tango

Exactly. Is that the kind of state Israel wants to be? Do Muslims have full rights in Israel? Can a Muslim be head of state in Israel? I don't see why I should support Israel without questioning, especially with their actions in blockading and causing children to starve in Gaza, and then bombing the civilians they trapped there. I do not support their right to do that in 'defence' of a Jewish state. And I believe our leaders should be at the conference to vote against any racist measures, or any that place one religion over another.

Certainly Omar Kadhr did not give useful information under torture in Gitmo. He admitted he just said whatever they wanted to hear to get it to stop.

If you quote it we can discuss it. Otherwise, you are again simply stating something without evidence.

What I find odd is that he did not remove the pics when he ran for office.

Ya ... what he said! Some seem to forget that our soldiers are in Afghanistan fighting for the freedom of ordinary Muslim Afghans from the extremist Taliban. It is important for us Canadians to be able to make that distinction as well, just like our soldiers have to.

Economically, wage cuts are irrelevant to the future of Chrysler and any other auto maker. Whether these companies live or die depends on bondholders, on government, and - most importantly - on consumers. Direct labour accounts for 7 per cent of total auto costs: less than capital, less than materials, less than dealer margins. Cutting that to 6 per cent won't sell a single car or truck. Indeed, the demand flies completely in the face of Fiat's own successful restructuring. Fiat went from basket case in 2004 to success story by 2007. Was that because of wage cuts? No ... because there weren't any. Rather, Fiat's turnaround reflected successful efforts to develop new products (like its trendy Cinquecento), to rebuild domestic market share, to boost foreign sales through exports and joint ventures and to implement leaner, dynamic management. That's what we need in North America - not wage cuts, which will only undermine auto sales as other employers follow the lead. This silly confrontation has Harper's fingerprints all over it! What a loser he turned out to be. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...Story/TPComment Only in North America, however, has this restructuring been sidetracked by an ultimately phony confrontation over auto worker wages. Auto workers are well paid everywhere - after all, that's a key reason governments chase auto investments in the first place. But only in Canada and the United States have governments made auto assistance contingent on union concessions. That's not the case in Germany or Japan (where auto workers make more than they do in Canada), nor in Brazil or Korea (where they make less). Only here has the future of the industry been linked to a frontal attack on unions. ... How else to explain the arbitrary hook on which Clement and Co. have hung their hats? They're demanding that CAW costs be cut to match non-union plants in Canada. (By the way, accounting for demographics and capacity utilization, the true difference between union and non-union auto plants in Canada is more like $5 per hour, not $19.) Canadian non-union plants account for just 4 per cent of North American sales. What about the other 96 per cent of the competition? Why not demand that CAW costs be cut to the level of unionized auto workers in Korea, say, or unionized workers in Mexico - both of which pose greater competitive threats than non-union Canadian plants? Because the demand is not about being competitive. It is about challenging the legitimacy and survival of unions. It aims to exploit the wedge, in an anti-union political culture, between workers who've managed to win a little more - and those who have yet to do so. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty tried a similar stunt last November, in his infamous economic update. He tried to capitalize on fears of recession to snatch away the legal right to strike from federal employees (who also enjoy good wages and pensions). It was an opportunistic, mean-spirited act, driven by politics, not economics. It was defeated by the united opposition parties. The same government is now trying the same thing with auto workers: capitalizing on economic fear to challenge the fundamental right of unions to exist and to bargain. Harper and the yahoos screw up again! I noticed the article was revised this morning to correct the false labour cost comparisons, likely provided by gc.ca. I wanted to show how they were faked. It had direct comparisons of US and Canadian labour costs that weren't correct. The "$75/hr" claim that we keep seeing for the CAW cannot be compared to the $55 we see for the US for two reasons: 1) The US figure actually is hourly rate and does not include costs of health care and other benefits. Health care is expensive in the US and cheap in Canada. 2) The "$75" includes ALL costs incurred by the company, divided by the current number of workers. That is, it includes all costs for pensioners as well. It's a false comparison promoted by Harper. I'm glad the Globe corrected it. The 'real' discrepancy of about $5/hr is likely accounted for by higher costs of living in Canada. A decrease of $19 as proposed would put Canadian Auto Workers way below international levels of pay and benefits for auto workers. The CAW is offering to take wage cuts of $7.50/hr. That's more than the real difference, and more than reasonable, imo.

Are you sure the ones who walk up and say "gimme" are the poor and not just crooks? Maybe we're just not talking about the same people. I'm talking about families who do not have enough to eat, mothers who have to lock their cupboards because their teenaged sons will eat a week's food in a day (because they need it, but she can't afford it). I think the problem is that the ones who are perhaps conning people are not really the poor, but that's who people want to think the poor are, so they dismiss the truly impoverished based on a stereotype that does not represent the poor. If you can dismiss them all as crooks, you can feel satisfied with allowing them only welfare/disability benefits that keep them hungry. Unfortunately, the truly needy suffer the disdain of otherwise decent people, because those decent people allow themselves to believe that the nastiest among the panhandlers represent all poor people. You just gave an example of a well dressed woman with a minivan going to the food bank. You may be right that she's a rip off artist. However, it's also possible that she just lost her job and doesn't have enough food. Maybe her EI is delayed, as it usually is. Maybe we shouldn't jump to conclusions ... or maybe she's one of the ones people like to include in stereotypes so they can more easily dismiss all poor people.

I see good things and not so good about each party. However, I think Harper is done. There is nothing more. If he runs again it'll be a cakewalk for Iggy I think.

I think it's supporting a Jewish state that I am questioning, the concept of rule by one religion. I don't see how that can work. I also wonder whether removing our voices and our votes from the conference might be the worst thing to do, in these circumstances. the U.S. and at least six other countries boycotting the event out of concern that Islamic countries will demand that it denounce Israel and ban criticism of Islam. I do agree with the concerns about what's facing the countries at the conference. Freedom of and from religion ... fine. Banning criticism of a religion or any religion? No. That goes too far. And I think we should be there to say that, and to vote that way.

Great idea! pirate update NATO forces foil pirate attack on tanker Sun Apr 19, 2009 4:55pm EDT FACTBOX: Ships held by Somali pirates 12:59pm EDT Gunmen kidnap two foreign aid workers in Somalia 4:30pm EDT By Alison Bevege ON BOARD NRB CORTE-REAL (Reuters) - NATO forces foiled an attack by Somali pirates on a Norwegian oil tanker, and briefly detained seven gunmen after hunting them down under cover of darkness, NATO officials said on Sunday. It was the latest assault by sea gangs from Somalia who have hijacked dozens of ships, taken hundreds of sailors hostage and made tens of millions of dollars in ransoms -- defying an unprecedented deployment by foreign navies in the region. The violence has disrupted aid supplies, driven up insurance costs and forced some companies to route cargo round South Africa. Michael McWhinnie, a spokesman on the Canadian warship Winnipeg, said it, a British naval supply ship and U.S. warship Halyburton all responded after pirates attacked the 80,000-tonne MV Front Ardenne in the Gulf of Aden late Saturday. http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE53I0Q920090419

Well, browsed through and found no useful suggestions there! Some would like to ignore that we have international laws that we are bound to uphold. Otherwise, we are criminals. Many of the pirates are teenagers from fishing and farming communities that can't fish or farm anymore. If we just kill them all, are we behaving any 'better' than them? Are we worse? In fact, they have a code of honour about not harming anyone ... or at least they did ... but likely not anymore. It is a unique dilemma facing those who face the pirates. With no easy solutions. Life is complex like that and succumbing to immediate revenge-aggression is seldom if ever the best response, unless one is immediately threatened, of course. But it's pretty much guaranteed to bring the worst consequences. Now they will kill. And I do understand them to be victims of corporate degredation of the earth, which is out of control and has us in a downward suicidal spiral fuelled by adrenalin and testosterone. Sorry, boys, but it's still the truth. Gender imbalance from the Command to the gun barrel is a serious issue because 'nothing's too good for one's own family', even if it destroys the world for 'the coming faces' ... the next generations .... and many of these generations too. Knee-jerk revenge-aggression ... sucks. There is a better way. imo. ANY other way is a better way.

Read the paper and find out.

No need to get so insultingly personal and make up stories. You know nothing about me, nor are you entitled to. However, I certainly never complained about the large amount of taxes I paid like you do, because that's the price of living in Canada, and that's my choice. Love it or leave it. Your neighbour is about 3 months away from living on the street if he gets laid off and can't get a job. That's when the bank forecloses. And that's true of over half of Canadians, but if it is not true for you ... what do you really have to complain about! People who make a lot of money are supposed to make sure they enjoy life so it will motivate other people!

Great post, WIP!

Yes we made big mistakes in the 60's and 70's, putting public housing all in the same place. Some of them still exist but they are being gradually replaced by units reserved for that purpose in a variety of locations. We have always had public housing of some kind. They used to call them the "poor houses" or "workhouses". Funny ... I've never had one say no when offered food. Are you speaking for yourself? Because that certainly does not describe all of us. Except the ones who are disabled, or partially so. Except the ones with mental illness. Except the ones caring for those. Except the single moms with young children. Except those with addictions, because no one will hire them anyway. Pretty much nobody will hire any of these people. Just who are all these people that you think exist who are so "unmotivated"? I only see people in poverty from those groups above, unemployable in today's world. Of course, that can change and is changing right now as so many thousands are being laid off ... due to greed-induced short-sightedness in the corporate world. I agree that people need a hand up, and in fact 80% of people on welfare are off and working within 2-3 years. Most of these are single moms. However, the people left who are not employable, on welfare or on disability, are doomed to harsh poverty, though they are the most vulnerable and the least capable among us. Why do we doom such people to hunger? It just doesn't seem right to me.

Funny, I live in Ontario next to Quebec, and I never hear them complaining, just Alberta. It is sadly true that the more money someone makes, the louder they cry when they have to give some of it up. Apparently it's true of provinces too. Hydraboss, if you could only really hear yourself ... whining like a two year old because you have to pay as much in taxes as some people pay for their mortgage. That means you make a damn good living. Can you see this very tiny violin that I'm playing for you? It's just ridiculous to complain about making so much money. When a union worker loses his/her job, they lose their house. It is just not the same thing as an executive or business owner having to cut back a bit. Again, it's just unbelievably tacky to hear people whine about such good fortune. I think the whiners should do us all a favour and give up their high paying jobs and live on welfare. I guarantee you will be too busy trying to stay alive to be so grouchy about it, and you won't have to pay taxes!

Who are the poor in Canada? http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/166353 Frances McNutt, a Scarborough mother with four young children under the age of 12, is struggling to get by on social assistance. But after the Ontario government claws back the National Child Benefit Supplement from her meagre payment and she pays her $990 rent, she is left with only $122 to feed and clothe her children and herself until the middle of each month when her $300 child-support cheque arrives. After six years on welfare, McNutt is trying to get back on her feet by taking job training and doing volunteer work, but she admits it's hard. McNutt is just one of the 5.3 million hidden faces of poverty in Canada. Tragically, the number of people living in poverty has grown – not dropped – in recent years despite economic boom times in many parts of this nation. Those good times, though, have bypassed many Canadians. Today, one in six Canadians, including 1.2 million children, live a miserable existence on incomes well below anyone's definition of poverty. Welfare + child support x4: $16,944 ($1,412/mo) Minimum wage: $17,992 ($1,499/mo) And see StatsCan table here: http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/famil19a-eng.htm Canada has made a concerted effort, and had some success in raising some seniors out of poverty. However, the same effort and success is not apparent for families with children, especially single moms.

Sure.

From previous page in this thread ... The Islamic Courts Union accused the U.S. of funding the warlords through the Central Intelligence Agency and supplying them with arms in an effort to prevent the Islamic Courts Union from gaining power. You mean the Warlords funded by the US/CIA?

Ya ... but where would the volunteers park their big cars?

You told that deaf person to "Get a job", so the question is not would you hire a deaf person. The question is 'would you hire THAT person?' If you wouldn't, chances are no one else would either. Pretty difficult for the low skilled people who live in poverty, often due to illness, mental illness or disability, to "Get a job", when highly skilled people often can't, especially right now.

Whose cars? The volunteers? I have a problem with the logic that says we make the children go hungry because their parents are bums/alcoholics/drug addicts/criminals. It is the kids who really suffer, and then we have a new generation of unemployables. I think it would be a very noble experiment to raise all people out of poverty by redistributing wealth, and then see how many social problems disappear. Kids who are hungry do not learn well. One of the most successful impacts on academic performance is a school food program. We don't have to analyze and speculate about the social problems. Just feed people properly, especially children, and see if it makes a difference. Personally, I favour school food programs.

Did Bush give it away? The information that the Central Intelligence Agency has obtained by questioning men like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has provided valuable information and has helped disrupt terrorist plots, including strikes within the United States. For example, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed described the design of planned attacks of buildings inside the U.S. and how operatives were directed to carry them out. That is valuable information for those of us who have the responsibility to protect the American people. He told us the operatives had been instructed to ensure that the explosives went off at a high -- a point that was high enough to prevent people trapped above from escaping. http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/lib...hitehouse01.htm

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/articl...4NEbcQD97KEP5G0 What do you do with a captured pirate? Among the difficulties facing prosecutors is assembling witnesses scattered across the globe and finding translators in various languages. Other countries are wary of hauling in pirates for trial for fear of being saddled with them after they serve their prison terms. Some European nations dump detained pirates back into lawless Somalia, said Pottengal Mukundan, director of the Commercial Crimes Services of the International Maritime Bureau. "I think EU countries are concerned that if the pirates are convicted and spend time in prison, when they finish their sentence, they may not be able to send them back to Somalia," Mukundan said. Kenya is the most popular destination for suspects. The East African nation bordering Somalia has agreements with the U.S., EU and Britain to prosecute Somali pirates, leading to a slew of court cases in the southern port of Mombasa. But diplomats privately fear that if every suspect is brought to Kenya, it could take years to prosecute because of a backlog of 800,000 cases of all kinds in the country's courts. Some suspects must spend a year or more in jail just to get a hearing.

CIA torture exemption 'illegal' Mr Obama has banned the use of controversial interrogation techniques US President Barack Obama's decision not to prosecute CIA agents who used torture tactics is a violation of international law, a UN expert says. The UN special rapporteur on torture, Manfred Nowak, says the US is bound under the UN Convention against Torture to prosecute those who engage in it. Mr Obama released four "torture memos" outlining harsh interrogation methods sanctioned by the Bush administration. Mr Nowak has called for an independent review and compensation for victims. "The United States, like all other states that are part of the UN convention against torture, is committed to conducting criminal investigations of torture and to bringing all persons against whom there is sound evidence to court," Mr Nowak told the Austrian daily Der Standard. ... Mr Obama on Thursday said he would not prosecute under anti-torture laws CIA personnel who relied in good faith on Bush administration legal opinions issued after the 11 September attacks. Well this is an interesting development. I certainly hope and insist that prosecution start at the TOP of the chain of Command. And perhaps also with the lawyers giving them advice.