Battletoads

There is a pretty clear cut difference between denying someone entry/deporting them and accusing them of a crime and jaling them.

He was responsible to prove his innocence? Think about that one for awhile.

So bureacrats should be able to do whatever the please with no source of compensation for someone who gets screwed by them? I'm pretty sure if that was 5 years of your life down the tube you would be sining a different tune. And are you honestly telling me that a moocher is someone who feels they deserve something for having 5 years of their lives wasted?

Whens the last time you saw a large religious group, that wasn't muslim , yelling for someones beheading at mearly drawing a picture of their prophet. I am not saying muslims are inherently bad I just see a lot of them are comming from places that don't share canadian values.

and the people in lower paying jobs make more money. They then spend more money. Demand increases. Price increases. In the end it works out to a pretty much zero net gain.

almost two years in jail and 3 years of time spent proving his innocence. Seems perfectly legitiment that someone who was innocent should get some form of reperation. Either that or give him that 5 years of his life back.

I wouldn't mind seeing some stats that show people that get these conditional sentences are more likely to recommit than those who spend time in prision.

Stephen Harper, he holds his ministers responsible. Unless they are women.

You are right there is no link between how much fuel you burn and how much water and carbon dioxide you put out as exhaust.Man I don't know what I was thinking there. (sarcasm)

Choo Choo here comes the logic train, If you reduce emmisions what else are you doing? Oh yeah reducing comsumption... Which might be a good idea looking at the state of the world, and the limited and expensive nature of these resources. Man what a jump of thought, no wonder you were confused.

Harper is at least smart in one way, he knows Quebecers will suck up to the guy who they can beat the most money out of with their sepratist club. If anything he will be trying to split the federalist vote as part of his strategy of keeping the liberals down at any cost.

Anyone who is still arguing about this being a necessity is an idiot, whether climate change exists or not. If you have no background in any form of chemisty your opinion is worthless on regaurding this subject, please stop wasting bandwidth. If you do I would like to hear why you think the continued consumtion of limited hydrocarbons supplies is a good thing is a good thing.

One only need to look as far as BC to see the failure that privitization brings. We use to have the third cheapest power on the continent. BC Hydro provided numerous jobs and was a net contributor to the governments revenues. The key phrase is "use to" as once privatization hit that went belly up. And then there is BC rail....

"If you don't want a carbon tax and tax increases and a deficit and recession, the only way to ensure that is the case is to vote for the Conservative party." "I know economists will say well, we could run a small deficit but the problem is that once you cross that line as we see in the United States, nothing stops deficits from getting larger and larger and spiralling out of control." "We will not run a deficit." - The conservative party of Canada

In a perfect world I would be all for it. but this is not a perfect world, people can be falsely convicted. So no.

People trust the queen?