Mark H.

$11 per hour with meals included is decent pay. It may also be full room and board - we don't have that info

#dougberry

By suing for only $50,000 you have a very good chance of settling out of court with the league.But there was no signed contract. Not even a handshake deal. Can an email hold up in court for "a contractual guartantee"? They might offer them something like 30K to avoid the hassle. Happens all the time and every two bit lawyer knows it.

The process will take two months longer than originally stated - I'm feeling snug, secure, warm and fuzzy.

Hmmm sounds like good pickup for Christmas

I'd rather not. It's of no consequence one way or the other.

Are we back to the dead cat issue again?

This is from September - before the election. Bringing in Syrian refugees by the end of 2015 has been in the works for a while. The Conservative government said Saturday it will speed up the processing of refugee applications in an effort to bring in "thousands more" Syrians and Iraqis by the end of 2015. Immigration Minister Chris Alexander said the new measures mean the 10,000 Syrian refugees the government previously promised to resettle in the next three years would instead be brought to Canada by September 2016 — "a full 15 months earlier than anticipated," he told reporters in the Toronto suburb of Scarborough. Syrians and Iraqis fleeing civil war and sectarian conflict will no longer have to prove they are convention refugees under the United Nations Refugee Agency, but will be presumed to be refugees by Canadian authorities for the purposes of vetting their applications. http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-chris-alexander-refugees-1.3235415

If you really wanted to get someone into Canada why would you chose to do it through a long and haphazard refugee process when foreigners are entering Canada everyday through other channels? - we have tens of thousands of foreign students, many from the middle east. Ed Fast instituted a program last year to double that number (that's right, the Conservatives agreed that this was a worthwhile goal) - we invite thousands of foreign workers every year to fill temporary jobs in Canada - we have a regular immigrant program - the Conservative planned to bring in 285,000 this year. - last year 5212 tourist entered Canada from countries other than the US - 23,218 Iraqi refugees have already been settled in Canada (Yup - once again the conservatives did this and I didn't hear a single squawk from anyone while that was going on) - the Conservative government had agreed to take on 10,000 Syrian refugees - apparently no one thought that terrorists would arrive in the first 10,000

A fellow north of Teulon makes some decent Vodka. The man likes his produce fresh - and is willing to pay by the gallon.

You can get help for that

Due to the influence of a certain football forum, I also enjoy Bombay gin with a splash of 7 up and a dash of lime.

I prefer my whiskey on the rocks. Rye however, I prefer with coke or yukon jack (now there's a mix that sneaks up on you). If I'm going to add mix to an expensive whiskey, I really see no point in drinking it.

Meh - Forty Creek > Crown Royal

The middle east has hated us for way longer than 100 years. Islam has been trying to eradicate Christianity since it's inception 1400 years ago. And there has been an ethic cleansing of christians going on there for over a hundred years. In the early 20th century 20% of the population of the middle east was Christian. ....now it's 5% and quickly falling. Cause it's not like Christianity hasn't tried to eradicate other religions throughout history. I'd say Christians are all suckers. Suckers as in letting refugees in that among them would kill our loved ones in a second. I'm torn between that and thinking 'what if my family were on the run and had no where to go'? I think that no matter which side we find ourselves on i,n this thread, we're all guilty of too much black and white either/or thinking. There will be not be a perfect solution. Screen refugees thoroughly and you're still taking a risk. Which is precisely what ISIS wants you to be afraid of. Or, shut out all the refugees and try to reconcile your conscience to their suffering by telling ourselves that 'at least our families are alive.' There no easy answers, but one thing is certain: the truth, as always, is somewhere in the murky middle.

I havent seen if this has been changed in the last couple of days but from BBC: Ahmad al-Mohammad, from Idlib in Syria, has been named as one of the attackers involved in Friday's terror attacks in Paris. His was the name on a Syrian passport found with the remains of one of the attackers, though the man's identity has not yet been verified. It is believed he entered mainland Europe after arriving by boat on the Greek island of Leros, like many refugees fleeing Syria's civil war. Additionally, other terrorists have entered countries as refugees, perhaps most infamously the Boston Marathon bombers. I'll be honest, as much as I think Trudeau's plan is politically motivated based on how it looks, and I think prudence requires a step back, I am hesitant when I see so many US states determined to ban refugees. I dont want to embrace a knee-jerk reaction. In a perfect world, or even a normal world, we should do our part to help people. However, its not a perfect or normal world. ISIS has said they will hide operatives among refugees. If it was any other group and any other event, we wouldnt hesitate but to choose more security. If Trudeau goes ahead with his plan and someone commits a terrorist attack in Canada or the US (entering by means of Canada) who was among these refugees, what would Trudeau say then? When someone says how they will attack you, you dont shrug and say "odds are long". How many Arab nations are taking in refugees? I think some people get this impression that the entire world is bringing in tens of thousands of refugees and us hateful Canadians are wanting to *gasp* fully vet any before we bring them in, and its not true. Never mind the economic and social issues of bringing in so many. Its a complicated issue. I'd love to help as many people as possible and accept that they are all good people with no ill intentions. But if I had to take responsibility for their actions, I couldnt do it. 1. The person blew him/her self up - but the passport was still in good condition 2. The desire of US governors to ban refugees - is also politically motivated 3. The refugees who will come to Canada have been in UN refugee camps for a few years 4. How many countries are taking in refugees? I would counter that with some other questions - which are merely food for thought a) How many countries took in Jewish refugees during the Holocaust? Very few b ) Did people / countries take a risk when they helped Jewish refugees? Absolutely c) Was it a greater risk than taking in the current refugees? It's hard to argue otherwise I think the other question you should be asking is how many rich Arab countries are taking in refugees? Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Qatar & Kuwat? The answer is zero. Yet, we are supposed to bring in an influx of 25,000 in a month? Why are these countries doing nothing? I'm guessing these countries don't take in very many refugees - from anywhere. Canada takes in 10 000 refugees every year. I would bet every single year we could have found a country that wasn't taking any.

I have no idea what Harper's timeline would have been. Measured approaches can run the gamut. Just another example of how this has become a political issue. I'll say it again - unfortunate

I think Harper would have brought those refugees in as well. My understanding is that much of the vetting process has been done - in the refugee camps. It's unfortunate that this has become a political issue. According to MCC (friends recently hosted one of their info sessions) there are other refugees who need our help as well. But it's the Syrian crisis that is getting all the media attention. Also unfortunate.

I havent seen if this has been changed in the last couple of days but from BBC: Ahmad al-Mohammad, from Idlib in Syria, has been named as one of the attackers involved in Friday's terror attacks in Paris. His was the name on a Syrian passport found with the remains of one of the attackers, though the man's identity has not yet been verified. It is believed he entered mainland Europe after arriving by boat on the Greek island of Leros, like many refugees fleeing Syria's civil war. Additionally, other terrorists have entered countries as refugees, perhaps most infamously the Boston Marathon bombers. I'll be honest, as much as I think Trudeau's plan is politically motivated based on how it looks, and I think prudence requires a step back, I am hesitant when I see so many US states determined to ban refugees. I dont want to embrace a knee-jerk reaction. In a perfect world, or even a normal world, we should do our part to help people. However, its not a perfect or normal world. ISIS has said they will hide operatives among refugees. If it was any other group and any other event, we wouldnt hesitate but to choose more security. If Trudeau goes ahead with his plan and someone commits a terrorist attack in Canada or the US (entering by means of Canada) who was among these refugees, what would Trudeau say then? When someone says how they will attack you, you dont shrug and say "odds are long". How many Arab nations are taking in refugees? I think some people get this impression that the entire world is bringing in tens of thousands of refugees and us hateful Canadians are wanting to *gasp* fully vet any before we bring them in, and its not true. Never mind the economic and social issues of bringing in so many. Its a complicated issue. I'd love to help as many people as possible and accept that they are all good people with no ill intentions. But if I had to take responsibility for their actions, I couldnt do it. 1. The person blew him/her self up - but the passport was still in good condition 2. The desire of US governors to ban refugees - is also politically motivated 3. The refugees who will come to Canada have been in UN refugee camps for a few years 4. How many countries are taking in refugees? I would counter that with some other questions - which are merely food for thought a) How many countries took in Jewish refugees during the Holocaust? Very few b ) Did people / countries take a risk when they helped Jewish refugees? Absolutely c) Was it a greater risk than taking in the current refugees? It's hard to argue otherwise

Do they have a choice? Does anyone?

France is accepting 30 000 refugees

The longer I'm away, the more I'm reminded how much I love it, and how much I need to defend it. The funny thing is, I've never lived in Winnipeg, and as a Rural Manitoban, I'm not always a fan of it, but living in AB, I find myself defending Winnipeg all the time. But yeah, absolutely, the longer I'm away, the more I realize I'm #Manitoban4Life. Just a matter of time before I find a job to get me home full time. Rural MB is the best kept secret in Canada - I like it that way

Sorry Mark, but I'm not buying this apologist argument. As I said in a previous post, this is just too easy. Why aren't the Vietnamese self-detonating and murdering people in cold blood in restaurants and theaters in Paris right now? They have every reason to hate the French. They were mistreated by "our" countries (I'm not sure who you are lumping into this catch-all) including France and the USA, for well over 100 years. Over a million of their citizens were murdered. And yet, the Vietnamese are peaceful and are moving on with their lives. This isn't about mistreatment (or at least, that's just a small factor) of the Middle East (once again, not sure who you are lumping in to that category). It's about a religion that seems to be unable to co-exist with anyone else in many parts of the world. Try going to parts of Myanmar. Guess which parts you can't travel in. Try going to the Philippines. Guess which area you can't travel in. Were the people of Mindanao in the Philippines "mistreated" by "our" countries? Of course not. Yet they are kidnapping and beheading "infidels" too. I just don't buy it Mark. Okay. Vietnam sucked it up, China sucked it up, therefore the Middle East should suck it up too. I'm oversimplifying, but that is essentially what you're saying.

Too many journalists ignore the West's role in all of this. Our countries have spent the past century mistreating the Middle East. When we weren't doing that, we were supplying them with weapons. If we are to believe the media avoids mentioning Muslims in their news stories because it's not politically correct, then we should believe a thousand times more that our own governments carry a good share of the blame.

So what's the difference between their views on homosexuality and the "Christian right", who are already embedded in N.A.??? Neither group is stupid enough to openly attack gays. Thank you. That's precisely my point.