A rare spectacle. . . . . . .

So, in a rare bit of over the top Canadian PC, when might we see the first legally authorised public stoning, amputation or beheading in Central Montreal? Is this not expected if minorities are granted the (dubious) "right" to be governed by their own laws, judiciary and parliament? Sedition and treason I call it.

R.

[Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP)]

When this type of foolishness truly overwhelms what used to be a nice country, can some of us apply for refugee status in Great Britain? 'Back to Mother' as it were? I'm half-Scottish and half-English... the third half used to be Canuck, but that doesn't seem to matter any more...

Originally posted by Geoff Winnington-Ball
When this type of foolishness truly overwhelms what used to be a nice country, can some of us apply for refugee status in Great Britain? 'Back to Mother' as it were? I'm half-Scottish and half-English... the third half used to be Canuck, but that doesn't seem to matter any more...

It is, well, unbelievable. Gob is smacked and belief beggared.

Hardly fits with our rugged but reasonable Canadian stereotype.

You need an outbreak of common sense there, you do, PDQ would be nice.

And I thought we had leadership of weasel-word, pocket-lining, mealy-mouthed, two-faced, bombastic drongoes.

C'mon Canada, reality check NOW.

R.

[Garry Shipton (RIP)]

Hi guys,Garry in Greenfield Park,Quebec,a suburb across the Victoria Bridge from Montreal.I don't get the topic of this thread.Can someone explain??I'm not aware,what happened & where??As an anglo here I'd be on the front line for my rights.
Let me know!!

[Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP)]

The Martin gummint is seriously considering allowing Muslim communities over here to substitute Canadian law for Sharia, to be administered by themselves. Sharia includes all that Richard touched upon, plus more. It is the law of the fanatics who currently hold the world hostage. And it seems we might be endorsing it.

Are these people insane?

If they do this, I want out.

Originally posted by Geoff Winnington-Ball
The Martin gummint is seriously considering allowing Muslim communities over here to substitute Canadian law for Sharia, to be administered by themselves. Sharia includes all that Richard touched upon, plus more. It is the law of the fanatics who currently hold the world hostage. And it seems we might be endorsing it.

Are these people insane?

If they do this, I want out.

Wake up Karmen too!

If this is true ... future? Holy Hanna. It's not logical at all, or "right by Canada and Canadians"
If you live in Canada, you're Canadian, period? We are not "other countries" we are "A" COUNTRY holding people of all cultures and backgrounds in ONE COUNTRY CALLED CANADA. Thats our country's reality. If a place is part of Canada, it's Canada. PERIOD.

Us Canadians could call actions like this DISCRIMINATORY? Couldn't we realistically claim that as inequality and discrimination against the rest of us CANADIANS?

I dunno ... scarey thoughts, even for an ignoramus like me.

Where the hell is logic and common sense?

Originally posted by Vets Dottir
Wake up Karmen too!

Karmen, its why I obscurely put the comment: "Better lay in some black cloth then, and start sewing your Hijab." after your post in TAC HQ.

Is the penny dropping yet?

R.

And furthermore....

If SOME EXCLUSIVE CANADIANS are NOT ruled by CANADIAN law, then they are ANOTHER COUNTRY, but IN ACTUALITY/REALITY they ARE NOT ... They're CANADIAN!

It's not the individual laws themselves that make me crazy, its one segment of us acting as if we are a separate country while we are NOT.

The laws Richard mentioned, no I don't want, but its our collective ONENESS that will prevent that and worse.

This "fragmentation and separatist do your own thing without regard for everyone else and the structure of the whole" is the behavior that destroys relationships, families, and countries.

done my emotional rant.

By the way ... my early history included some actions against my person and mind that hurt every level of my life ... those responsible ... would have their heads and hands and nether parts chopped off and torured in public?

Would I be okay with that as justice and retribution for what I lost?

NO. And I wouldn't be okay with laws that allow that for some Canadians, but not others, under the LAW. I don't agree with or like many laws but tend to abide by them as the best we currently have and in the end,our laws are our collective strengths, and weaknesses, as a whole.

done my rant.

Originally posted by FV623

Is the penny dropping yet?

R.

Can't you tellby my responses Master R.?

It scares me because stuff like this spells doom to even try and go there.

If you're currently Canadian, you're Canadian.

(my Mom's old expression would have been "Like it or lump it" ... FIDO )

[Snowtractor]

Canadians all Canadians? Come on now, we have native self government, Nunavut self government, Quebec self government infringing on non french speaking peoples rights. Even the UN gave Quebec a slam for that. The Sihks in Vancouver have been soft handed for years to handle a lot of their own issues.
My wife , of aboriginal decent, was given 2 years to learn french or lose her job, and we live in the west where we all speak english and the few french people here have moved here for economic reasons and speak english also. And in some provinces you have health care extra dues and in others none. We have Provincial and GST in the west (except alberta and NT) and HST in the east. It takes less requirements of working to go on to unemployment insurance if you live in Quebec or the east coast then it does in the west, this was put in place by Martin just before the last election. We have 2 provinces that can decide the destiny of 8 provinces and 3 territories. Hard to imagine someone born and raised in Toronto or Montreal really understanding what is going on in Regina, Winnipeg, Peace River or Balgona . Interesting stuff.
Sean

[Jon Skagfeld]

Originally posted by Geoff Winnington-Ball
The Martin gummint is seriously considering allowing Muslim communities over here to substitute Canadian law for Sharia, to be administered by themselves. Sharia includes all that Richard touched upon, plus more. It is the law of the fanatics who currently hold the world hostage. And it seems we might be endorsing it.

Are these people insane?

If they do this, I want out.

Sharia law is totally offensive to any Westerner...especially women, who are treated as definite second class people suitable only for breeding purposes. Can't vote, can't drive a car, must be covered head to toe, must obey males without question, can't watch TV, listen to radio, watch videos...and on and on.

Wahabbism (the strictest fundamental manifestation of Sharia law) is on the rise in such Muslim countries as Saudi Arabia and is going to prove to be a great battle between progressives and fundamentalists. The Taliban was such a movement where the Q'ran was strictly followed as a path to purity. This meant that any reference in the Q'ran (and Sharia law) that could not be explained (i.e. electric lights) was rejected.

We all know the current Liberal party's pandering to the immigrant vote, but granting Sharia law to resident Muslims simply violates our parliamentary (or more properly, our constitutional) democracy.

If, heaven forbid, this madness is promulgated, you can be damn sure that the Sikhs, Hindus, Outer Mongolians, etc will be champing at the bit for their share of their destiny.

For example, a few years ago, in Toronto, a group of Sikhs started a class action against others living in the same neighbourhood who, when others were BBQing steaks, made the claim that the process resulted in the charring the meat of the sacred cow. Thankfully, common sense prevailed and the action was cancelled. Can you imagine how your lifestyle would change if there was the weight of law behind the suit?

This is a somewhat longish rant, but isn't the preservation of those who fought for this country's values what MLU is all about?

Canadians...demand of your constituent MP just what the hell is going on!

Hi Sean.

Interesting post you did to go with the interesting thread.

I don't know how all of "Canada" works, but do see different rules in differnt places for different reasons ... all little parts that erode the whole because as ONE collective we aren't all living by interdependent rules of conduct that hold the whole together.

Social issues, economic, they're natural outcomes of the way things are done.

Too many "segments" acting independently rather than interdependently, and at the cost of interdepndency.

I could go get a Metis card and join a political force and fight against the lot of you-all-ain't Metis to have my METIS way ... but wouldn't.

Why not? Does it benefit, or erode, the whole for me to do that and who do I most depend on anyways?
I wouldn't want to "erode" my mommy and daddy "Canada" because if they breakup ... I don't have a good home to be Metis in anyways.

I'm losin my train of thought here chicken simmering making me very hungry.

Bottom line is that a family that doesn't hang together, hangs. No one group is more or less important than the next and we all depend on each other for survival and for maintaining equality of life and freedoms that should benefit us all.

I see it all around me and this bothers me EVERY day of my life because I can't fix it ... erosion of the whole due to "exceptions" or entity unto themselves.

Sigh.

[Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP)]

For three-quarters of the twentieth century, immigrants came to Canada to take advantage of the freedom and values offered by our essentially British heritage. With Trudeau's rise to power, this was diminished (actually before, if you acknowledge the demise of the Red Ensign). We were SUPPOSED to be a country under one flag, under one set of [British] values, but this continues to erode under the auspices of political correctness and intellectual pandering to the masses.

This latest bit is appalling.

If this DOES go through, I cannot see remaining here, at least in Ontario. Alberta seems to have their boots on the right feet, and after that? Who knows. Will somebody PLEASE pull the plug on this government? I cannot believe they were voted in yet again, after all the evidence of corruption alone.

Terribly depressing, all this.

Originally posted by FV623
So, in a rare bit of over the top Canadian PC, when might we see the first legally authorised public stoning, amputation or beheading in Central Montreal? Is this not expected if minorities are granted the (dubious) "right" to be governed by their own laws, judiciary and parliament? Sedition and treason I call it.

R.

Master R.

I apologize for my going off on tangents here ... way off the topic of what you posted (but in the same vein,sorta/kinda) The whole idea of the above actually ever happening is just one more EXTREME thats really scarey to contemplate, on top of things like SEAN mentioned that already are happening.

Back to YOUR topic the idea is insanity itself.
Thats my opinion and I'm stickin' to it.

And what can someone like me DO to help prevent this?

[Snowtractor]

Originally posted by Geoff Winnington-Ball
This latest bit is appalling.

Terribly depressing, all this.

I agree with both of those statements. Though Alberta is going on to set up its 2 tier health system and has given the logging right for almost 50% of the Province to a Japanese company and has the fastest crime rate growth this past year, with Hell's angels moving in force etc etc.
I think it is the problem with cental governments and democratic systems (not that I know of a better system). It forces the government , in order to stay in power, to appease special interest groups. There was a report released sometime back that said one hundred thousand people was all it took to force the government to change legislation. So a tightly knit group can steer the government. This tightly knit group stuff tends to run more in immigrants, for a couple of generations, as longer term Canadians tend to be more independent in thought and actions.
I also think the longer in power the more complacent you become and the more you try to stay in power instead of doing the 'work'. The old adage "absolute power corrupts absolutely' and variations on that theme. We should limit all elected officials to a maximum time in any office ,total, so that new ideas and fresh blood are introduced without being pressured by carreer politicians who have heald once office or another for 40 years and have brought their cronies along for the ride. Maybe a total of 15 years including all elected time, like city alderman provincial and federal time combined.
My two cents on my soapbox by Sean

Originally posted by Vets Dottir
Master R.

I apologize for my going off on tangents here ... way off the topic of what you posted (but in the same vein,sorta/kinda)

Not at all, well on topic. I knew full well it would touch an exposed nerve and elicit some informative posts from the Canadian residents of MLU, in that respect it was a somewhat selfish ploy to advance my understanding and get an overview of the "popular" opinion, if ever you couldn't deduce that outcome with 5 brain cells or less.

Jon Skagfield said: "It forces the government , in order to stay in power, to appease special interest groups. There was a report released sometime back that said one hundred thousand people was all it took to force the government to change legislation. So a tightly knit group can steer the government."

Isn't this minority rule ?

And previously he rightly said: "We all know the current Liberal party's pandering to the immigrant vote, but granting Sharia law to resident Muslims simply violates our parliamentary (or more properly, our constitutional) democracy."

Isn't this sedition and treason?

One might hope the crowned head of the Commonwealth has a few words with the people in charge there, preferably bangs some heads together, but don't hold your breath.

Bear in mind too, the problems posed by the 21st century social order in daily life, is "resolved" by these Middle East doctrines, if I may group them thus, by an immediate and ruthless return to "Fundamentalism".

In fact no answer at all, but a turning back of the clock to 2,500 years ago.

Whilst "you" and "I" permit, nay encourage, these people to retain their culture and build specific and restricted meeting places for their important religious practices, how many Christian churches have been built for the westerners in the Middle East? The very suggestion would have your head off. Surely, fair's, fair?

Lets not forget at the very fundamentalist root of it, all us western, "Christians" are scum of the Earth infidels. Unacceptable.

I thought here in England we got over the "my lot are holier than your lot and if you don't believe me, I'll punch your head in" many hundreds of years ago with civil wars and gummint purges, surely we don't have to go round the buoy again, do we?

All British monarchs are sworn to "F the D", you can't have the job without it, and Fid. Def. or latterly F.D. appears on all coins since George I in 1714. As you all know of course Fidei Defensor is Latin for "Defender of the Faith" which for us means The Church of England.

Are we getting close to the point when HM QE II needs to do a bit of pro-active F-D ing?

R.

[chris vickery]

Just had to jump in on this one. It is of little wonder why our American neighbours to the south are so worried about us, especially when it comes to security, both internal and at our borders.
If I remember correctly, was it not from a point in BC a few years ago that a terrorist was staging a bombing plot to take place in the US when he was apprehended at the border? This incident reeked at the time of misguided immigration officials and their assinine rules which usually let these people in with very little research as to their identities.
I am not anti-immigrant, having family immigrate here afterall like most others in their past (albeit from the UK). This was the good ol' days when Canada was made up primarily of Anglo-Saxons who respected the Queen, God and Country.
I understand why people would like to leave some S*******E country to come here to a prosporous land of opportunity.
Please though, leave your political BS, religious BS and ethnic BS at home (the one you left) or GO BACK. Afterall, I'm sure in the homecountry your oppressive government would love to hear your squacking.
It's about high time that Canadian people take back this country with some degree of commonsense and old fashioned values...

[Alex Blair (RIP)]

Originally posted by chris vickery
It's about high time that Canadian people take back this country with some degree of commonsense and old fashioned values...

Chris
Having your say is the way it is supossed to be in the land of free speech...
I admire the Americans in their attitude of "I'm an American first!!"
No hyphenated Canadians would go a long way to harmonizing this country and if immigrants ,which we ,or our forefathers all are ,including the "Native" members of Canadian society ,originally came from somewhere else..
But the potlicking,lickspittle,goughing,theiving polititions of Canada would do anything to beg ,borrow or steal a vote to keep them in the trough of perks,pay and porridge...
In the hierarchy of society it is theives,murderers,drug dealer,rapists,kiddy-diddlers,lawyers(Greg Andersonis the exception here)and polititions..lowest of the lowlife....
I can't believe that the liberals were voted back in to power in this country...
(as previously mentioned by Sunray)
Those that don't like Canada or want to bring their ways and beliefs to Canada to impose them on others or carry on as if they are "Home" should be asked to leave..If they don't ,do it for them..
Thousands of immigrants have come to Canada and have built positive elements into this country..
The dissenters would have us back in mud huts and stone axes if they get powerful enough...
Can't happen..???
Look at Rhodesia today..
Canada could go the way of Rhodesia ..
I won't be around to see it happen but I am here now to see it well under way..
See you at Coe Hill..

[Garry Shipton (RIP)]

Originally posted by Geoff Winnington-Ball
The Martin gummint is seriously considering allowing Muslim communities over here to substitute Canadian law for Sharia, to be administered by themselves. Sharia includes all that Richard touched upon, plus more. It is the law of the fanatics who currently hold the world hostage. And it seems we might be endorsing it.

Are these people insane?

If they do this, I want out.

Hell,I'm awake now.I follow the written press & TV news daily,& this is the first time that I've heard of this news to change laws to appease religious denominations!!One time the pipe band was hired to do some religious parade.While standing in the street waiting for the form up,while having a smoke,I was approached by an orange turbaned guy who TOLD me to stop smoking,as their religious symbol was at the front of the parade.I TOLD him if it was bothering him,he should take the symbol back into the mosque,until I finished my smoke on public property!!Some people,including our gummint,have their nerve.

Originally posted by Garry Shipton
I TOLD him if it was bothering him,he should take the symbol back into the mosque,until I finished my smoke on public property!!Some people,including our gummint,have their nerve.

Cool Garry!
(Geoff ... WHY is there NO "thumbs up and down" icon to add in posts? I've often wished I could use them in my text. Is it possible to add some please?)

The smoke story may be one that most people wouldn't understand the signifignace of.

Stories like that just how "unclear and undefined" these many people, not just immigrants, ARE, in their own perceptions of the boundaries and limits of "freedoms and rights"

If gummint is actually considering allowing self-rule for exclusive group, then the gummint itself is unclear in its perception of the boundaries and limits of freedoms and rights???

Is that because the "script" itself is ambiguous? Or just the perceptions of it by the differing mindsets of the different gummints?

Maybe more specific clarification, and teaching that to Canadians and especially to people new to the country before they signonthe dotted line just exactly what the limits and boundaries are?

I myself don't know the "actual rules", and the language of "running a country and gummint and all that, well, I'm learning as I go. I know that's obvious to all of you by my posts. If I sound like and idiot, or naive, well, I AM but I can learn dammit!

What do you mean by:

1) SEDITION
2) TREASON

Thank you

Originally posted by chris vickery
I understand why people would like to leave some S*******E country to come here to a prosporous land of opportunity.
Please though, leave your political BS, religious BS and ethnic BS at home (the one you left) or GO BACK.

YES.
Here's the beginning of a serious outbreak of commonsense.

"When in Rome, do as the Romans."

We too have a problem with so-called immigrants, or asylum seekers. Some are very genuine, it is obvious the majority are economic refugees though. Most fall into a certain category though, whose basic doctrine is to conquer or convert the infidels and the world.

I thought the asylum rules were quite simple, you seek asylum in the first safe haven; now why would these people cross all the developed European countries to come to England?

We're not a "soft touch" since Mr Blair and his entourage keep telling us we are not.

Let me tell you a story, more as an on-topic illustration perhaps.

We have just received a 20 page gummint booklet,
http://www.preparingforemergencies.gov.uk/
a publication well advertised on all the terrestial channels and the 900 odd satelite ones too, which together with the printing and postage to EVERY household in the kingdom must have cost me a pretty penny.

It is an obvious scare-mongering tactic but cleverly takes the pubilc eye off the other balls that were causing so much consternation, it tells anyone with 5 or more brain cells absolutely NOTHING.

But the back page is informative, in the context of this thread:
"To obtain more copies of this booklet, translations or alternative formats, fill out this form. . . . . . . . ."
Her you may have up to 5 more copies, in:
Audio tape
Bengali
French
Large print
Chinese
Urdu
Braille
Arabic
Punjabi
English
Welsh
Somali
Gujarati
or
Greek
Kurdish
Farsi
Turkish
Vietnamese
and Hindi via the website.

To me this back page carries a message.

R.

Originally posted by Alex Blair
Chris
Having your say is the way it is supossed to be in the land of free speech...

Yes it is.

I admire the Americans in their attitude of "I'm an American first!!"

Me too, and we are jealous of the Federal encouragement of patriotism, a position which is almost on the legal limit of the Race Relations Act here and seen by many English as hugely unfair when our Welsh and Scottish chums are positively encouraged to assert their specific identities. But I've been here before.

The dissenters would have us back in mud huts and stone axes if they get powerful enough...

Very likely, I know the feeling.

Look at Rhodesia today..

Errrr, I think you mean Zimbabwe. . . . . . .
In fact the ethnic and indigenous population, the white settlers and the ex-pats were all very happy with Ian Smith's UDI and his running of the country, PM Harold Wilson was not and the Russians mixed it with the UN.
You may see the result as you allude to.

Canada could go the way of Rhodesia ..
I won't be around to see it happen but I am here now to see it well under way..

I do hope it doesn't, but also whilst the sh-1-t is currently being lobbed onto the fan in small dollops, I too will thankfully probably not be here to see it tipped on by the truck load or the results therefrom.

Pity the next generations.

R.

[Geoff Winnington-Ball (RIP)]

It's actually the Canadian Constitution which has brought us this mess. From the very beginning, it was designed as a document so open-ended that the Supreme Court would have to interpret every clause over time. That way, the elected government wouldn't be in hot water themselves over legislation enacted; said legislation could be interpreted and defined/refined by a small select group of [government-appointed] judges, thus freeing the legislators themselves from direct responsibility.

In effect, the moment the British North America Act was repealed and the Canadian Constitution invoked, we here rejected traditional parliamentary democracy - the oldest form of democratic government, more than 800 years in service during its evolution - in favour of a judicial autocracy which is virtually unimpeachable. The 'Charter of Rights' grants theoretical rights (via the Courts, as above) to just about anyone NOT associated with the founding of the country. It was designed that way, I daresay deliberately. Hence the multicultural madness slowly creeping up on all of us, never mind regional abuses.

Despite its weaknesses, I long for the society I was brought up within, but I shall never see it again.

Originally posted by Vets Dottir

What do you mean by:
1) SEDITION
2) TREASON

Permit me to use my reference work, this may differ from yours though. The Concise Oxford Dictionary, 10th edition, revised, 2001.

Sedition - Conduct or speech inciting rebellion against the authority of a state or monarch.

Treason - The crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government.

R.

gy GEOFF: Re Karmen ...It's actually the Canadian Constitution which has brought us this mess. From the very beginning, it was designed as a document so open-ended that the Supreme Court would have to interpret every clause over time. That way, the elected government wouldn't be in hot water themselves over legislation enacted; said legislation could be interpreted and defined/refined by a small select group of [government-appointed] judges, thus freeing the
legislators themselves from direct responsibility.

GEOFF;

Thank you ... I think you said that so well that I think I even may "get it" GRIN...and if I do, I see a lot of room for a lot of erosion ... it works good for a gummint and countries within countries,, but not for "ONE COUNTRY" that hopes to survive intact. But I guess, judging by the splinter groups and imbalances between Canada, Provinces, communities and cults, that Canada isn't INTACT as one country anyways as long as it runs with the ambiguity. How can it? It's impossible as done?

Despite its weaknesses, I long for the society I was brought up within, but I shall never see it again. SUNRAY SENDS

I long for stable rules and no ambiguity so we can FIDO and have some optimism that driving on will even succeed. (I LOVE FIDO! Thank you SUNRAY .... big FAT GRIN!)

Permit me to use my reference work, this may differ from yours though. The Concise Oxford Dictionary, 10th edition, revised, 2001.

Sedition - Conduct or speech inciting rebellion
against the authority of a state or monarch.

Treason - The crime of betraying one's country,
especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the
sovereign or government.

R.

Thank you Master R. That really helps me to understand, better, what you meant.

Gummints can be charged with "treason and sedition" too? Or is that too much to hope for because they're the boss?

To those of you who answer what some of you might think to be som of my "stupid" questions and comments .... thank you for taking me seriously, cuz I'm seriously wanting to understand. You're actually making me know what being Canadian is. It's nice to start seeing and feeling how and where I fit in in the whole of things ... and where others do to. And HOW. Even at 50 or 80, more awareness can happen

Originally posted by Vets Dottir


Thank you Master R. That really helps me to understand, better, what you meant.

You're welcome as always.

Gummints can be charged with "treason and sedition" too? Or is that too much to hope for because they're the boss?

To an extent that's on the outer envelope of my competence, however, with a Monarch as Head of State you could believe the gummint can be so charged, certainly individual ministers of recognised departments, like a ship's captain, could be accused.

I see the sedition here, in this Canadian issue, against the department head that is pursuing the policy as an intent, insofar that it sets up and encourages one faction to rebel or usurp the normal authority of the historical and accepted order.

Treason applies to the same ministerial post as it is a partial or full act of overthrowing or betraying the country, as embraced by its people.

Of course the gummint just moves the goal-posts when you box them into a corner. You have to follow the golden rule, the people with the gold make the rules.

To cite a similar case; although it was a leading question, one faction here managed to table a parliamentary question which was answered by the Speaker at the time being Betty Boothroyd in this case and so it is recorded in Hansard (the daily,verbatim, journal of the proceedings of the House of Commons). Simply put she confirmed that Magna Carta (1215) is a valid law on our statute books and as such is a Bill of Rights.

One aspect of this prohibits and quotes as treasonable any action by govt to forcibly remove any property or posessions that an individual may own. Since the Home Sec had just forced the removal of the legally held and correctly certified hand-guns, there was a case brought against him for treason citing the requirements of Magna Carta.

This they neatly side-stepped by casting off this 1215 legislation and Bill of Rights by claiming it was so old as to be inapplicable, forgetting for a moment that the specific subject matter may well be an emotive one, the official response is absolute Bollocks.

(Capital B and two L's.)

As you might imagine though, when the boot is on the other foot its a different matter altogether.

However, its not the end of it. Whilst most aggrieved hobby pistol shooters could never pursue the full force of the law, there are a number of aggrieved and very senior legal people, including Peers of the Realm, who are working privately at the case using their extensive knowledge and usually wholly unaffordable time.

We shall see.

Personally, I'm not fussed by the specifics of the case, however, I am concerned with dual standards and govt dismissal of the statute book, plus the punishment of the innocent here for the dereliction of duty by officialdom who failed to carry out the legal procedural controls, or instigate discreet investigation to confirm the cogent intelligence received, over a three year period.

No police internal investigation of the top-level officer could be made as he retired one day after the event that propogated this trouble. You can't have an internal investigation when the person is no longer "internal".

As circumstantial evidence, in an obvious official effort to circumvent difficult questioning, the whole scenario has been placed under a media gagging order (our D notice) and the official investigations made into a state secret and placed under the 100yr rule.

Therefore and with some parallel aspects, I see this as case of un-democratic and dictatorial high-handedness.

In your specific Canadian case at present I'm thinking, God save Canada.

It seems at present nobody else can, or will be allowed to.

and again; 00:46, I must go and do my horizontal noisy dead man act.

R.

[chris vickery]

I really hate to say it, but here goes.
If one looks at Great Britain and her list of bygones, do we see a pattern developing? Afterall, it seems that any "colony" she left eventually fell into a state of disgrace, economic disaster, ethnic troubles etc. Lets think about that. Zimbabwe, India, Palestine, etc etc. The Brits tried to civilize these nations and after leaving, the elected or dictatorship governments virtually devastated these countries. I guess you could say I'm a little more leaning towards King and Country" (Queen) and wish somehow we could change back to the pre PM Trudeau days, the Constitution etc and revert to the Dominion of Canada. Heck, I'm not even old enough to remember it as that, but from my UK roots can respect the ideology.
In the days now where a certain ethnicity can send their kid to school armed with a "ceremonial" knife yet to a Christian kid it's a felony (concealed weapon), I see something very wrong. To me, to get passed over as a white male for a job because I don't fit a certain quota, something's wrong. To have to say "Happy Holidays" instead of Merry Christmas, well...
I'm happy to go to work everyday knowing that these people depend on me... Taxes well spent.
Pissed off in Rockwood and ready to head North to the wilderness.

Originally posted by chris vickery
I really hate to say it, but here goes.

The truth is not always palatable.

Afterall, it seems that any "colony" she left eventually fell into a state of disgrace, economic disaster, ethnic troubles etc. Lets think about that. Zimbabwe, India, Palestine, etc etc.

The record speaks for itself, and to be fair this also applies more or less to other ex-European African dominions with the now common brutal ethnic cleansing, govt condoned inter-tribal fighting and wholesale official pocket-lining.

The Brits tried to civilize these nations and after leaving, the elected or dictatorship governments virtually devastated these countries.

Simplistically, these places had an injection of civilisation, order and control representing hundreds of years experience; then having seen what they could achieve and the dominion power creaming off the profits, the people wanted it back but lost the plot with inter-faction power scrabbles, despot leaders and so let go of the tiller.

revert to the Dominion of Canada.

Contentious stuff indeed, but I see the thrust of the argument. Do bear in mind the administrations here aren't a patch on the sort of leadership extant at your time of independance.

In the days now where a certain ethnicity can send their kid to school armed with a "ceremonial" knife yet to a Christian kid it's a felony (concealed weapon), I see something very wrong.

Very, very wrong indeed.
Of course, should you live in certain state school catchment areas around London you would be obliged to send your child to a school where English is wholly unused, they would need to become proficient in Hindi or Urdu before learning anything.

To me, to get passed over as a white male for a job because I don't fit a certain quota, something's wrong.

"Snap".

To have to say "Happy Holidays" instead of Merry Christmas, well...

Fortunately these excesses are not applicable here yet, doubtless some pressure group is working on it though.

I'm happy to go to work everyday knowing that these people depend on me... Taxes well spent.
Pissed off in Rockwood and ready to head North to the wilderness.

Wholly understandable, but at least you do have a wilderness to hide away in. . . . . . . .

If ever anyone could accurately say "I told you so", it would be the late Enoch Powell, we desperately need him back. (Sorry, only the Brits will understand)

R.

[Rod Diery]

Glad I live in God's own country. Just a little confused sometimes just which God owns it.

Rod
Vegemite rules

by Master R.
One aspect of this prohibits and quotes astreasonable any action by govt to forcibly remove any property or posessions that an individual may own. Since the Home Sec had just forced the removal of the legally held and correctly certified hand-guns, there was a case brought against him for treason citing the requirements of Magna Carta.

This they neatly side-stepped by casting off this
1215 legislation and Bill of Rights by claiming it was so old as to be inapplicable, forgetting for a moment that the specific subject matter may well be an emotive one, the official response is absolute Bollocks.

If the charge/complaint is filed WHILE a law/rule is still in effect, then even if the law/rule is done away with AFTER the charge/complaint is put forward, in my "logic" those charges/complaints are still valid and exist validly, and should be dealt with under the original understanding. Argh... but thats the beauty of changing the rules mid-stream isn't it? People walk away going "whew' THAT was close, laugh, and walk on undisturbed.

sigh

I still love my Canada. It's "home" ... so far.