Shwa

Indeed and this line of thinking has anticipated the boomer attrition for decades, even before Prime Minister Mulroney. One of the driving forces to prepare for this mass attrition has been the automation and centralization of key processing services in the Federal Government. I would hazard a guess that within a decade, perhaps sooner, all Federal Government administative functions are condensed into a single deparment, likely Public Works.

And let's not forget that scion of fascists, Miss Manners and the evil etiquette of polite society. You know the ones that tell you what fork to use, how to eat properly (no elbows on the table!) and their well known attack on freedom of speech: the etiquette of conversation in mixed company. Facists, all of them and their political correct politeness. That this decorum is firmly rooted in finer civilized nobility of the ages shouldn't fool you, they were totalitarianistic social-ists in the worst way. They invented 'politically correct' in the great halls of Kings and Queens.

Victoria fancied Albert and that was pretty much it. No, likely it had no significance outside of colonial quaint. The Tropic of Cancer is bigger.

Cool story from the Star: Spinal electrodes let paralyzed athlete stand briefly, try treadmill Although not a cure by any means, it is an insight into the direction such treatments are taking.

To her, they would have been exotic. It likely meant very little, like Saskatchewan. Quaint notion and not entrenched - right or wrong - in British national mythology. Except for the Columbus thing. Which is also "American."

I was noticing the same thing. http://www.umontreal.ca/english/pro_stu_und/definitions.html A certificate appears to be distinct from a degree. He wasn't claiming to have a degree.

If it was in some exotic Cree or Assiniboine dialect, sure. I mean, 'Saskatchewan.' She likely knew of the reference, but didn't name BC because of it. Same can't be said for the American on a boat named because of it. Just as the American following the Indian leads on things hasn't changed much in America. Except for the Columbus thing.

Then, according to the article as to what Sportsnet said, why would you post that there is a lawsuit to be had? Or were you just being satirical with that comment?

Pretty much; and to be fair, not only calculating capitalists, but also scheming bureaucrats in government and private corporations; political parties, etc. There are all kinds of limits to expression in all kinds and types of contracts. The public has only a few restrictions on public expression, thus Goddard wasn't fired by "the public."

Queen Victoria only recognized the name of the district which was named after the river. There is no reason to assume that she recognized Columbus in her acquiescence to the name. The same cannot be said for the American captain who named the river after he "discovered" it.

Yes, because Price-Waterhouse-Coopers says so. They are the ones that did the study or research or brain storming and got their list in the news. I am sure it was a slow news day...

Freedom of speech that is likely regulated by contract. It seems many firms have rules and limits to employee expression on social (i.e. public) networks.

No, it goes further than mere Liberals in Ontario. It won't be long before they are blaming the lack of private property rights and the limits in hunting and fishing.

So you admit you are wrong then. Good. Not for everyone ele's sake, but for your own self-awareness.

Provincial Crown Land is held in tenure, which is an administrative function and does not denote title. All land in Canada is subject to Aboriginal claims of title by way of treaties with the Government in Canada. Don't mix up administrative access as equalling title. Your use of the word "held" strengthens my point. Being 'held' means that the Governmt of Canada directly administers those lands by way of federal responsibilities denoted in the Constitution. Sure, so let's revisit the Alberta Natural Resources Act, specifically Section 10: Alberta is obligated to transfer lands back to federal administration. An 'agreement' with the Province is a mere formality. They can be told to relinquish the administrative rights over those areas because they do not have title to it. See all of the above. All land in Alberta is subject to Aboriginal title per the Constitution of Canada and that administrative process can be used to dismantle the province, piece by piece. You see the government of Alberta enjoys administrative privledge by way of the Alberta Natural Resources Act, which is an Act of the Parliament of Canada, not the Legislature of Alberta. Whatever is written in that Act can be simply amended by Parliament and will be legally binding. Whatever. The point is that it can be done as a countermeasure to any threat of Albertan secession. I doubt the ROC would have a problem amending the Alberta Natural Resources Act to ensure Albertan compliance towards it's federal obligations. In short, Alberta is - and always will be - held by the short and curlies by the Government of Canada. Just like Quebec.

Get your history straight. It was "so named" by Queen Victoria based on the district named for the river which was named by an American explorer taken from the name of his boat, the 'Columbia Rediviva.'

Because it was named after the district that took it's name from the river that was named by an American from Boston who named it after his ship?

This is what your medias don't want you to know: New Research Proves the FLQ Were Totally Innocent in the October Crisis

.You assume that any land claim settlement would result in a "reservation," which is the first error on your part since you can't see past a very limited view of what is possible with self-determination with the Aboriginal peoples under Constitutional Law. The second error is that in Canada, we call them "reserves" not "reservations." Nope, I gave Treaty 8 as an example. Here is their website and there is a page on that has documents pertaining to important Aboriginal legal cases and an introduction to Aboriginal Law. Take your time to get up to speed. You may also wish to be familiar with Part II, Section 35 of the Constitution as well. Note that section (3) says "For greater certainty, in subsection (1) "treaty rights" includes rights that now exist by way of land claims agreements or may be so acquired." The limted viewpoint again. I am proposing that the Government of Canada can re-arrange and re-organize adminstrative responsibilities for it's various regions and that includes using their Treaty and Land Claims obligations as part of the process. Whatever such newly formed adminstrative regions are called is mere terminology, not effect. See all of the above, it isn't my legal opinion, but codified in Canadian law. You mistake administrative privledge as title, such as to say that a bank teller could help themselves to the coin in the vault. I think it is fearmongering to suggest that there would be anything more than diplomatic chatter over Canada's attempt to assert it's sovereignty over it's natural resources no matter what form it takes. Invoking the wrath of "our friends from the south" as some sort of hedge against any action taken towards Albertan secession is worthy of a chuckle. You might want to do the same and get up to speed. Note that the Government of Canada holds the cards and the oversight on everything to do with oil and gas in Alberta. The province can administer it, but only within the context of Canadian law and federal policy. There are no 'inherent rights' for the province over it's natural resources; they are given the "rights" to administer the natural resources through the Constitution. Even Trudeau knew that.

Come off it. It seems that it is technically incorrect to refer to Columbus as the discoverer of "America." Why does American media (and Americans) often make this mistake?

Barring a tidal wave, being frozen solid, a volcano, being wiped out by telepathic aliens, having a giant ape, dinosuar or a godzilla-like creature attacking, New Yawk will always be #1. All T.O. can hope for is second best.

More alter-history from the head wound of Benz: Front de libération du Québec First Wave - bombings, murders Second Wave - robberies Third Wave - murders Fourth Wave - robbery, murder, bombings Sixth Wave - bombed the stock exchange and Drapeau's house; kidnapping murder So where in the Keable or MacDonald Commission reports does is assign the cause of the above to the RCMP? The only think I see is a barn burning by the RCMP in 1972 and a nutcase Samson trying to plant a bomb. Where is all this evidence of secret agents? LOFL!

Well I am glad that is all cleared up because when you wrote this: It was almost as if you didn't have a clue and completely misunderstood the purpose of the Monarchy in Canada and other British-isms that are often associated and enjoyed here. Carry on...

Exactly what "people" have brushed aside the "wishes" of Quebec as "meaningless and unworkable?" Are you new to this country or something?

Exactly how does the Sun cater to "uneducated individuals" or, better yet, why do you assume Sun readers or viewers are "uneducated?" Is this statement driven by your political ideology?