And a second article, this one on the slow steps toward forming a government in BC. We are likely to find out this week what kind of deal the three party leaders are cooking up.
What are your predictions and hopes? I would like to see an NDP/Green coalition myself.
That would be the direction I'd like to see it go. I think it would be a really interesting opportunity for collaboration instead of the endless, reflexive opposition to anything any other party proposes.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
And a second article, this one on the slow steps toward forming a government in BC. We are likely to find out this week what kind of deal the three party leaders are cooking up.
What are your predictions and hopes? I would like to see an NDP/Green coalition myself.
So would I. I actually think that if Weaver decides to go with the Liberals or refuses to create a coalition with the NDP in order to get Clark out of office, he is an even bigger sellout than I ever imagined.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
I am within the large majority that doesn't really know much about Scheer. Anyone know more?
I have the feeling that a pretty large majority of Canadians aren't interested in social conservatism at all, and given that, I think this was a pretty dumb choice on the part of the party. Given how close the vote was, I'm thinking there was some serious "whipping" going on in the days leading up to the vote... I wonder how many perks were handed out so Scheer could squeak in?
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
OMG, is it the end of Clark?!? Oh please please please let it happen!!! I hope she doesn't make the process too difficult or too drawn out. She could force another election FFS. Wow, despite the possibility that Clark could make this hard, I'm actually surprised by how happy I am to read this news!! Now all she has to do is quietly resign, and my year will be made, lol. Pretty shocking too btw. I know this has never happened in BC before... has it ever happened in Canada?
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
OMG, is it the end of Clark?!? Oh please please please let it happen!!! I hope she doesn't make the process too difficult or too drawn out. She could force another election FFS. Wow, despite the possibility that Clark could make this hard, I'm actually surprised by how happy I am to read this news!! Now all she has to do is quietly resign, and my year will be made, lol. Pretty shocking too btw. I know this has never happened in BC before... has it ever happened in Canada?
A few times, but not many.
Provincial Coalition Governments
Coalitions have formed at the provincial level. During the Great Depression, the Progressive Party of Manitoba combined with the Manitoba Liberal Party ahead of the 1932 provincial election and won, holding off a challenge from the Conservatives. In 1940, all Manitoba political parties joined a non-partisan administration formed to meet the province’s wartime demands. In British Columbia, a wartime coalition between the Liberals and Conservatives held off the challenge of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF). The coalition probably benefited the CCF; it certainly damaged the Liberals and Conservatives, who were soon supplanted by Social Credit. In Ontario, the minority Liberal government of David Peterson governed from 1985 to 1987 with an explicit written agreement with the NDP. However, it was not a coalition agreement in the strict sense because NDP members were not appointed to Cabinet or given any authority. The NDP did however have influence on policy and legislation.
As the BC Liberals continue to eke out every last day of their time in power, most of us in BC are getting tired of Clark's insistence on drawing this out to its bitter end.
Clark's latest desperate move - abandoning the Liberal platform and trying to convince people that she really does care about them after all. Despite all evidence to the contrary.
Clark's latest desperate move - abandoning the Liberal platform and trying to convince people that she really does care about them after all. Despite all evidence to the contrary.
Clark's latest desperate move - abandoning the Liberal platform and trying to convince people that she really does care about them after all. Despite all evidence to the contrary.
I didn't know it was possible for me to hate her any more than I already did, but she managed to make it happen! What a .... heh heh. I am not allowed to use that word here. Seriously, she has absolutely no shame, but somehow still acts as though everything sje' s saying is fine. It's so weird.
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Don't read this if any hint of positive coverage of the PM makes you mad, lol. Just an interesting article about how Canada is navigating the Trump admin re US-Canada trade relations.
Oh, I almost forgot to celebrate Christy Clark's demise in BC politics here!!!!! I am so happy to see her go!!!! Why a fucking lying, schmoozing, gredy, corrupt scumbag, thank God I don't have see her shit-eating smile all over the news anymore. Yaaaaaay! No more Christy!!
Post edited by PJ_Soul on
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
Personally, I agree that Canada was complicit in violating his rights, as the court has twice found, and thus he has ground for compensation. I am a strong believer that the legal system needs to operate absolutely cleanly and transparently at all times, given the enormous power it has. Similarly, that's why I also don't complain when accused individuals "get off on a technicality" because police or lawyers have broken the law in the course of prosecution - if your job is to uphold the law, then you'd damn well better be following the law to get there.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
Personally, I agree that Canada was complicit in violating his rights, as the court has twice found, and thus he has ground for compensation. I am a strong believer that the legal system needs to operate absolutely cleanly and transparently at all times, given the enormous power it has. Similarly, that's why I also don't complain when accused individuals "get off on a technicality" because police or lawyers have broken the law in the course of prosecution - if your job is to uphold the law, then you'd damn well better be following the law to get there.
Classic Canada.
I get the principle of what you are saying, but this case is atypical. Khadr was soldiering against the US (and Canada for that matter). In my mind he lost his rights as a Canadian citizen when he took up arms against us (albeit by extension).
Personally, I agree that Canada was complicit in violating his rights, as the court has twice found, and thus he has ground for compensation. I am a strong believer that the legal system needs to operate absolutely cleanly and transparently at all times, given the enormous power it has. Similarly, that's why I also don't complain when accused individuals "get off on a technicality" because police or lawyers have broken the law in the course of prosecution - if your job is to uphold the law, then you'd damn well better be following the law to get there.
Classic Canada.
I get the principle of what you are saying, but this case is atypical. Khadr was soldiering against the US (and Canada for that matter). In my mind he lost his rights as a Canadian citizen when he took up arms against us (albeit by extension).
No one loses human rights regardless of who or where they are. If it is against our laws to treat a minor as he was treated, then it's against our laws, regardless of whether you agree with his political beliefs or not. That's my point - we can't pick and chose when we follow the rule of law.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it
Sure.
It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.
Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.
Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.
And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it
Sure.
It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.
Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.
Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.
he was 14. a child that age can easily be manipulated into the situation that an older adult would not have.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it
Sure.
It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.
Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.
Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.
Since the legal system generally deals with people who haven't followed the law, I don't find your argument that by not following it he has given up the right to its protections to be compelling.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it
Sure.
It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.
Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.
Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.
he was 14. a child that age can easily be manipulated into the situation that an older adult would not have.
15.
Maybe I'm wrong. But certainly not 8.
And his case is hardly one of being manipulated. Let's not pretend he's the poster child for child soldiering. As I said, he is suitable for the category, but his situation as a 'child soldier' is far different from African children as young as 7-8 years of age scared into soldiering after being taken from their village, watching their parents and peers mutilated, and fed drugs among a variety of other methods employed to solciit loyalty.
And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it
Sure.
It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.
Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.
Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.
Since the legal system generally deals with people who haven't followed the law, I don't find your argument that by not following it he has given up the right to its protections to be compelling.
Of course you wouldn't.
The legal system is there as a safeguard for people. It wasn't developed to protect and reward criminals as much as you favour it doing so.
And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it
Sure.
It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.
Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.
Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.
he was 14. a child that age can easily be manipulated into the situation that an older adult would not have.
15.
Maybe I'm wrong. But certainly not 8.
And his case is hardly one of being manipulated. Let's not pretend he's the poster child for child soldiering. As I said, he is suitable for the category, but his situation as a 'child soldier' is far different from African children as young as 7-8 years of age scared into soldiering after being taken from their village, watching their parents and peers mutilated, and fed drugs among a variety of other methods employed to solciit loyalty.
no, he's also not 3. so what? not all child soldiers are of the same mold as you keep stressing.
14. 15. doesn't matter. he was a minor. if he engaged in a sexual relationship with an adult, you'd consider him a victim of manipulation at that age, would you not?
the perception that he was a willing participant doesn't matter. he cannot be considered mature enough to be able to form his own intent and ideas in that type of scenario.
under international law, he was a child soldier and detained at guantanamo and tortured. again, a slam dunk of a settlement.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it
Sure.
It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.
Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.
Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.
he was 14. a child that age can easily be manipulated into the situation that an older adult would not have.
15.
Maybe I'm wrong. But certainly not 8.
And his case is hardly one of being manipulated. Let's not pretend he's the poster child for child soldiering. As I said, he is suitable for the category, but his situation as a 'child soldier' is far different from African children as young as 7-8 years of age scared into soldiering after being taken from their village, watching their parents and peers mutilated, and fed drugs among a variety of other methods employed to solciit loyalty.
no, he's also not 3. so what? not all child soldiers are of the same mold as you keep stressing.
14. 15. doesn't matter. he was a minor. if he engaged in a sexual relationship with an adult, you'd consider him a victim of manipulation at that age, would you not?
the perception that he was a willing participant doesn't matter. he cannot be considered mature enough to be able to form his own intent and ideas in that type of scenario.
under international law, he was a child soldier and detained at guantanamo and tortured. again, a slam dunk of a settlement.
Tortured?
He was treated medically after being seriously injured and then detained following a squirmish where he killed someone.
I believe this case and settlement centered around the fact that he was not afforded the opportunity to be accompanied by an adult when initially interrogated and admitted to his activities in the conflict?
I might have to brush up on things if I have this wrong.
* Hmmm. It appears I did have this wrong on the torture end of things. I'm talking more than I am listening right now. Sorry.
And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it
Sure.
It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.
Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.
Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.
Since the legal system generally deals with people who haven't followed the law, I don't find your argument that by not following it he has given up the right to its protections to be compelling.
Of course you wouldn't.
The legal system is there as a safeguard for people. It wasn't developed to protect and reward criminals as much as you favour it doing so.
It's there to protect both sides, both the accused and the accuser. It's designed that way because otherwise it's useless as it simply pre-judges guilt, something that is unfortunately a common occurrence.
my small self... like a book amongst the many on a shelf
And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it
Sure.
It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.
Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.
Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.
Since the legal system generally deals with people who haven't followed the law, I don't find your argument that by not following it he has given up the right to its protections to be compelling.
Of course you wouldn't.
The legal system is there as a safeguard for people. It wasn't developed to protect and reward criminals as much as you favour it doing so.
It's there to protect both sides, both the accused and the accuser. It's designed that way because otherwise it's useless as it simply pre-judges guilt, something that is unfortunately a common occurrence.
Disagree.
It is there to protect the innocent. And, once it has been established you are not innocent, the law should not be working for you anymore in my mind.
And as for "Classic Canada" - if its classic to expect that our laws apply to everyone, then I'm in favour of it
Sure.
It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.
Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.
Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.
Since the legal system generally deals with people who haven't followed the law, I don't find your argument that by not following it he has given up the right to its protections to be compelling.
Of course you wouldn't.
The legal system is there as a safeguard for people. It wasn't developed to protect and reward criminals as much as you favour it doing so.
It's there to protect both sides, both the accused and the accuser. It's designed that way because otherwise it's useless as it simply pre-judges guilt, something that is unfortunately a common occurrence.
Disagree.
It is there to protect the innocent. And, once it has been established you are not innocent, the law should not be working for you anymore in my mind.
no, it is not there just to protect the innocent. it is to keep society fair and balanced as much as possible.
"Oh Canada...you're beautiful when you're drunk" -EV 8/14/93
Comments
OMG, is it the end of Clark?!? Oh please please please let it happen!!! I hope she doesn't make the process too difficult or too drawn out. She could force another election FFS.
Wow, despite the possibility that Clark could make this hard, I'm actually surprised by how happy I am to read this news!! Now all she has to do is quietly resign, and my year will be made, lol.
Pretty shocking too btw. I know this has never happened in BC before... has it ever happened in Canada?
Provincial Coalition Governments
Coalitions have formed at the provincial level. During the Great Depression, the Progressive Party of Manitoba combined with the Manitoba Liberal Party ahead of the 1932 provincial election and won, holding off a challenge from the Conservatives. In 1940, all Manitoba political parties joined a non-partisan administration formed to meet the province’s wartime demands. In British Columbia, a wartime coalition between the Liberals and Conservatives held off the challenge of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF). The coalition probably benefited the CCF; it certainly damaged the Liberals and Conservatives, who were soon supplanted by Social Credit. In Ontario, the minority Liberal government of David Peterson governed from 1985 to 1987 with an explicit written agreement with the NDP. However, it was not a coalition agreement in the strict sense because NDP members were not appointed to Cabinet or given any authority. The NDP did however have influence on policy and legislation.
http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/coalition-government/
Andrew Scheer says he won't impose his religious beliefs on Canadians. We'll see: Neil Macdonald
Social conservatives in the United States have used all sorts of creative schemes to impose their views
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/opinion/andrew-scheer-leadership-1.4136808http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-election-2017-poll-1.4168667
http://www.timescolonist.com/news/local/premier-clark-adopts-ndp-green-promises-as-throne-speech-looms-1.20704022
Just a mutant in my mind.
Just an interesting article about how Canada is navigating the Trump admin re US-Canada trade relations.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/world/canada/canadas-trump-strategy-go-around-him.html?mc=adglobal&mcid=facebook&mccr=CA&subid=LALs&ad-keywords=NYTGCanadaNews&referer=http://m.facebook.com/
Two links here to articles in the G&M
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/odious-khadr-payout-is-the-penalty-for-being-lax-on-the-rule-of-law/article35551200/
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/us-soldier-widow-to-seek-injunction-to-halt-ottawas-payout-to-omar-khadr/article35540496/
Personally, I agree that Canada was complicit in violating his rights, as the court has twice found, and thus he has ground for compensation. I am a strong believer that the legal system needs to operate absolutely cleanly and transparently at all times, given the enormous power it has. Similarly, that's why I also don't complain when accused individuals "get off on a technicality" because police or lawyers have broken the law in the course of prosecution - if your job is to uphold the law, then you'd damn well better be following the law to get there.
I get the principle of what you are saying, but this case is atypical. Khadr was soldiering against the US (and Canada for that matter). In my mind he lost his rights as a Canadian citizen when he took up arms against us (albeit by extension).
-EV 8/14/93
It is just a little ironic that people who refuse to follow our laws then seek them for protection and repatriation. And by saying this, I am not completely referring to this case.
Hugh... typically, when I think of child soldiers... I think of pre-teens in Africa wielding AK47s. While I agree that Khadr is kind of suitable for the category... I am not thinking for one second that he is a victim as much as the 'child' soldiers scared into soldiering such as we have witnessed in, say Liberia. He was young, but he was not naive.
Anyways... I offered my perspective. I have heard others and while mildly disagreeing with them... I appreciate them. Thank you for the exchanges.
-EV 8/14/93
Maybe I'm wrong. But certainly not 8.
And his case is hardly one of being manipulated. Let's not pretend he's the poster child for child soldiering. As I said, he is suitable for the category, but his situation as a 'child soldier' is far different from African children as young as 7-8 years of age scared into soldiering after being taken from their village, watching their parents and peers mutilated, and fed drugs among a variety of other methods employed to solciit loyalty.
The legal system is there as a safeguard for people. It wasn't developed to protect and reward criminals as much as you favour it doing so.
14. 15. doesn't matter. he was a minor. if he engaged in a sexual relationship with an adult, you'd consider him a victim of manipulation at that age, would you not?
the perception that he was a willing participant doesn't matter. he cannot be considered mature enough to be able to form his own intent and ideas in that type of scenario.
under international law, he was a child soldier and detained at guantanamo and tortured. again, a slam dunk of a settlement.
-EV 8/14/93
He was treated medically after being seriously injured and then detained following a squirmish where he killed someone.
I believe this case and settlement centered around the fact that he was not afforded the opportunity to be accompanied by an adult when initially interrogated and admitted to his activities in the conflict?
I might have to brush up on things if I have this wrong.
* Hmmm. It appears I did have this wrong on the torture end of things. I'm talking more than I am listening right now. Sorry.
How did we find out he's a bad guy?
Because the legal system decided he was, while ignoring its own rules.
Kind of a vicious circle.
It is there to protect the innocent. And, once it has been established you are not innocent, the law should not be working for you anymore in my mind.
-EV 8/14/93