tango

It isn't off topic. It's a response to the suggestion that immigrants should not be allowed to vote. I'd like to take a peek at your "statistics which demonstrate that there is no actual economic or demographic need for massive immigration." if you could provide a link. I can't quite believe that, considering the huge baby boom population near or already retired.

So you are arguing for bail reform. I agree it should be reviewed. Two of your links are about the same case of gang killings of other gang members. As long as they keep the gang wars off the streets, though, do you really care when they pop each other? The young offenders rape case ... I suspect they are under virtual house arrest. Since they know now they can't get away with it, do you really think they'll reoffend before their trial? Those are the things the judge considers in setting bail. I don't disagree with bail reform. I would like to see a proper review to see how much of a problem there is - ie, How many people reoffend while out on bail.

Did you read this somewhere? Can you not provide some link, some evidence? Did this actually ever happen?

I really don't know what all the whining is about: from Molly's link: Canada has always had high incarceration rates compared to those of other countries. [except the US] To some extent, this is due to variations in the age of majority among countries and different classifications of prison sentences. However, simply put, Canada relies heavily on prisons, and we incarcerate at a rate of 130 of every 100,000 adult and juvenile Canadians (Canada, Solicitor General Canada, Corrections Population Growth, 1996, p.2). Table 1 compares Canada's incarceration rate with those of some other western countries. The public seems to believe that crime continues to escalate in Canada, although this is not supported by police statistics or victimization surveys. As a result, there have been calls for both mandatory minimum sentences and longer sentences, and Canada has seen significant increases in prison populations. Canada has somewhat higher levels of property crimes than other countries, and far lower levels of violent crime. More than half (58%) of all Criminal Code infractions reported to police in 1995 were for property offences -- a figure that has changed little over the years. Examples of property offences include break- and-enter, theft, fraud, motor vehicle theft, and possession of stolen goods. A considerable percentage of crimes (30%) belongs in the "Other" category, covering such offences as mischief, prostitution, possession of restricted weapons, and arson. In reality, in 1995 only 11% of crimes reported to police involved violence. Now, if someone wants to provide evidence that the situation has changed since 1995, I'm willing to listen. Ranting and whining without evidence, however, is just stupid.

Another gem from the fount of MrC's mouth, with no evidence whatsoever to back it up. And you wonder why nobody takes you seriously?

The death of any soldier is a tragedy. So is the imprisonment and torture of an innocent person for political purposes. I never said the US is solely to blame. In fact, I consider Canada primarily to blame. The US would have sent Khadr home anytime Canada asked. ALL other westerners are gone home. ALL other children are gone. Harper is the problem. I don't know why Obama denied Khadr his chance to clear his name. Just didn't want the bad publicity, I guess? Irrelevant to me: he would have sent him home if Harper asked, I think. I see now why you've been so cranky with me. You thought I was blaming the US? No. This is purely a Canadian political issue, imo. Harper is playing with Omar's life to satisfy his nasty hardline core voters. Perhaps you should keep in mind that this is a forum on Canadian federal politics.

Governments make labour laws so workers like you have some protection. Unions make sure employers follow the laws. Without unions pressing labour issues, you'd still be working for slave wages most of which you give back to the company (store) to pay debts to them. That's how it worked before there were unions. As long as we have unions, some people will complain about them. But if we didn't have unions, someone would create them, because employers will take advantage of workers whenever and however they can. You can choose to work in non-union shops: That's your choice. But don't ever forget that you only have employee rights because unions fought for them.

I agree that our leaders should keep their religion out of their politics. However, the article cited doesn't bother me much from that perspective. It does reveal something important about Harper, though: He doesn't give a damn what Canadians think of him, so long as he figures he's straight with his God. Since 'God' is whatever you choose to believe it to be ... basically he's answerable to no one. His contempt for Canadians shows up clearly once again.

Just so we have some real facts to consider, here's Toronto's demographic profile: Toronto's racial diversity Racial Diversity Toronto, with a population of 2.48 million people (5.5 million in the GTA - Greater Toronto Area) is heralded as one of the most multicultural cities in the world and is ranked as the safest large metropolitan area in North America by Places Rated Almanac. Over 140 languages and dialects are spoken here, and just over 30 per cent of Toronto residents speak a language other than English or French at home. ... * Half of Toronto's population (1,237,720) was born outside of Canada, up from 48 per cent in 1996. http://www.toronto.ca/toronto_facts/diversity.htm Yes it is culturally diverse ... but 70% of Torontonians till speak English or French at home, and half were born in Canada. Not quite being "outnumbered" as MrCan claims. I'm still waiting for evidence that this has ever happened: "Liberals not living in Toronto yet telling the forums how great minorities are of which you have no idea about." I think you are making it up, MrC. For interested readers ... Check out your town here: http://www12.statcan.ca/census-recensement...All&Custom=

In October 2005, the inquiry released its fact-finder's report on Arar's treatment. Fact-finder Professor Stephen Toope said: "I conclude that Maher Arar was subjected to torture in Syria." http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/arar/arar_faq.html Now why would you intentionally lie, b_c? I guess your name speaks the truth about your motives, eh!

Error casts doubt on Khadr case Obama seeks Gitmo trial halt U.S. President Barack Obama has instructed Pentagon prosecutors to seek the delay of the war crimes trial of Canadian Omar Khadr and 20 other pending cases here until May, to give his new administration "time to review" the process. Jan 21, 2009 04:30 AM Thomas Walkom In the end, testimony at a Guantanamo Bay military hearing that attempted to link Ottawa engineer Maher Arar to an Afghan "safe house" doesn't tell us anything about either Arar or Afghan safe houses. It does, however, speak volumes about the manner in which the U.S. has conducted its so-called war on terror. First, the allegation. Two days ago, FBI interrogator Robert Fuller testified that in October 2002, terror suspect Omar Khadr identified Arar as a visitor to a so-called Al Qaeda safe house in Afghanistan. It was a sensational claim that made front-page headlines in Canada. ... If Arar really had been bunking down at an Al Qaeda safe house in the fall of 2001, as Fuller said yesterday in a second day of testimony, both the royal commission finding and Ottawa's compensation decision would have faced serious questions. And the U.S. decision to send him to Syria might have seemed more explicable. ... In October 2001, when Omar Khadr was allegedly seeing him in South Asia, Arar was under RCMP surveillance in Ottawa. That the FBI could be so spectacularly wrong on this important detail casts into doubt all the evidence gleaned from interrogating Khadr. In fact, it casts into doubt all the confessions obtained from terror suspects subjected to what Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff once approvingly called "coercive interrogations." ... They used both sleep deprivation and classic Inquisition-style methods (now referred to by the anodyne phrase "stress positions"). She writes that Khadr, at the time badly wounded, was initially targeted for particular mistreatment. ... A lot of Americans are implicated in Bush's patently unconstitutional projects. All may eventually be forced to justify their actions. The sound you hear from Gitmo is the pitter-patter of bureaucrats scurrying for cover. http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/574363 Including Obama, imo. http://www.thestar.com/Unassigned/article/574494 Navy Lt.-Cmdr. Bill Kuebler, Khadr's Pentagon-appointed lawyer, said yesterday outside court that Khadr would have "confessed to seeing the Pope," to make his interrogations stop. Fuller's first interrogation of Khadr about Arar occurred on Oct. 7, a day before U.S. officials sent Arar to Syria, where he was held for more than 10 months on suspicion of terrorist activity, and tortured. Fuller testified he did not know whether the information he gleaned from Khadr played any role Arar's deportation to Syria. http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/01/20/khadr-hearing.html So ... Omar says under interrogation that he saw Arar in Afghanistan. The next day Arar is sent to Syria for a year of torture. Now Arar has been cleared and paid a settlement ... something Harper certainly doe not want to go through again. No wonder they're tripping all over themselves to deny Omar Khadr a fair trial. :angry:

I guess we agree to disagree. I do believe a trial would have cleared the air, but it wasn't allowed to occur. We'll probably never be allowed to know the truth, because it's too damaging to the US and Canada. If Omar has a 'bone to pick' with the US and Canada, whose fault is that? However, I've never heard reports of him saying anything suggesting he seeks revenge, martyrdom, or has any of the views you say.

Many of the same people who trumpet the joys and successes of multiculturalism live no where near other races. What evidence you can provide to support this claim? However, it is an interesting question you raise: If people who live in multicultural environments are quite comfortable with it, why do others who don't have any experience with multiculturalism keep complaining about it?

Do you have any evidence to support your claim? Of course not, as usual. However, your claim does raise another question: IF people who support multiculturalism are the ones who live in a multicultural milieu, why do others keep whining about it if they know nothing about it? Is it true that people's comfort with people of other cultures is related to their experience of same?

Yes some people have had their skills recognized and been hired, because of affirmative action programs, and are doing well. However, there is still an imbalance in the workforce, and a specific problem with the recognition of people's foreign professional certification. That's why plenty of engineers are driving taxis. Just curious, MrCan, what you think about the fact that your generation will carry the biggest tax burden of any generation of Canadians ever, due to the aging of the baby boomers. Do you think increasing the population of Canada to spread out that huge tax burden is a good idea?

http://elliotlakenews.wordpress.com/2007/1...r-attack-again/ http://marginalizedactiondinosaur.net/?p=1940 These are personal blogs, and prove nothing. Link to real evidence please.

If you actually read the article to see what he's talking about, it comes down to this: Dr Nazir-Ali said that using amplification for the call to prayer from mosques was an attempt to impose Islam on an area. This, he said, raised the question of "whether non-Muslims wish to be told the creed of a particular faith five times a day on the loudspeaker. "This is happening here even though some Muslim-majority communities are trying to reduce noise levels from multiple mosques announcing this call, one after the other, over quite a small geographical area." ... The charges brought an angry response from the Muslim Council of Britain, the Islamic umbrella group which has come back into favour with the Government since Gordon Brown became Prime Minister. Assistant Secretary-General Inayat Bunglawala said the Government had contributed to the rise of Islamic extremism and compared the Islamic call to prayer with church bells. 'He talks about the rise of "Islamic extremism" but fails to mention how some of the policies of our government and especially that of the United States in the Middle East over several decades now has clearly contributed to this phenomenon. "He complains of the Islamic call to prayer but presumably is content for all of us to listen to the ringing of church bells. As Jesus himself advised, perhaps the good bishop may want to examine the beam in his own eye before pointing fingers at others." Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-50...l#ixzz0Phb9qfT0 I think he has a point: I hear church bells everyday, from three churches in my neighbourhood. It doesn't make me feel that they are trying to "impose Christianity" on me. Why should a call to prayer intimidate people? Get over it, I say. Just an extremist with his own beef trying to whip up anti-Muslim hatred. Much like some of the posters here.

TransCanada pipeline encroaches on aboriginal territorial rights Lubicon fight proposed TransCanada pipeline April 04, 2008 by: Kate Harries TORONTO – The Lubicon Lake Indian Nation in northern Alberta is gearing up to fight a proposed jumbo pipeline that would carry natural gas from the Mackenzie Valley in the west to the oil sands developments to the east. The $983 million proposal follows a history of industrial development across the unceded Lubicon territory that has left the 500-member Cree nation impoverished, poisoned and disregarded by Canada and Alberta – despite criticism about violations of their rights from two United Nations committees. ”It’s a devastating situation where there is all kinds of activity around our traditional hunting and trapping areas,” Lubicon Chief Bernard Ominayak said when he traveled to Geneva two years ago. ”It’s polluting most of our waters – we have to haul our own water and we can’t eat the fish any more.” TransCanada Pipelines filed an application last November for the 185-mile pipeline, stating that it had consulted extensively regarding the pipeline route with stakeholders, including affected First Nations, and received no objections. That prompted an indignant denial from the Lubicon. TransCanada representatives never provided answers to repeated questions about construction, operations, safety issues and mitigation measures, and ignored a request that the company recognize Lubicon jurisdiction before applying to the provincial regulatory board, said Lubicon lawyer Fred Lennarson. ”TransCanada’s so-called ‘engagement program’ is clearly not a sincere effort to inform the Lubicon people about the project,” Lennarson wrote in a letter to company lawyer Line Lacasse in January. The Lubicon have been struggling against the oil industry for decades. Their worst fears have been realized - poisoned water, game scared away ... and still the province (Alberta) and federal governments do not fulfill their legal duty to consult with First Nations about development on their land. We get rich off the oil, they starve and are poisoned and get no compensation. And yet, TransCanada Pipeline posts pretty policies about its 'Aboriginal Relations', that signify ... nothing! TransCanada respects the legal and Constitutional rights of Aboriginal peoples Sounds good ... BUT! and recognizes that its relationships with Aboriginal peoples are separate and different from that of the Crown. http://www.transcanada.com/social/reports.html That's a sleazy way of saying that the Crown must consult with First Nations and accommodate Aboriginal rights, but the company has no legal obligation to do so. This is true, and the 'Crown' in Alberta is evading its lawful responsibility, and should be taken to court by the Lubicon. However, desperate as they are for basic food and water, now that their food and water supply is destroyed by industry, its clear they cannot afford to sue the province. grrr :angry: We all assume we have a huge pristine water supply up north. Not so: Much of Canada's north it is toxic from mining, oil and other industrial developments.

The Ontario Ministry of the Environment is the next target, because they approved the certificate that will allow the land to be sold as a dumpsite. grrr! All provincial MPP's should be targets for complaints about this, emails here: http://dawn.thot.net/ontario-mpp.html#2 but especially the Minister of the Environment and the premier. (emails above) However, for the land to be sold, Simcoe County Council has to approve the sale, because they own the land. (emails provided earlier in the thread)

Off topic ignore

From the Examiner: MoE looks at transfer of C of A to another owner Private sale feared By RAYMOND BOWE | Barrie Examiner, August 27, 2009 Despite a one-year construction moratorium at landfill Site 41, there are fears that Simcoe County could sell the property — and its certificate of approval issued by the Ministry of the Environment — to a private company that would continue the project. That would quickly eliminate the political infighting over the controversial landfill, but it remains to be seen whether it could actually happen. ... Officials with the Ministry of the Environment’s Barrie district office said they are reviewing whether the certificate, issued in 2006, can be transferred to another owner. Boy, these slime buckets just don't quit! [email protected] [email protected]

And this wouldn't have happened if they hadn't.

Really? Are you sure that isn't just a racist myth? I'd want to see evidence before accepting that gross stereotypical generalization!

Only the rich ones ... who can then use the Senate to further their business interests without impediment by ordinary people (who need a salary) to oppose such corruption. That's why we pay reasonable salaries: So us 'common folk' can afford to do those jobs and are represented as well. It's called democracy - rule by all the people, instead of oligarchy - rule by a few rich and powerful people.

We have a common identity! Where do people come up with this crap! I'm walking on the beach in Florida, I pass a bunch of people speaking French. I say "Nice day, eh? They laugh, point, wave, call back. We know we're Canadian, eh!