http://q13fox.com/2017/02/03/customs-and-border-protection-tells-airlines-they-will-begin-reinstating-visas/

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

And changing how we vote doesn't alter the law? This is an argument of semantics and the word referendum has multiple meanings but if you ask the people to directly vote on something it's a referendum. 

It may not - depends how many changes they make. Perhaps considering that something as long standing as rep by pop would be altered, a referendum may be warranted. You may think its semantics, but in Canada you can only ask people to directly vote on constitutional matters.

1 hour ago, 17to85 said:

That's one definition, however the other definition is simply any vote put before the electorate. Federally Canada has had 3 referendums, one on the Charlottetown accords, one on conscription and one on prohibition so clearly in Canada the usage is not solely for constitutional matters. 

All of those were fundamental changes to Canadian Law - as the Quebec referendum would have been - had the result been 'yes.'  If eliminating our 'first past the post' election system (a Westminster system) will fundamentally change the laws of the land, then yes, a referendum would be warranted.

I honestly don't know why this feels like an argument - there's nothing to argue about - it's a fact.

3 (1) Where the Governor in Council considers that it is in the public interest to obtain by means of a referendum the opinion of electors on any question relating to the Constitution of Canada, the Governor in Council may, by proclamation, direct that the opinion of electors be obtained by putting the question to the electors of Canada or of one or more provinces specified in the proclamation at a referendum called for that purpose.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/R-4.7/page-1.html#h-2

 

49 minutes ago, 17to85 said:

you can call a referendum on what ever you want and personally I think that if the way we are changing how our government is elected then it should be put before the people and let them directly voice their opinion. 

Incorrect. A referendum can only be called on a constitutional matter.

6 hours ago, 17to85 said:

Not without a referendum he shouldn't. Honestly I don't know why people even believed him when he promised that, it was clearly something they promised only to motivate a certain segment to vote for them. 

Unless the electoral reform were extensive enough to become a constitutional matter, they can not call a referendum on it. 

https://mcccanada.ca/stories/hutterite-help-refugee-sponsorship-story

I don't know if this video will make a difference to some of the views I've read in this thread - but I'm going to post it anyway

Most of you are aware that I'm a Hutterite - it has never been a secret around here. The way we dress is simply our dress code - we prefer to keep things simpler. Our Muslim friends are just people who worship in a different way than we do.

 

 

39 minutes ago, Mark F said:

Muslim hatred comes to Canada

Two men were arrested following last night's shooting at a Quebec City mosque that left six people dead and 18 wounded, in what Quebec's premier described as a "murderous act directed at a specific community."

 

Fear. Irrational, unfounded, fear.

 

51 minutes ago, Rich said:

The 90 day ban was put in until they can review and change the current immigration procedures.    I'm very curious to see what changes they are going to make in those 90 days so that they feel they can lift the ban.   Hope I'm wrong, but have a feeling this is just the tip of the iceberg.  

Most refugees are from camps already vetted by the U.N. I believe this is fear mongering, and as you say, just the tip of the ice berg.

8 hours ago, kelownabomberfan said:

So this is a prime example then of what you are talking about, right Mark?  This really is a total load of crap.  I can't see this ban lasting, it's just not going to work. These bans will be reversed soon.  There is so legal basis for it, whatsover.

http://cnews.canoe.com/CNEWS/Canada/2017/01/29/22700549.html

Exactly that. The fact that it's even news shows a complete lack of research by Trump's administration. Fear trumps facts...

3 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2017/01/29/news-bulletin-the-list-of-muslim-nations-in-trumps-socalled-muslim-ban-are-ones-obama-choose-n2278021?utm_content=buffer40f82&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Good points Mark.  I do note that for some reason Obama did not seem to think Saudia Arabia was an issue either.

That's visa waiver restriction compared to a complete immigration ban.

I want to share a story here - definitely related to current US politics:

We have a family of Sudanese refugees in Selkirk, MB. that were sponsored by a group of 20 local churches - my wife and I are members of the committee. They were vetted by the United Nations and arrived in July. Just in case it matters, they are Muslim. A widowed mother, her teenaged / young adult children, and one son who's married with one infant child. The had to leave a daughter and son behind in a U.N. refugee camp for complicated reasons.  The son (22) is now being forced out of the camp due to a lack of U.N. resources and him being an able-bodied male. However, if he leaves, Sudanese rebels will force him to fight for their cause, literally put a gun into his hand. One of the sons has dramatically improved his english, can even text coherently, and has started volunteering in the seniors program at the local library - a first step to building an employment resume.

Questions:

1. Is the U.N. vetting process not adequate enough for Trump?  What exactly is going to be improved in 90 days?

2. If that young man is indeed forced out of the camp against his will and winds up with the rebels - would he then be considered dangerous when he undergoes the vetting process? Is it really that simple?  Does he not deserve help?

Finally, this is why articles like the one posted above really bother me. They are mostly political: the democrats did this, the republicans did that, the left wishes this were not true, etc. etc. etc.  They attempt to fear monger while not actually addressing the issues, not really sharing the story of actual refugees.

1 hour ago, kelownabomberfan said:

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444370/donald-trump-refugee-executive-order-no-muslim-ban-separating-fact-hysteria

The article would be quite convincing if one were not aware of the facts it omits.

1. It cites Somalia as a source of terrorism via refugees - but Somalia is not even on the ban list

2. It does not mention countries like Turkey and Saudi Arabia being excluded from the list - or does the that art gallery incident in Turkey not matter?

3. Obama postponed refugee applications, not ALL VISAS, big difference

I wonder - if Trump is getting bad advice or if he's just not listening to anyone? He's making changes at a rate that is unreasonable and unsustainable. The immigration ban, forcing Mexico to pay for his wall, while his VP is busy spouting off about abortion, etc. etc. etc. This all happened in their first week - they could at least give their country a little room to breathe. 

How many executive orders can he sign before they don't mean anything anymore?  

 

I saw that message too - but it's not what was originally announced. 

Cool article. I wonder how effectively they can measure variables. Such as: a defensive player making an outstanding play that does not usually get made. Or, a certain  play is very effective but a certain opposing D is adept at stopping it, perhaps due to their skill set.

8 hours ago, Atomic said:

Not so sure about that one... I doubt they're very good (how would you know if they are?), and most IT jobs in the private sector are the furthest thing from cutthroat and demanding.... source: I've spent my career in IT...

That's what they tell me. As for knowing that they're good, let's just say they know their around a Sonic Wall, just to give you one example. 

1 hour ago, Floyd said:

I'd really look at going 5 import receivers...

Go three NI DL...  Thomas and Corney should be ready to rotate each play, maybe sign Westerman or Klassen?

Bring in someone to compete with Hardrick too...  MacMillan or Van Zeyl?

NATs - 3 OL, 3 DL, S, RB

QB pressure was not generated consistently this year - I think improving the DL should be the bigger priority.

 

27 minutes ago, kelownabomberfan said:

That's been my experience with local politicians of almost every stripe.  Our Conservative MP was a nice guy.  Our new Liberal MP is a nice guy (though his office is right across the hall from mine, I can say that he sure isn't in Kelowna much).  I feel for them when their leaders are the ones that are the targets for a lot of anger, and they have to smile and nod and say "I know what you mean" and eat a lot of poop on behalf of their party, even though they are just the face of the party in your area.

They also work far harder than many of us realize. I was talking to Kelly Block when I got a chance to spend a week at Parliament. She gets up at 4:00 Monday morning to drive to Regina, to fly to Toronto, to fly to Ottawa 

15 minutes ago, Kluchk said:

All I'm saying is its time to move on. The Riders have a vision. Their vision is to go young. Will there be growing pains, absolutely; however, you're crazy to think Jones doesn't have a plan. The Riders will be ok. Durant hasn't done anything in two years. A lot of us aren't willing to watch him sit on the bench anymore. I'd rather see young talent try and solidify a spot. 

"Try and solidify a spot" therein lies the problem. This is a QB driven league. 

7 hours ago, johnzo said:

People who are good at cybersecurity don't work for governments. The private sector pays way, way more.

I work in the school system. Some very good tech guys come to work for school divisions due to fatigue from the cutthroat, demanding nature of the private sector. 

1 hour ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Carbon taxing. A liberal elitist scam. Just awful.  If he thinks we're gonna be off oil in the short term he's nuts. Punishing every day Canadians so he can look good to his elitist pals. This clown isn't remotely up for the job of PM. Disgraceful. 

Oil is not sustainable, environmentally or economically. The oil sands are one of the most expensive oil sources in the world.

2 hours ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

Just can't see Trump lasting 4 years. Certainly based on what I saw yesterday. He's a clown who'll be impeached.

Well - the clown wasn't supposed to win...

42 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said:

They do have a budget for the qb position under the cap for 2017 so I respectfully disagree. The money they saved on Glenn will go to Nichols. Decisions have to be made with remaining Bomber free agents as in who stays & who doesn't.

Considering they play in a QB driven league, I hope you're wrong. If they cut Glenn it should be because they have confidence in Davis as the #2 guy - if that then gives them more cap room, it's just a bonus. If history hasn't taught them not to roll the dice on their #1 QB started staying healthy, then I don't know what will. Again, I hope you're wrong. 

5 minutes ago, tracker said:

God cares about NFL football??? And if Mulumba gets cut, does that mean that Mulumba has been shunned by God???

That's where fundamentalism runs into a dead end 

42 minutes ago, FrostyWinnipeg said:

Another one bites the dust...

 

The only reason to keep reading the Sun is now gone