noahbody

I can't imagine anyone at the G8 is allowed out without one. Surely you don't think this is downtown ottawa? And yet an 81 year old woman who's head of sixteen countries (two of then in the G8) can mingle with the public anywhere without body armour - even after being shot at once, and having her life threatened on many an occasion. Tisk, tisk, Harper. Seems the Queen's got bigger gonads than you do...! There was a plot to cut off Harper's head you know? I'd say he's a larger target (no pun intended), especially with the optics of killing a 81 year old woman no being so great.

4000 steps backwards. What an embarrassment.... of course this is Alberta, the land of eager ecological destruction and pandering to the Bush white house. The land of Canadian neo-conservatism... Alberta is a province that is very hard to respect. Maybe you should open up a museum on Alberta, since you have no knowlege of it. Yeah, i have only lived in AB my entire life. Andrew Have you ever been outside? Seriously, why are you condemning the province? There's no public money behind this, just a few religious nuts. You can find them in every province. Alberta doesn't have a monopoly. Alberta was the first province to legislate greenhouse gas reduction. I guess you could respect it for its leadership on this issue. It's also a good employer and contributer to Canada. Can I take a wild guess that you're in a union and vote NDP?

4000 steps backwards. What an embarrassment.... of course this is Alberta, the land of eager ecological destruction and pandering to the Bush white house. The land of Canadian neo-conservatism... Alberta is a province that is very hard to respect. Maybe you should open up a museum on Alberta, since you have no knowlege of it.

Here's the big valley website: www.bvcsm.com. cuckoo.com must have been taken.

Procedural flaw doesn't exactly mean innocence.

The only fraud was signing onto the accord in the first place with no intention of meeting its targets. And cost how much?

Stephane Dion is not a leader. There is truth to this. The majority of Liberals didn't think he was the best leader either, as seen on the first ballot. Leadership is not born out of compromise. Some people have it, others don't. Aside from that, the Liberals have decided to champion themselves on one of their weak points, Kyoto. It's like Dion yelling at another dog owner to clean up the poop in the park, when everyone knows it was his dog Kyoto that crapped.

we have educated and well financed proffesional role models that have done everything to fit in to your society. They are your equals now. But, it is sad to say that society will still not share the same views. I believe today for Fn people that we are not being allowed to move forward as a whole and we are not falling back any further, I believe that society has us at a stand still " just turn your head the other way". I think that this situation with Tim Hortons is just a new beggining to the same old song. YES to all First Nation People stay away from Tim Hortons. One person does something racial at a Tim Hortons, therefore all Tim Hortons are bad. Isn't this the type of thinking behind racism? Secondly, you mentioned there are professional role models who have fit into society, then mentioned FN people are not allowed to move forward as a whole. I would suggest this is because modern society is about the individual, not group success. Many native leaders have taken the role as union leader and claimed "we" can't get ahead. This is in contrast with the role models who have shown yes "you" can.

So you are saying the bill is back from committee and now the Tories don't like it. Welcome to the years that Martin was prime minister. Harper will have to suck it up. He could do that or he could try to generate public pressure through advertising. Might accomplish something versus the "Dion is not a leader" campaign. Agree?

Have a read: http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2007/05/3...-cellphone.html

Should this post not be named, "Woman beaten for resisting arrest"?

I'm still not convinced that the bills are being held up. As for the mandatory sentencing bill, I believe all parties said they were for it when the election was on. On the face of it, it sounds good but I haven't seen the wording on it. Nor have I heard how long the bill has been in the House before committee. Do you have a citation to indicate how long it has been or what the delay is? Or are you simply getting the information off the Conservative web page? It was introduced in may 06. "... was significantly amended by the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights, which reported the bill back to the House of Commons on 21 February 2007. All mandatory minimum penalties were removed, leaving the two new offences accompanied only by maximum penalties of life imprisonment. " http://www.parl.gc.ca/common/bills_ls.asp?...b&Parl=39&Ses=1

This was one of the several crime bills. Now the Tories won't be able to get any of their crime bills done because they will end the session early. Yes, but the mandatory prison terms was the key promise to the people of Canada. This is why it would have been a good topic for advertising as mentioned. Curious, politics aside, would you support the mandatory sentencing for gun crimes bill?

They should probably ask the Conservatives why they rejected fast track for the crime bills that was offered by the Liberals. I assume this is the reason: "The centerpiece of the government’s law-and-order agenda — and a key election promise — is a bill to impose mandatory minimum prison terms for a variety of gun-related crimes. The bill was gutted by the opposition last month." Ottawa Citizen

Praise for California. Scorn for the Harper plan. Apples to apples, the targets are very similar. California is targeting to be at 1990 levels in 2020. The Conservatives 2% above 1990 levels by 2020. Both would meet Kyoto targets between 2020 and 2025. Does anybody think Arnie would agree to try to achieve his targets by 2008, just cause?

Rex could have used this in his article. Makes me think of Y2K.

She's a lot more Fred Flintstone than Betty Rubble.

Does anyone else have a problem with the headline of the story? Are they planning a lawsuit agaist the Tories? No. They are planning a lawsuit against the Canadian government. The reporter also uses "Conservative Government" to put a political slant on the article. I remember when the media reported news and didn't create it.

The kind of idiots who think they can sue the government for breach of contract when there's no contract with them.

Did the prime minister slide a bill for lunch across the table to the guy? Did he leave an envelope full of money on the table then go to the bathroom?

Did he eat it with a fork and knife?

What's your opinion?

You should address that to the person who brought up the subject, not me. I just found noah's usual irrelevant diversion a little tedious and so I called him/her on it. No worries though s/he's back on my ignore list. I can't stand trying to discuss things with people who I repeatedly have to explain thing to before I can get a response from them. Likewise. I didnt' bring Iraq into this either. I was just addressing a comment I found absurd. So calling my post an "irrelevant diversion" is a little off, again. Also, if you go back and read page 2, you'll find I did answer your questions. Your rant about having to explain it for a second time was actually directed to a different poster.

Sometimes parents have to do the responsible thing, whether it's popular with their child or not. Parenting isn't about popularity. In that regard, it's similar to being the PM. By your comment, "I think Harper is making a tactical error. If he wants to get his majority maybe he should start listening to the Canadia people." are you suggesting a quick withdrawl because some polls suggest the people, informed or not, do not want us there? As far as childish comments go, saying Harper would dearly love to go into Iraq is make believe. Johnny might have told you there's a boogie man in the closet, there's no indication that that is true. If you disagree, please state your case and we can debate it. On the Iraq topic, pointing out that others shared Harper's previous position is relevant. If you can understand why Martin, Ignatieff and many other Canadians shared his opinion, you might realize that the basis of your war monger image of Harper isn't justified.