CANADIEN

WE have known that for months. :lol:

Let me check here... Vic Toews is the MINISTER , the MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT, responsible for, among other things, implementing the laws of Canada regarding the use of French and English (the two main CANADIAN languages) in the Federal Civil Service, Therefore, he should OF COURSE ve able to explain the role, mandate and policies of his Ministry. Ge does not need to be able to speak both languages to do that. In other words, as long as the rights of Canadians are tespected, I don't care ehich of our official languages he speaks or doesn't speak. No, since we are all decent people who eschew bigotry, we would have the same reaction if Mr. Toews were an unilingual French-speaker, right?

Yep.. Obama was right to to make the original available, but he was wrong not doing so. There is no conspiracy, but factcheck.org imust be conspiring with Obama to hide the truth. He was born in the US., but we must entairtain any wingnut theory that says otherwise hey, they might be right.. Whatever. :lol: it's legal, therefore it's not torture.Not that I would compare Bush to Hitler or Stalin, but their crimes were perfectly legal too. In the real world, what is wrong remains wrong even when it's covered by law.

Let's face the truth, The appointment of a Justice of the United States Supreme Court has nothing to do with qualifications (even though they usually end up with people who are up to the task). It's about politics, and politics alone... It is clear that many of those who are pushing for a lesbian candidate are concerned less about competency than politics. But let's not fool ourselves. There are plenty of people who will oppose her because of her sexual orientation, no matter how qualified she may be.

I have admitted it, my reading of that particcular piece of legislation was fauty, and I corrected myself. I have made another mistake as well... wasting my time with a conspiracy nut. No longer. When you have something that looks like the shadow of an evidence of any the stupid claims espouses by the lunatics (that he was born in Kenya, that he was never a U.S. citizen, that he has lost his citizenship, that he currently holds Kenan and or Indonesian citizenship, that an independant fact checking think-thank is not to be trusted because they received funding from the same source that funded dozen of political research and education advocacy programs including one Obama was involved with, that just providing in a court of law the information he has made public would shut the imbeciles up), I may waste my time commenting. Until then, feel free to defy logic without me. In the ewal world, torture techniques are torture techniques, no matter how legal one declares them to be. I used to be content to just think Bush did n't know what he was talking about. Not now that the White House has relased memos detailing some approved interrogation techniques that constitute tortures.

Edited for clarifications The Annenberg Foundation has provided founding for a number of SEPARATE groups, charities and political study institute. These include 18 distinct projects under the Annenberg Challenge, launched in the 1990's to support initiatives aimed at improving public education. Barack obama sat on the Board of the Chicago Challenge (not the Annenberg Foundation) along with the terrorist Ayers and a number of people from academia, the education sector and business interests (I don't use Wikepedia that often, but they have a complete list of people who sat on the Chicago Challenge at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago_Annenberg_Challenge). Factcheck.org is a Web site operated by the Annenberg Public Policy Centre, a program of the University of Pennsylvania that was established thanks to a grant fron the Annenberg Foundation, but is part of the University and is not managed by the Foundation. A look at the Annenberg Foundation website as opposed to websites with weard names, would have revealed that. BTW, the foundation was founded by Walter Annenberg, a media moghul who became U.S. ambassador to the UK under Nixon and later introduced Ronald Reagan to Margaret Thatcher. His (now deceased) widow publicly supported Senator McCain during the last campaign. The pro-Obama bias is there for all to see. A dozen FAILED attempts to compel the State of Hawaii to illegally provide access to the certificate in their records are not enough for you? The document that the Obama campaign made public was a valid official proof of the existence of a birth certificate in the records of the State of hawaii that states that Brack Obama II was born in Honolulu in 1961. This document would constitute sufficient proof of Obama's Hawaiian birth if submitted in any court of law. Which is unlikely to happen because courts will not waste any more time than necessary on frivolous lawsuits. It is a KNOWN fact that , under Kenyian laws, dual citizens (which Obama was at birth) automatically lose their Kenyan citizenship at 21 unless they renounce their other (in this case American citizenship). It's up to the conspiracy nutcases to provide evidence that he renounced his U.S. citizenship. As for the claim he lost his American citizenship when his mother married an Indonesian citizen and moved to Indonesia, this is not the case under American law. There are claims that he became an Indonesian citizen, but the "evidence" is circumstantial at best. Besides, if there was any reason for him to believe that he had lost his U.S. citizenship while in Indonesia, don't you think he would not have just taken the necessary steps to become a U.S. citizen again; after all, the U.S. Constitution says nothing about dual citizenship. But hey, it's a lot simplier to believe that he forged a birth certification but forgot to forge an application to regain his U.S. citizenship as well. There are claims that some family members have stated that he was born in Kenya. Those claims are for the most part based on taped interviews of poor quality and what is heard varies depending on who is listening. As for the claim that Barack himself "admitted" to a Kenyian birth... pleeeeaaaase. Like the Clinton campaign and the McCain campaign would not have pounced on that one within 2 hours of such a statement. Like the mainstream media would not have picked up on it. Those who have launched court cases have FAILED because, like any "good" conspiracy theorist, all they have is a wild imagination, rthe belief that if things did not turn out the way they wanted it must bbbe beecause someone did something wrong, and the belief that somehow 2+2=5. It is not a coincidence that the head lunatic, Philip J. Berg, was also bbbehind a failed attempt to have George Bush and co. stand trial for blowing up the WTC. At least, his delusions are bi-partisan. :lol: Let's see. I point you to the web page FROM THE WHITE HOUSE, and that's not enough. I point you to the very line, and that not good enough. So here are the words (and you can go to the posting where I included the link, and check for yourself):

Don't worry, I'll keep laughing as you try to mix contradictory facts (Quebec fifn't sign on the constitutional amendment) with fiction (Trudeau was workinh for Quebec at the expense of the ROC). Now back to Ignatieff. Here we have Harper-lite, who has spent most of his adult life aaabroad, whohas the charisma of a bonsai, and who leads a party that was not too long ago on the brink of irrelevance. Yet the Liberals are in a virtual tie with the Conservaaaaatives, and making modest in-roads in the West and Quebec. Says a lot about Harper.

Typical Leafless... The Charter is bad because it (in your opinion) gives control to Quebec, and the proof of it is that is was opposed by,,, Quebec. :lol:

We shall start with: And then there is: I'd rest my case, but I know you'll add to this illustrious display of stupidity before long.

I have made my opinion clear enough. Nice bit of your usual intellectual dishonesty though. Bizarre, I haven't even mentioned the word multiculturalism... I didn't know you were so much in favour of treating people as individuals instead of based on their ancestry and physical traits. ]As usual, you distort what I say to fit your little racist agenda. Physical features, and places of origin, is not what I base my opinion pf ptjer people on. Neither is the language they speak to other people, the food they eat and (any some cases at least), their customs. As for how people look... everytime I stand in front of the mirror I am glad people do not look as ugly as me :lol: You don't want anything to do with people who do not think or look llike you. Your problem. Now, let's take a look at what you would call a community, or what you would like Canada to be: a little white-only fortified camp, where the "inferiors" are not welcomed, where everybody must look the same and think the same. Where did I see that before?... And how would you achieve this? Expel the non-whites? Throw in jail those who do not think like the others? Ban food that does not meet your idea of what appropirate food should be? Conduct genetic testings so that anyone not "pure" enough can be thrown out? Forbid the flow of ideas with the rest of the world? And where would that stop? Because, if I have to reject let's say curry chicken and people watching Chinese television, what would be the basis for tolerating perogies or not burning Bergman's movies? They come from an European culture different than mine. If I were you, I'd move to another planet where you can be alone with a mirror and be with only person who is exactly like you'd want everyone to be.

Not surprisingly, you don't get it when you're mocked. And we are still waiting for you to show us why diversity is bad.

Because they're not white? And you wonder why I think you're a low-life.

Nothing. One is a fact, the other one a delusion of yoor clueless mind.

My job includes for the most part expaining to adults from various educational background how to find information using sometimes fairly complex tools. It also involves the occasional class-type instruction to adults People (co-workers and clients) have told me they think I would be a great teacher. My response is: "I tried it, and never EVER again". If you think after being around teachers for years that their job is easy and that they barely have to work, you clearly see only what you want to see. News to you: preparing lesson plans and lesson activities, grading papers, meeting with parents and students outside of the classroom is part of the job of the teacher. Teachers are expected to be educators, social workers and cops all in one. When I was younger and naive, I tried teaching, even going through teacher's college, because I thought it was an easy job. I lasted 3 months. You wouldn''t last one.

People on welfare are already subjected to a host of controls, ranging from the logical (if you earn money from another source, to the absurd (in Ontario, a woman on welfare and the man sub-leting from her were considered a couple (therefore reducing her welfore egibility) if he bought a gift for the woman's kid at Chritmas (I am not making that one up!)). But now their life should be "regulated"? We should license parenting, like we license dog ownership? (mind you, licensing parenting could have the effect or keeping children away from racist, sexist, homophobic, and otherwise bigoted parents, not that I would rrrrecommend we do that, of course). Why not just throw the poor in jail, where they would at least get a roof and three meals a day? Or maybe forced sterilization? Not that I claim that's what you're gettting at, but some have and will suggest it. Simply put, the best way to ensure that poor people do not pass their poverty to the next genreation is to repair the safety net so that less people fall into poverty in the first place.

:lol:

Nice theory. Now. Let's see what is missing in it. Like the fact people in the lower salary ranges cannot afford to put that much money aside. Or the unpredictability of death, accidents, etc. And the fact that people receiving EI payments have paid into the program.

Putting him on ignore now would be a HUGE mistake. He's just starting with the anti-Jewish stuff. It will get more and more hilarious.

What is not that curious is that you won't dare telling what are the challenges you claim exist. Me... I don't care if my neighbour across the street is from Nigeria or has Italian ancestry. I do not care if my manager was born in Tahiti or Barrie. I don't care where my friends were born, the colour of their skin, their ancestry. Because IT DOES NOT MATTER. Your notion that I should automatically assume that one is more intelligent, more honest, a better human being because of their skin colour, makes no sense at all. After all, your anti-Jewish rant constitutes proof enough that there is at least one white man on this planet who is a complete moron. So, once again, since YOU claim that diversity is an evil thing, and since it is obvious you want Canada to be a little white only enclave, why don't YOU say why this would make it such a paradise?

If your kids grow up to be like you, I hope they will not become teachers.. for the sake of the students.

Compared to someone who believes one has to be stupid and lazy to be a teacher, I'm Einstein. :lol: :lol:

Did I say we need diversity? No. Did I say we do not need it? No Did I say diversity is a weakness? No. Did I say it's a strenght? No So feel welcome to drop the cowardly dishonesty any time. It is clear you think diversity is wrong, tell us why.

Strange what a little search on the Web, including visitng three different genealogy web sites and one discussion forum cn do. All point to the origin of the Battenberg family being count Hans Maurice Hauke, a German who became a general in the Russian Army in the arly 18th century, and his fater a school teacher in Prussian Poland. General and teacher.. clearly two occupations widely opened to Jews in those days, right? Now you are of course welcome to produce genealogical information that validates your claim. sorry, but sites on Jewish conspiracy and family trees linking the Royal Family to David and Mohammed do not count. And you found that one where? And I thought it came from a word in the Old English language, Bryttisc meaning Briton You got one thing right. Pigs do fly Nope. I'll call you an idiot for posting that

Tpp bad you were not around there to correct the Nazi propaganda machine when it was denouncing the Asian hordes coming from Siberia :lol:

Now I must admit that for the first time you're surprising me. Stepping down to the anti-Jewish stuff without stopping first at "let's separate the races"... Considering all your nonsense about how iq is linked tto intelligence is linked to race, I am surprised by your lack of respect towards the British Royal Family. After all, if they are half Jews (which about anyone but you knows is BS but that's besides the point), and considering that the Askhenazi have an average iq of 120... :lol: