U.S. Says Canada Cares Too Much About Liberties 1562
A cheeky writer at Canada's Ottawa Citizen newspaper has written a story about the U.S. State Department's 2002 Patterns of Global Terrorism.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
U.S. Says Canada Cares Too Much About Liberties
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
"If it ain't broke, don't fix it." - Bert Lantz
Screw you, America (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Screw you, America (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Screw you, America (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Screw you, America (Score:5, Informative)
If by "liberated" you wish to draw spurious parallels between the purchase of Alaska and the deposing of Saddam, you're an idiot.
Re:Screw you, America (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Screw you, America (Score:5, Informative)
Jason
ProfQuotes [profquotes.com]
Re:Screw you, America (Score:3, Interesting)
We also grow large quantities of wheat in Western Canada. However, we are forced to ship it to Eastern Canada first (Canadian Wheat Board). Then we get to buy it back at higher prices. If a farmer tries to circumvent this procedure they are thrown in jail.
Re:Screw you, America (Score:5, Insightful)
Great, now I'm fearing for my life...next thing I know some "glorious" American army is going to "liberate" me from my "prison".
You all know the sayings:
War is peace
Freedom is slavery
Ignorance is strength
Re:Screw you, America (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Screw you, America (Score:4, Insightful)
Not yet, anyway. But just wait until we finish off Syria and North Korea and a few other small countries. After all, if Iraq looked easy, imagine how trivial invading across an undefended border would be....
Sad to say, this scenario is no longer really beyond the imaginable. Sometimes my own government makes me ill. No, wait, let me say "the government of my own country" -- there is no way I'll lay claim to this cowboy administration.
Re:Screw you, America (Score:5, Funny)
I dunno... General Hull tried this in 1812, and got his ass whipped.
Re:Screw you, America (Score:5, Insightful)
This isn't just something the US does...
The country that they're trying to influence can then tell them to fuck off, or decide that their approval is worth bending their policies for. It isn't like the US is going to invade Canada and truely interfere in our sovereignity. It's Canada's choice as to whether we'll let the US affect policy, as it's our choice to decide whether any external political forces should affect our policies.
Re:Screw you, America (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Oh really? Is that so? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Screw you, America (Score:5, Funny)
When questioned about America's response to legalizing marijuana in Canada, Canadian Prime Minster Jean Cretien remarked: "They just want our pot. BC pot is the shitznit."
wow (Score:5, Funny)
Re:wow (Score:5, Funny)
If you're right about Canada -- what, with all the pot smoking, low crime rates, free healthcare, and civil liberties -- I would expect Canada to rise to the top of the terrorists' hit list. So, maybe instead of trying to get the damned Canadians to cooperate with us, we should simply launch an advertising campaign in the Islamic world explaining that Canada is the more logical target for their anti-western fringe element.
Re:wow (Score:3, Funny)
Re:wow (Score:5, Insightful)
It is not the US standard of living alone which attracts terrorism, it is what it does to sustain that quality of life. The US cares about civil liberties (at least nominally) within its own shores, but those from other countries are not afforded the same rights (wasn't someone shipped to an american court rather than camp X-Ray due to their being a US citizen, the non americans were illegally imprisoned with the rest of them). It effects politics all over the world for good and bad.
It's size and cultural power has another interesting implication. The pervasiveness of american culture and media (cinema, McDonalds, nike trainers
Americans with an interest in the civil liberties of all people, not just those americans with the power and money to defend their own (and to take those of others), many of whom I'm sure read slashdot should fight terrorism in their own way. By making America the state it was founded to be, by scrutinising businessmen, politicians (and anyone else in a position of power and influence) by using the power of their wallet, their vote and whatever else it takes to make america a state and a symbol that is not viewed by the rest of the world with contempt. It's not about what they cannot do, but what they see America (as a symbol for the global economic system?) doing to them.
A perception of america as a greedy, self interested, intefering, imperialist power is what attracts terrorism. To fight terrorism america should look within.
Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain! (Score:5, Insightful)
Oddly enough, you know, the people who're presently bitterly resenting our foreign policy are decrying exactly such a culture. And I'm not just talking about in Iraq, or Syria, or Egypt -- I'm talking about in France and in our closest ally, the UK, too. Out of passing curiosity, had you ever considered actually listening to the nature of the criticisms against us? Or are you completely isolated in your solipsistic echo chamber?
Because we have the freedom to pursue whatever business we like, Americans have gotten very good at supplying what people want... It seems like simple logic to me that any human being would naturally gravitate toward systems that bring greater satisfaction. There, no complex motives required, just basic human behavior.
It's the echo chamber, then... Talk about your "propoganda (sic)." The Arab world hates us because our businesses are so efficient at giving people what they want. It's all just basic human nature.
Gee, how do you explain the Shias in Iraq right now? They were cheering when the tanks went into Baghdad; why are they now telling us to go home, if they're gravitating toward more satisfaction as you say? Why is the Shiite reaction so similar to their reaction to the British in 1919? Were the British also exceptionally good at giving the people the satisfaction they wanted? Or does this explanation of yours float in a totally ahistorical fantasy universe where you don't need to deal with comparisons like that?
More to the point: supply us with one clear case in which this has motivated a specific terrorist act. We know a fair amount about the 9/11 hijackers. Were Mohammed Atta's attitudes toward skyscrapers born of this way of thinking you describe? They seem to fit the "corporatism" critique much better, to me.
Please, please, look into how the educated Arab world feels about US foreign policy. There are many, many people out there whose desperate desire is to bring secular, democratized states to the Arab world, but who also seem to understand the sources of terrorism. They do understand the despotic regimes out there -- they seem particularly aware of ones like Egypt, and of the Shah in Iran. You know, the ones the US props up? Like in Pakistan, where Bush W. applauded the military coup that brought Musharraf to power back during the 2000 election? (Those regimes really don't fit into your idea of leaders oppressing the people to preserve the status quo, incidentally. The people resent our backing their leaders. Ever notice that? Ever hear of Anwar Sadat?) Those people aren't living in fantasy la-la land where "The terrorists hate us because we provide the people with more satisfaction." They're saying things about how US foreign policy is counterproductive. You might want to try listening.
Re:wow (Score:5, Insightful)
Thats because (Surprise!) thats not the real reason the terrorists hate us. They hate us frot he same reason the canadian wrote this article. Because we try to interfere in other countries buisness very aggressively. Second reason is that we support israel, which is anathema in the arab world. The israeli army uses US abrams tanks, US apache helicopters, and US f-15 fighters. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, Israel uses them to kill palestinians (justified or not). Ultimately the terrorists want us to change our foriegn policy: stop selling arms to israel, stop supporting israel, pull US forces out of the region. Canada may support israel, but its not a canadian tank that palestinians see rolling down the street, and its not a canadian army invading iraq.
Re:wow (Score:5, Informative)
And round here, these things aren't enforced nearly as much. House is worth $1,000,000, paying property tax for $300,000? Nobody cares to hear about it. And you're certainly not getting thrown in JAIL for dodging taxes.
In the meantime at the White House (Score:5, Funny)
Bush,Rumsfeld,Cheney (CHORUS) : Bomb them!! Bring canadians democracy!!
Canada! (Score:3, Insightful)
Respecting Canada (Score:3, Interesting)
Of course, SP reduces that respect, as it tells me to hate canada. And they do have funny accents. And flapping heads.
Re:Respecting Canada (Score:4, Insightful)
It might be, but the url you gave, gives no proof of this. It doesn't actually contradict anything in the film, just says it doesn't like what it hears, and says it is a work of fiction, without following it up.
Do you have any better links?
MOD DOWN FLAMEBAIT (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't see why the Right has to search for 'inaccuracies' and then claim he's worthless because some facts or assumptions may be off.
He's ideas are still correct, and if you are trying to disprove him, you're missing the point of what he does.
But then, if someone challenges your ideas, it's best to try and discredit them or shut them up isn't it?
Re:MOD DOWN FLAMEBAIT (Score:4, Interesting)
Can't believe this got modded up to 5 (Score:4, Insightful)
Once again, prove it. Your silly stats - which vary only marginally from the actual atats in the movie - do not do the job.
Clearly Moore touched a nerve in the US populace, which is what the film was intended to do. Tell me, do you really think they'd give an Academy Award to such a 'blatantly obvious hack job'? Or a 10-minute standing ovation at Cannes?
Oh, right. You hate the French. Never mind.
revokethepresident.com (Score:3, Insightful)
Hysteria. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Hysteria. (Score:5, Funny)
You just don't understand. Dubya just wants to take our rights and keep them in a safe place for us. That way the terrorists can't get them, don't ya see? All our rights are still there. We may even get to take our kids to see them someday. They'll be preserved in pristine condition in hermetically sealed jars. We should thank Dubya for taking such good care of our rights!
Re:Hysteria. (Score:5, Insightful)
And the answer is...because it gives a wonderful excuse for any sort of action, and a convenient way of attacking those you don't like for economic, political or geostrategic reasons. Read the arab states, at the moment.
It gives an unquestionable moral high ground for what the likes of Noam Chomsky call *state terrorism* -i.e. direct wars and state sponsored terrorism. Look at Algeria, Colombia, Israel for recent examples of state sponsored terrorism, some with links to the US...
See this is Reagan's cold war all over again, a great way of shaping foreign policy to your convenience, and with a heavy hand.
And the best thing is that the public is buying it!
Thanks Canada for doing it right
Re:Hysteria. (Score:5, Insightful)
Thank you, America, for training and funding Osama Bin Laden.
Re:Hysteria. (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, since you're tracing causality, what country does the U.S. have to thank most for its freedom? France.
Re:Hysteria. (Score:4, Insightful)
Quite a few. But, then again, that's mostly due to the fact that the US used its veto in the Security Council, thus negating UN involvement. Don't blame the UN for sitting on its ass when it's the US that pulled up the chair for it to sit on.
Care to guess how often the US has NOT vetoed against resolutions regarding illegal, israeli settlement in Palestine? Answer: 0, Zero.
It never ceases to amaze me that, since WMD's are apparently so bad in the Middle East, how come the US doesn't interfere with the ONLY nation that literally has all sorts of WMD's, that single nation being Israel?
Re:Hysteria. (Score:5, Interesting)
When I first read that statistic, I thought it was an exageration or just plain wrong. However, I did some research and it is true. Malaria is a major killer in less developed countries.
Evolution of the State (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Evolution of the State (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Evolution of the State (Score:4, Interesting)
I would say that Canada is a cross between the U.S. and Europe, civically, politically, grammatically, and geographically. As such, it frequently finds itself in the middle of a tug-of-war between the two poles.
Re:Evolution of the State (Score:3, Insightful)
Maybe it's not evolution though. It's more of a growing up. The parent nation of the US smacked them around a few too many times, and the US fought back, they figured that fighting back was a good way to get what you wanted. This set the course for how the US is.
Canada on the other hand, benifited from the US fighting back, they got treated better by the same parent nation, and grew into a more stable, responsible country...
Maybe it's time to
Re:Evolution of the State (Score:3, Insightful)
USA 2nd World? (Score:4, Interesting)
[For the record, I'm a Canadian currently living in Chile]
Oh great. (Score:5, Funny)
sigh (Score:3, Insightful)
(oh I'm not bitter.)
In response... (Score:5, Funny)
Chretien in a speech declared USA to be part of an "Axis of Oppression" and said "those that are not with the Commonwealth is with the oppressors".
"Too much emphasis"? (Score:5, Insightful)
I know that I will sleep much more soundly the day that Ashcroft is forced to clean out his desk.
Author's words, not State Department's (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Author's words, not State Department's (Score:5, Informative)
"Some US law-enforcement officers have expressed concern that Canadian privacy laws, as well as funding levels for law enforcement, inhibit a fuller and more timely exchange of information and response to requests for assistance. Also, Canadian laws and regulations intended to protect Canadian citizens and landed immigrants from Government intrusion sometimes limit the depth of investigations." (http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2002/html/1
Sounds to me like they're complaining that Canada cares too much about privacy and preventing Government intrusion, and I would consider that to be caring about liberty.
Dillema's (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm just concerned about the way the US is trying to tell the rest of the world how to handle this tension. Every country for itself should make it's own descision in how to solve these challenges.
A different way isn't allways a worse way
Mice And Elephants (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it was former Prime MInister Pierre Trudeau who used the metaphor of the mouse in bed with the elephant to describe Canada-U.S. relations. In a lot of ways it's a good metaphor.
Canada has to walk a tightrope: on the one hand our economic prosperity as a nation depends on our trade relationship and close economic ties with the U.S. (Canada is the U.S.'s largest trading partner, and vis versa), and certainly Canada's national security is largely tied to that of the U.S. But on the other hand, Canada is a distinct sovereign nation, and it's important to protect our sovereignty, and not become an extension of the U.S. The article mentions the Canadian government's long-standing flirtation with legalizing pot, and not to downplay issues like that [1], there are other, bigger, issues to consider. The current U.S. administration has shown a cavalier attitude towards environmental protection, weakening the EPA and making efforts to open up protected areas in Alaska for oil exploration and exploitation. Canada has been (awkwardly at times) tracing out it's own environmental policy, balancing the need to preserve our unique and precious ecological heritage, while at the same time preserving our resource based economies. It'd be a real shame if that balancing act was thrown out of whack by pressure from south of the border. The situation with freshwater policy is similar, and will perhaps become even more important.
Canada/U.S. relations loom large over Canadian politics, just as the movements of the elephant loom large in the thoughts of the mouse that it's in bed with. So when U.S. officials make "rumblings", the Canadian government can't help but take note.
[1] I'm for it. The war on drugs has been an abject failure, especially as far as pot is concerned
Re:Mice And Elephants (Score:5, Insightful)
The privacy/terrorist issue is similar in nature. It's not that the State Department believes Canada is actively harbouring terrorists, but if Canada is less vigilent (or, less kindly, intrusive) than the US, then the US government will have to make up for the difference with more strict border checks. A system is only as secure as its most vunerable part, and the State Department is worried that Canada will become that vunerable part.
Re:Mice And Elephants (Score:5, Informative)
In fact, the War on (some) Drugs has little to do with the will of the people, and everything to do with being a scapegoat for hysteria, and a way to justify egregious pork budget increases.
And it is a witch hunt... People are so scared of the flowers of a harmless plant that job applicants are mercillessly rejected if they "Test positive" for marijuana. In some states, the "pot paranoia" is so pervasive that they've enacted "Smoke a joint, lose your driver license" laws to further stigmatize marijuana smokers. Without a driver license, where can you work in this country? If you live in a city that doesn't have GREAT public transportation (thats most of them) you simply won't get a job.
In the U.S., felons (for non-Americans, a felon is somebody convicted of a "serious" crime) can't vote. Even though arrests for drugs are about proportional to the proportion of the various races in our society, minorities serve vastly longer sentences than whites arrested for the same offense... They are three times less likely to be offered "diversionary sentencing" (ie. non-jail) to avoid felony conviction, and FIVE TIMES more likely to do jail time for a first-offense.
Of course, since white people in the U.S. on average have more money than their minority counterparts they can afford a lawyer who can get them out of trouble without jail.
So even though it might not have been the original intent, what you have is a de facto concerted effort to disenfrachise "undesirables."
The only advice I have is to write your congressmen and tell them you want legalized buds-- And keep your eyes peeled for cops.
Not Legal, Decriminalized (Score:4, Informative)
Their evaluation of France (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, they do not support attacks on countries, justified by the war on terrorism, based on a combination of manufactured and inadequate evidence.
Re:Their evaluation of France (Score:5, Funny)
"The problem with the French is that they don't have a word for entrepreneur."
-George W. Bush, discussing the decline of the French economy with British Prime Minister Tony Blair
And Marijuana (Score:3, Interesting)
A little policy issue thrown at the bottom of that article. The U.S. administration is unhappy that marijuana possession in Canada is now a ticketing offense (parking meter sort of thing) instead of a criminal offense. I'm sure someone will have to draw the paralel that's been brought before that the "war on terrorism" has allowed the broadening of police powers which are being used for the "war on drugs". I'm voting Democrat in 2004, and I'm a Libertarian.
Re:And Marijuana (Score:3, Informative)
Well... not quite yet... The intention to do this has been announced, but no legislation has yet been passed.
Wait- we're the ones (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow. Watching the news for the last year and a half made me forget all that. Hey, Bush- remember this? "I, George W. Bush, do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and I will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States." Try reading it instead of wiping your ass with it.
It's not fair. We're the ones with these rights guaranteed, and Canadians are the ones getting them. It's not my fault; I voted for the other loser machine politician.
Re:Wait- we're the ones (Score:5, Funny)
Let me get this straight (Score:5, Insightful)
Representatives from upper and lower Canada including Ontario were originally part of the continental congress during the American revolution but backed off when the declaration of independance was signed.
It was then when loyalist for England moved north into Canada while freedom loving rebels stayed in the states or moved south from Canada.
How is it that today Canada is more free then the US?
Americans love freedom and credit the revolution but support the president and look at anyone non conformist as unpatrotic. Guess what?
Bush is the one who is unpatrotic. I really hope he is not re-elected. Many Americans are becoming wary of not only his economic record but his horrendous foreign policy. Bush advisors mentioned that he will start his reelection on ground zero this september 11 and run on a foreign policy campaing. I think it will fail. They do not look Bush or Powell twisting everyones and threatening everyone they see fit. I think Powell definetely acted inapropriatly in Syria yesterday.
I was on yahoo messages boards and found many are upset and look at Bush as reckless and a threat to global stability more then anyone else. He really could overreact and create a nuclear war if he is not carefull. Some republicans do not like what is going on with the patriot act and even view bush as more pro-government then Clinton.
Re:Let me get this straight (Score:5, Insightful)
Canadians pride themselves not on their past accomplishments. I know of relatively few Canadians that happen to know about the actions taken at Vimy Ridge during WWI where they took what the British and French had been trying to take for years in half a day, even fewer know about how a Canadian was the first to enact the Uniting For Peace resolution in the UN.
But we don't base our freedom on these past actions. We base our freedom on our current standard of living and how we live our day to day lives.
Let me put it this way. Read 1984. It's all based around having relatable symbols to your "freedom": Big Brother, Minutes of Hate, slogans and catchphrases. This is the one way to guarantee your own personal attachment to your government and as such gives more way to control the people. What are our national symbols? Beer and Hockey. These aren't things you pledge alleigance to, these are things that you do to make life more for the living.
As far as I'm concerned, my patriotism means having a country that makes me happy with my life. It doesn't mean being blissfully in love with a flag or a pledge that you have to say every day at the beginning of class or of a history of accomplishments.
At least that's my take on it. I'm proud to be a Canadian, but not because I was told to be.
Re:Let me get this straight (Score:5, Funny)
As a Finn, that makes me feel warm and fuzzy inside... Beer..... Hockey.... More beer.....
Re:Let me get this straight (Score:4, Insightful)
Remember why 9/11 happened... (Score:5, Insightful)
So what a great way to prevent a future terrorist attack. Remove those freedoms so they (theoretically) have no reason to hate us anymore.
(Of course, that is a bunch of crap. "They" hate us now more than ever.)
Terrorists won already (Score:5, Insightful)
It's just amazing that, when you walked into any government related building in DC, you gotta go through a metal detector. All visitors are treated as potential terrorists.
Then it's always a pain to fly. All those hassle, especially if you have the wrong look (I thought being a Chinese Canadian is easier, not so. Security officer in airports like to pick me, because they know for sure there's nothing to look at, just to pass the quota.)
How about Americans visiting other countries? Better pretended to be Canadians.
That's how the terrorists won. Canadians, on the other hand, just refuse to live like that. The first step Canadians do: be friendly to others. Respect the difference, accept other's value. No matter how inefficient or stupid Canadian governments sometimes are, Canadians still can live peacefully.
So, if you have the right to vote in US, exercise your right and tell your government what you think.
Re:Terrorists won already (Score:5, Interesting)
It was basically a transcribed message (or something like it) from Osama bin Laden saying, essentially, that they (al Queda) had already won. Supposedly, the idea behind their attacks was not to kill citizens, or destroy landmarks. It was to kill liberties, and destroy freedom. Apparantly Osama wanted the citizens of the US to live in fear, and to loose their freedoms. He wanted them to experience life as other countries did, with checkpoints, searches, and the constant fear of attacks.
It would seem he succeeded admirably.
Canada should follow our lead! (Score:3, Funny)
Interesting read but.. (Score:5, Interesting)
This [geocities.com] gives a pretty good introduction to the theoretical classification of rights.
The stuff about legalizing dope is of course another matter entirely. I have no idea why American politicians gets so wound up about dope, when most Americans have used it without comming to much harm.
Re:Interesting read but.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Crime in Canada (Score:5, Interesting)
This is interesting.. the following are some stats I found on crime in Canada and the US (and Sweden, see this page.) [www.ccsd.ca]
Grim Shadow! (Score:4, Insightful)
Is it just me or is GW the puppet and Rumsfeild the insane puppet master? Or maybe he's got me fooled and they're both insane.
Left and Right (Score:5, Insightful)
IRA (Score:5, Informative)
There is a section on the IRA in the appendix on "other Foreign Terrorist Organisations" which notes that the IRA "retains the ability to conduct paramilitary operations" but it accepts that "the IRA reiterated its commitment to the peace process and apologized to the families of what it called "non-combatants" who had been killed or injured by the IRA" without noting that its activities of "kidnappings, punishment beatings, extortion, smuggling, and robberies" are active and continuing.
The report does not mention that two of the leaders of the IRA Army Council were allowed to become Sinn Fein Ministers in the (currently suspended) government of Northern Ireland.
Sinn Feinn, a major political party in Northern Ireland, is acknowledged by everybody except itself as the political wing of the IRA. The name translates into English as "Ourselves Alone" - illuminating its racist basis. Sinn Fein is not mentioned in the report.
Most astonishingly, NORAID's role in fundraising for the IRA within the USA is not mentioned in the report either.
Americans should realise that many British people who are temperamentally and politically inclined to give full support to American foreign policy find it severely compromised by America's sentimental and hypocritical blindness to the IRA threat.
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Score:5, Informative)
Constitution Act, 1982
Enacted as Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (U.K.) 1982, c. 11, which came into force on April 17, 1982
PART I
Canadian charter of rights and freedoms
Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:
Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms
Rights and freedoms in Canada
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
Fundamental freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.
Democratic Rights
Democratic rights of citizens
3. Every citizen of Canada has the right to vote in an election of members of the House of Commons or of a legislative assembly and to be qualified for membership therein.
Maximum duration of legislative bodies
4. (1) No House of Commons and no legislative assembly shall continue for longer than five years from the date fixed for the return of the writs of a general election of its members.
Continuation in special circumstances
(2) In time of real or apprehended war, invasion or insurrection, a House of Commons may be continued by Parliament and a legislative assembly may be continued by the legislature beyond five years if such continuation is not opposed by the votes of more than one-third of the members of the House of Commons or the legislative assembly, as the case may be.
Annual sitting of legislative bodies
5. There shall be a sitting of Parliament and of each legislature at least once every twelve months
Mobility Rights
Mobility of citizens
6. (1) Every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada.
Rights to move and gain livelihood
(2) Every citizen of Canada and every person who has the status of a permanent resident of Canada has the right
(a) to move to and take up residence in any province; and
(b) to pursue the gaining of a livelihood in any province.
Limitation
(3) The rights specified in subsection (2) are subject to
(a) any laws or practices of general application in force in a province other than those that discriminate among persons primarily on the basis of province of present or previous residence; and
(b) any laws providing for reasonable residency requirements as a qualification for the receipt of publicly provided social services.
Affirmative action programs
(4) Subsections (2) and (3) do not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration in a province of conditions of individuals in that province who are socially or economically disadvantaged if the rate of employment in that province is below the rate of employment in Canada.
Legal Rights
Life, liberty and security of person 7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.
Search or seizure
8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.
Detention or imprisonment
9. Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.
Arrest or detention
10. Everyone has the right on arrest or detention
(a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor;
(b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and
(c) to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.
Proceedings in criminal and penal matters 11. Any person char
Over-sensationalism all around (Score:5, Informative)
some Marijuana stats (Score:4, Interesting)
Disclaimer: I don't actually smoke marijuana...although i use a Mac, so that's close enough
Deaths from tobacco cigarettes in the US, 2002: 400,000
Deaths from Marijuana in the US, 2002: 0.00
Now tell me, which one should be illegal?
Re:some Marijuana stats (Score:5, Insightful)
Deaths from Marijuana in the US, 2002: 0.00
These numbers mean very little:
1. Both are carcinogens.
2. Most people who smoke marijuana also smoke tobacco; these deaths count as tobacco related deaths.
I agree that the U.S. marijuana laws are a bit ridiculous, but don't argue that it should be legal because it is "safe".
Uhh... what? (Score:3, Insightful)
Wait...
Canadian Jokes (Score:4, Insightful)
Canada is awesome. =)
Franks and Karimov (Score:5, Insightful)
In the early 1990-ties, Islam Karimov was a cheap Soviet-style dictator wannabee. But he worked hard, intensive surveillance of pro-democracy workers, rigged elections, and eventually, political assassinations, extensive use of torture, etc., gaining real, dictator power.
Most political dissidents have fled, notably, Mohammad Salih, who ran against Karimov in one of the elections. He was the subject of an assassination attempt, that fortunately failed. Salih is a member of the Erk Democratic Party [uzbekistanerk.org].
After 9/11, the US has given Karimov all the support he needs to grow from a dictator wannabee to a full Saddam/Hitler-style tyrant. There is hardly any serious democratic opposition left in Uzbekistan. What there is, however, is a bunch of extreme muslim fundamentalists, so, should Karimov loose power, it is not going to be the democratic opposition taking over, it is going to be the religious extremists (which is a development we're unsurprisingly seeing in Iraq too).
When I see Tommy Franks shaking hands with of the worst tyrants on the planet, it makes me wanna puke... It is history repeating itself, it is a reminder that Saddam too was a dictator wannabee before Donald Rumsfeld went to shake hands with him in 1984.
If the US wants to have any credibility whatsoever with the war-for-freedom rhetoric, they should at least stop supporting the worst dictators on the planet.
How to immigrate to Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
You have to act fast, however, since Canda is tightening its immigration requirements. A few years ago you could score a 70 on the test and be admitted. Today the threshold is 75 and rising.
Why would you want to immigrate to Canada? Because not only do Canadians have civil liberties, but people in the bottom 55% of incomes have higher after-tax incomes than the bottom 55% of Americans (which is most of us). Indeed, the average after-tax income for the middle class of most industrialized countries is higher than in the United States. (SOURCE: Up From Conservatism by Michael Lind.) Americans in the top 10%-20% are by the most affluent in the world, but the rest of us have fallen behind, since our jobs have gone to India and Taiwan. Not only do we have lower after-tax incomes, but we also have more crime (which is paradoxical since US law enforcement is dangerous and out of control), worse public education, and far costlier health care.
Schoolyard bullying (Score:5, Interesting)
As for the pot situation. I can't believe they're kicking up such a fuss when they already have much larger issues in their cities and towns with hard drugs, violence and heck, while we're at it, corporation scandals. Hollywood must be one of the biggest drug using communities but that doesn't matter! The Canadians are trying to make it easier to import pot so let's kick their arses all the way back to Europe! Ok, I'm being cynical but what the hell.
The US has this wonderful way with bullying, especially against Canada. "Bow to our demands or we will treat you like a third world country and boycott business". Isn't this a free world, where the right to choose is available even at a national level? Riiiiiight. So if that's your attitude we'll stop selling water and electricity to California; imagine hundreds of thousands of screaming nerds on the rampage due to failing servers and consoles.
Let's face it Mr Bush, you have to wonder why the vast majority of the world, including many of your so called friends and neighbours, the Brits and Canadians, despise the US. They're not jealous of your lifestyle, they despise your attitude, bullying and lack of respect for others.
Stop this crap (Score:5, Insightful)
With the wrong political party in power we could experience the same problems. So please have some respect.
We are not so different and we should be supportive of each others rights to freedoms and liberties. Saying that Canada is better than the US or that US is better than Canada, really doesn't address the subject at all, au contraire, you'll all try to justify some bad law your country have and as a result, it says that you approve of such laws.
Re:Tomorrow's headlines in the U.S. (Score:3, Funny)
I agree. Canadians must answer their unleashing of Celine Dion on the free world.
Re:Tomorrow's headlines in the U.S. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Tomorrow's headlines in the U.S. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:canadian forces? (Score:5, Informative)
Canada has had dick all to do with any military action in the last 100 years.
Learn your history before you start criticising.
You want us to take up arms? How about that time you guys tried to invade us and we burnt your White House down?
Or how about that time that we were busy bombing the crap out of the Nazis while the US was happily being isolationist for 2 years while he tried to take over the world?
Or how about the time that we organized the UN to intervene at the Suez Canal despite England's Security Council veto?
Or how about how we've supplied troops to just about every single UN mission since its inception?
Or wait. Of course none of that happened. It wasn't in the US papers, so it's pretty obvious that Canada doesn't have a military.
I knew a good number of Doctors from my hometown alone (a rather small town in British Columbia) who were working at the MASH units in the first Persian Gulf war who were risking their lives trying to keep UN soldiers alive (including a good number of Americans). But again, it wasn't in any American newspapers so it obviously didn't happen.
Re:canadian forces? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:canadian forces? (Score:4, Informative)
Not to mention Vimy Ridge. Or the invasion of Italy during WWII. Or the Korean War. Or this little operation called "Operation Overlord". Or the Battle of Britain. Nope, no Canadian involvement in any major military operations in the past century at all.
Re:canadian forces? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:canadian forces? (Score:4, Informative)
> Let's not get into WWII. If you think the US
> didn't do dick or spill blood in WWII, then you
> have a real problem.
Yes, you are correct, Americans did die in WW2. Lives lost is not a good thing, no matter when and where it happens. That was not the point though. The point was that the U.S. sat on the sidelines for 2 years while the rest of the "free" world was getting their asses kicked.
> Supplied troops to every single UN mission?
Yes. If you are referring to the current war with Iraq. That is not a UN mission. That's why were are not involved.
> How many of anyone in your hometown gave their
> lives to depose today's hitler?
None. Because there is no equivalent of "Today's Hitler" in the world. Calling Sadam Hitler must be something that CNN came up with. Don't get me wrong, Sadam is bad but he isn't the equivalent of Hitler.
> After all, we deserve it, don't we? You are
> morally superior to us, aren't you?
Nobody said we were morally superior. We have our problems. We make mistakes. We're human. We just don't FORCE our views on everyone else.
> And as for the "riding the backs of the US
> military", I suggest you look within your own
> country for the criticism. Because I've seen it
> come from your own country more than anywhere
> else. From canadian news letters to the
> editors, from canadian news pundits, from
> canadians being interviewed on the street, from
> canadian politicians.
Yes, every country in the world rides the back of the US military. You know why? It's because the U.S. is too busy being the bully of the school yard and sticks it's nose in everything. Someone has to go in and clean up your mess.
Do you really want to know why Canada didn't join your war against Iraq? We all agree that Sadam is bad and should have been removed. There is no argument about that. We didn't join in because we do not want to be a TARGET. That's right, a TARGET. Just think about this in a logical fashion. Look at the possible chain of events.
- We join War on Iraq (tm)
- Terrorists attack Canada (ie Toronto)
- Canada turns to U.S. for support.
- Canada changes privacy policies to help fight "terrorism"
- Canada becomes part of the U.S.
See, you are correct. We ride on the backs of the U.S. military enough as it is and we don't want to. The more we rely on you, the more indebted we are. That's not good.
Re:Nifty Numbers (Score:5, Insightful)
Patriot Act made it so that in many cases law enforcement does not have to go to a judge to get a search order. There is an article in the Constitution against illegal search and seizure. This is one right being trampled.
How about the AMERICAN citizens being held in connection with terrorism and not being told what they are being charged with and not being allowed to contact lawyer or family? That is another right being trampled.
There are many other examples, but it is just too depressing to get into it.
The terrorists have won. The goal of terrorism isn't death or property destruction. That is collateral damage. The MAIN goal of terrorism is to inflict FEAR and POLICY CHANGE. Now we have the media and the war-mongering Bush administration keeping everyone afraid as they slowly strip away our liberties.
Re:Canada (Score:5, Insightful)
IE. I cannot go and beat up a black or a native american just because they are black or native americans.
No, I am talking about hate SPEECH legislation. American has hate crimes legislation too, though I think it is mostly nonsense. If someone beats me up because I am tall and beats you up because you're Chinese
What I am talking about is that it is illegal for me in Canada, and many European nations, to say I hate you because you are a part of some protected group group. Hate Speech. This is surely a freedom I do not wish to exercise, but to take away such a fundamental component of free expression -- the expression of unpopular ideas -- is chilling.
I am no fan of the ACLU, but I am proud that they recognize that such liberties are some of the most important to protect, because someone else's banned abhorrent view today could be your banned abhorrent view tomorrow. Maybe tomorrow it will be illegal to speak out against government officials, or corporate executives, or spammers.
I am not saying the US is admirable in comparison to Canada, overall. I think it is mostly a wash (except for, perhaps, when you throw the DMCA into the mix
Re:blame canada! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:blame canada! (Score:5, Insightful)
Population was led to believe that soviets were monsters because they didn't have the freedom that americans had, but most americans couldn't even figure out what freedom really meant. The funny thing is that the same people (Rumsfeld et al.) is trying to convince americans that the terrorists attack the USA because of freedom, and then what they do? Remove some freedoms from the people! Makes a lot of sense, only in the politics logic.
Re:blame canada! (Score:5, Funny)
Sadly, it almost makes a twisted sort of sense.
Re:blame canada! (Score:5, Insightful)
I've actually lived abroad, and while I enjoyed my time (Australia and Italy) overseas.. I do know that most of the rest of the industrialized world has more or less the same amount of freedom that I do right now.
We all have our faults, the U.S. included (and you may not beleive it, but Canada as well). Yet we, as a people, ARE free. We can live where we want, say (most anything) we want, and live the life we want to live. Sure, we have our problems, and we as a people have long been working to fight through them. We (along with the rest of the world) are constantly evolving and trying to find the balanace between outright freedom and the order we need to continue to live the lives we do.
Am I always happy with the U.S. ? Nope.. yet I recognize that we as a people really are a free. If your to blinded by your 'enlightened nature' and your very large chip that resides on your shoulder to see it, well then I hope you spend a few years somewhere else so that you can see exactly how wrong you really are.
Re:blame canada! (Score:5, Insightful)
I will continue to complain so long as the Constitution of these United States is violated. I will settle for nothing less than full compliance with the Constitution. Arguments to the contrary are irrelevant; if you want to change the Constitution in order to legally install your repressive state, then do so - the mechanism is there, and it's been done numerous times in the past.
But until you pass that amendment, you *will* abide by the Constitution whether you like it or not. And if you or the government violates the supreme law of the land, you can bet your ass that I and others like me will stand up and cry 'foul!'.
Our Founding Fathers would expect no less.
Max
Re:blame canada! (Score:5, Informative)
Please, before moving to Canada, can I ask you all to please register to vote and actually *vote*!?
Register for the primaries too and vote against the encumbants who support the PATRIOT act (I & II), the Iraqi misadventure and other pieces of legislation you love to hate. Remember, a lot of Democrats also voted for the above.
Considering America's low participation in its own democracy, you shouldn't be surprised the American government is acting against its citizens' own best interests.