding to the Holy F**K's of the science world to accomplish this any day. I would agree they shouldn't fund art that has limited public appeal. Fund the talented; not the second rate. Are you suggesting everyone on the left supports it? You use that tactic often. It's a little dishonest IMO. There has never been a lack of Holy F**K. By cutting health care funding to the West, the Liberals were trying to kill off all those who would not bow down to them. (I can spin just like you.) I think anything science related that is as useless as the gun registry should be scrapped and the money should go to fund something worthwhile. The thing about funding useless initiatives is that it takes funding away from worthwhile ones. That's my rub. The annual cost is $25 million, slightly over $2 million per homicide with a registered long gun. That's a waste. The fact that there are police associations that speak out against the gun registry speaks volumes. As far as the CACP endorsement goes, they also support mandatory sentences. We'll have to see if the left wing wants to be on their side on that issue.

This reminds me of the arts funding cuts/reallocation and how the opposition parties cried fowl and said the cuts must be restored. In that case, cutting tour funding for second rate Canadian bands like Holy F**k, was a common sense cut. Our music industry is well represented thanks to the likes of Celine Dion, Shania, etc. It's also like the cuts to the woman's literacy program where the majority of funding went to administration. That was a good cut, IMO. Of course, who could resist the opportunity to say the cut was made because the Tories don't like women? I'm sure 2,000 scientists would agree to scrap the long gun registry in order to restore their funding. Maybe we should ask and them and do as they wish.

It's far more likely that Ignatieff would do that. It's also too bad if you don't realize that when a US president and environmental groups are waging a "dirty oil" campaign against Canada, it might be a good idea to have a vehicle to get the facts out. And as Dancer points out, $240,000 is a bargain compared to what it would cost to get out side of the story out through paid advertising. Are you able to comprehend this or is it back to wild theory? Only the latter will advance your agenda. I'm guessing you'll go there.

Of course. That's been his hidden agenda all along. What a masterful job he's done in hiding his love for the media. If the Liberals had him running the Sponsorship Scandal, no one would have ever known. This must be why you resent Harper so much.

Since Don Martin characterized that as "a wild theory" he must be certain of it. The part of the story you're missing is that Harper might have to work. I guess that means no Shawinigate or no $161 million in shipping contracts (plus saving by avoiding taxes in Canada). What a disappointment this Harper is.

Obama isn't in a position to achieve any of these things. Anyone with 1/3 of a brain should realize this.

Innocent like Brian Mulroney.

How about posting a link to the bill and referring to specifics as evidence for your post instead of posting a letter to the Hill Times from the authors of whyprohibition.ca?

You forget he has Dion on his team. He's capable of finding an extra $12 Billion.

Harper's working on scrapping the gun registry because the private member's bill goes a little to far to support politically. Also, though Ignatieff will position himself against the distant Liberal recored (i.e. NEP), the gun registry isn't something he can diss politically. He therefore has to bite his tongue and back a moronic idea as he did with the Green Shift. In the next election campaign his judgment and habit of flip-flopping will be made issues.