Hazeleyes

Canada doesn't have a great record in providing an equal footing for native peoples but I haven't noticed our military lobbing any missles at their reserves - have you. But lets be honest the Israeli military over reacts to the slightest palestinian provocation. Didn't a UN investigation last year show that they bombed a hospital in the Gaza. A second change I would like to see is Israel to stop building on occupied lands in the Westbank. Everyone knows that if there is ever to be peace a two state solution has the best chance. This means that the West bank will be part of that solution but building homes for radical jewish settlers suggests that Israel dispite its verbage has no intention of conducting honest negotiations. Another change is the embargo on food and medicine. Of course again Israel denies this but the UN inspectors insist it is happening. If Canada or the US treated its minorities like Israel treats the Palestinians its citizens would rise up and demand change. The Israeli's that have tried that tactic mostly wind up in jail.

What we only support dictators if they are nice to Israel - pretty shallow politics.

I know that you will dismiss any critism of Israeli policy, history, treatment of the palestinians but in my book Israel is one of those countries that need to change on a whole lot of fronts.

The Columbia ice fields in the Canadian rockies have shrunk noticible in my lifetime. The glaciers in the rockiers are significantly smaller. The artic ice sheet is thinner. Greenland is calfing more iceburgs and the north west passage is open. Now you can deny all these observerable facts but then you will be taking yourself out of the discussion of "what ten". That when we talk about surviving the environmental change.

There is a nice warm feeling in the belief that the earth is capable of healing from any assualt that nothing bad will ever happen. That we can continue to pursue policies that have their foundation in the idea that jobs trump the environment and that that is the way god made it when he gsve us dominion over the earth and everything on it. Its sad to find that as a species we still haven't matured enough to really understand the intercaonnectedness of all life that our actions will always result in a reaction and that the consequences of those actions are often unintended.

Harmonizing the sales tax will of course result in businesses saving an estimated 2 billion dollars I would imagine the grateful companies that benefit will show their gratitude to the party that engineered this transfer of wealth from the consumer to the corporations. Ironically this will include international corps who will move their profits out of Canada as quickly as possible. Mr Harper has given a whole new meaning to "standing up for canadians" As far as BC goes documents have been released that show that the BC Finance Minister and the Priemier were aware before the election that discussions were underway on the HST before the election - a claim vehemantly denied by the BC Liberals up until now. You are right for BC to get out of the HST will cost us a whack of money but I think it will sink the BC LIberals and cost the conservatives seats in BC.

After the vietnam war thousands of refugees fleeing vietnam were welconed in the US and Canada. For the most part they were assimilated into our economy, their refugee status was never in doubt and they came by boat - in fact so many came by boat that the press referred to them as "boat people". I am an immigrant to this country my family went through the immigration process which my dad started in August 1963. We entered canada 2.5 months later in October. Now I understand that it could take years to process a claim which I think leads people, especially desparate people to skirt the rules and to find shortcuts. So rather than more draconian enforcement perhaps we should put more resources into speeding up the system.

Perhaps in the case of secret meetings with extremely rich people who seem to share your ideology Mr. Harper should look to Mr. Mulroney and put the agenda of that meeting on the public record.

Because I'm new to this forum I'm not sure if your post is meant to be sarcastic - The purpose of my post was to discuss the connection between free speech and sedition. I have always felt their needs to be boundaries to free speech that unlike the Americans where free speech is sacrosanct I think their must be limits. One of those would be people preaching the overthrow of the state by violent means.

So if you pay an exorbinant amount to someone to get you out of the country and you arrive here on the deck of a ship having suffered months of hardship getting here you obviously aren't a refugee. I am not sure there is a legitimate people carrier that caters to refugees, it sounds like a niche market.

And here is a link to an article on free speech in Canada In the preview mode this link seems not to have taken if someone can fix it I would be grateful. new link

The question has been raised whether "home grown terriorists" should be tried for treason and if found guilty, punished accordingly. It is interesting to note that the last attempt to enforce the sedition laws took place in 1951 against the Jehovah Witnesses and was unsuccessful. Some jurists argue that the sedition laws are antiquated and now longer useful. In Canada we value free speech to the point where some would argue that its scope should be limitless. It seems to me that this attitude makes enforcing any sedition laws difficult if not impossible. Canada does have laws against sedition: Part II of the Canadian Criminal Code deals with 'Offences against Public Order'. It includes sedition (ss. 59-61), treason (ss. 46-50), sabotage (s. 52), incitement to mutiny (s. 53) and an offence of intimidating Parliament or the legislature of a province by an act of violence (s. 51). Seditious intention encompasses everyone who a) teaches or advocates, or publishes or circulates any writing that advocates, the use, without the authority of law, of force as a means of accomplishing a governmental change within Canada. I would be interested in a reasoned discussion of this topic.

Thank you Capricorn. You have presented a cogent argument for the idea that the meeting was arranged in part at least for Rupbert Murdock to offer PM Harper an apology for his stations dissing our troops. But why wouldn't the PM or even better Rupbert Murdock give a quick statement to that effect after the meeting.

I think politicians have dropped the laws against treason many years ago for fear that they might find themselves in the dock. Consider some of the ashhat decisions polliticians have made that have resulted in people dying. Mercury poisoning and the death of indian people in ontario back in the 70's come to mind. The tar sands and the pollution of the athabaska river is another example. I am not suggesting that the polluters committ treason but the toady politicians that defend them is another, especially when they use their position of trust and authority to deny what is happening.

It would appear he/she doesn't get your point but despite posing a number of questions no one from the other side of the debate has stepped forward to answer Waldo. When both sides in an argument refuse to answer the others points it goes nowhere.