jacee

And it's to their great credit for keeping it light. They're just there. "Saturday night, people donated $10,000 worth of pizzas. And they're getting access to a kitchen. They're in it for the long haul now, with awesome public support. That was about 500 pizzas for 2000 people. I've never seen a protest supported by the public that way.

:lol: The kids are alright.

Search author Bob: "Your search for the term filth vermin animals returned 36 results" There isn't any justification for dehumanizing people.

So now you're Canadian, and you incite hatred against all "Arabs/Muslims" everywhere, and call them "filth" "vermin" and "those animals"? Do you claim to speak for Israel Bob? Does Israel know that you besmirch its character this way? I suspect you don't speak for Israelis at all, And you sure as hell don't speak for Canadians!!!

An update ... http://www.opednews.com/articles/Occupy-Wall-Street-Day-5-by-Chaz-Valenza-110921-806.html?show=votes A sampling of headlines from 'occupy wall street' google news search ... **UPDATE** Yahoo says it has fixed what the company has called an unintentional block of messages related to the Wall Street protests. See below: below http://thinkprogress.org -Why 'Occupy Wall Street' makes sense makes sense The Guardian - 2 hours ago -Protesters at the ' Occupy Wall Street' rally at Bowling Green Plaza, New York City, on 17 September; the demonstrations continue .. -Yahoo appears to be censoring Occupy Wall Street protest messages YouTube' -Occupy Wall Street' Calls For Protests in San Francisco International Business Times (press release) -Occupy Wall Street: Day 5 - Workers Union Joins Protest OpEdNews 53 article -Occupy Wall Street: Protesters Violently Arrested in New York Suite101.com - 16 hours ago They had been there for four days, as ________________________________________________ My take on it ...... Wall Street is worried. The Mayor is getting pressure from Wall Street power. The US mainstream media appear to have been ordered not to report. The cops have been ordered to 1) stop the live streaming feed and 2) bust a few heads to scare them and/or draw them into violence, giving police an excuse to shut it down. The cops would have tried to shut it down by now except they are in a privately owned concrete park with permission of the owner. Labour Unions are now joining. These young people are not surprised by official blackout and violence tactics. They expect it. It's a sign they are worrying the powers that be and their propaganda wing, the MSM. And they are the smartech generation. Montreal joins Friday. Bay Street next? Wall Street is the key of course. The stories of the unemployed graduates are interesting. They are protesting on behalf of themselves, not some nebulous 'principles'. http://www.thestar.com/iphone/news/article/1057018 "On Saturday, about 1,000 showed up to protest that 40 per cent of the wealth in the U.S. is held by one per cent of the people, and a record one in seven Americans live in poverty, the highest rate n the industrialized world. They want to know why the banks get bailouts, bankers get bonuses while ordinary citizens are losing their homes and jobs. “There’s something very wrong with our system as it is, there’s something very wrong with our financial system,” says MacAuley, who works for a Washington- based think-tank. “Few people have so much — and there are so many people who are really hurting.” And they have lawyers ... on speed dial. "Lawyer Sam Cohen said “We believe that the NYPD has been applying the law incorrectly in an attempt to disrupt the occupation.” CBC was the first mainstream North American broadcaster to ignore the pressure not to report. Some others in Canada are now tiptoeing in, and UK. US MSM still in blackout. ... to be continued no doubt. The unemployed have the time ... So do retired babyboomer activists who remember Kent State. :angry: (Ie, the parents/grandparents of this generation.) News blackout, violent intimidation ... I wonder what other Ghadafi tactics the Wall Street war industry will try ...? Food doesn't appear to be a problem ... "We're getting phone calls from all over the world about buying pies for the protestors—they're really passionate about it," Liberatos told us."

Taking a poll or referendum on PR without first educating people ... is a political ploy, intentional failure - Ontario for example.Majority governments are like dictatorships - prone to corruption and suppressing dissent.

We get it Bob. You hate all "Arabs/Muslims" and their countries.But "in our country" ? What country?

Canadians going to the US for health care do not increase your public costs as they pay in full. It is as I said earlier that your costs are higher per capita than ours due to higher administration costs. And see wikilink

Hmm... maybe we should work on that. There are people with multivariate understanding of human behaviour, but they're not economists. What ibehavoiurs are we talking about? How about make the richEST pay their fair share?

I think it's good for Harper to know what Canadians think about this. And I also think it was a smart move by the Palestinians. Whether successful or not, it has created a global public discussion and greater awareness. Certainly taking the discussion out of closed negotiating sessions was a good move. They've never gotten past the who-did-what-to-whom recriminations yet, so some light and fresh eyes can't hurt. Let's face it : There is no peace process, just a war of words. It's clearly time to try another route, preferably the high road. Each has to recognize the right of the other to exist as a state obviously. It's not so clear to me, though, that the Palestinians have to acknowledge Israel's right to be a Jewish state. That's an internal matter for the state of Israel isn't it?

I agree with you there, if they are complaining about the results. If they don't vote because they think there's something wrong with the system, though, that's different - a legitimate form of protest, I think. I'm not sure where you got that last statement from.The major parties know how to manipulate the current system to get more seats with a smaller percentage of the popular vote - eg Harper with 54% of the seats (and all of the power, but only 40% of the popular vote. The NDP seats are pretty consistent (S 34%. PV 31%), while the Libs with 19% of the PV got only 11% of the seats. The current system was designed way before the more accurate and targeted polling systems we have today, which makes it vulnerable to distortion. I think it's foolish to talk about a 'majority' government that doesn't have the support of the majority of the voters. Beyond that though ... why bother voting if your riding always goes to a party you don't want? There should be some value to those wasted votes to encourage more people to vote, but there is none at present. I don't think people have been well educated about PR, and - think it's because the major parties prefer the system they're accustomed to. I'm not in favour of two party systems. I think they keep people divided and don't provide enough choice or room for new ideas. I prefer multiparty systems because they can be more dynamic in collaborating to produce better quality work. A single ideology is a frozen government with no new ideas, and just doesn't represent all Canadians, nor can it respond well to surprise situations. Government needs to be more responsive than that, and needs to demonstrate ability to work cooperatively ... like we expect students and employees to do. We're not hiring a CEO to give the orders: We're electing a democratic government to address the needs of all Canadians. Big difference, imo.

People have a choice about voting. I think studies find that those who don't vote generally wouldn't have changed results as they exhibit the same voting patterns as those who did vote. It is also the perogative of the individual to not vote as a form of protest against a system where their vote doesn't count anyway, under our first-past-the-post system. If the outcome in your particular riding is pretty predictable, then your vote for a candidate who won't win is wasted - ie, doesn't count toward anything. Proportional representation has been suggested as a way of addressing this malaise in the system, where the #seats in parliament would actually represent the percentage of the popular vote obtained by each party. Thus, your 'wasted' vote for a losing candidate in your riding would still count toward your party's seats in parliament. wikilink "They have become the widest form of voting system n the world, mostly in South America, Europe as well as being chosen by most nascent democracies across the world. On the other hand, countries under the Westminster system, New Zealand excepted, have resisted it." link " The record of 509 national elections in 20 countries provides the basis for a regression analysis that clearly identifies higher turnout rates in PR systems ..." That said, voter turnout is related to inequity - increasing income gap between the wealthiEST and the rest of us. link " Income gaps translate into voting gaps In the ten states with the smallest income gap, an average 57 percent of the voting age population turned out to vote in the 1996 presidential election, according to Federal Election Commission data. The ten states with the widest income gap had an average voter turnout of only 48 percent. the widest income gap had an average voter turnout of only 48 percent. Voter turnout has fallen dramatically and rising economic inequality is one reason why. Upper-income Americans participate in the electoral process at much higher levels than middle- and low-income Americans. " Is falling voter turnout related to complacency/satisfaction, or to inequity/powerlessness, and how can it be improved? The data doesn't say for sure, but a Canadian report concludes: http://www.conferenceboard.ca/HCP/Details/Society/voter-turnout.aspx#_ftnref2 “without fundamenta changes in the way in which politics is conducted in Canada, these are goals that could well remain out of reach for some time.” Ahhh ... there we are ... "the way politics is conducted" ... seems to be an issue. Maybe because politicians do the bidding of the wealthiEST?

I think we need to have a referendum on that .. or maybe just a walkabout on Parliament hill would do it. Ah why bother. It's a piece o' cake ... we'll just email in our majority vote to Harper. Obama suggested individuals with income over $1m I think - the top .3% of earners - should pay more, and something about wealth too.

Only until the Canadian runs out.Then I'd bet there wouldn't be any difference. You can always count on Canadians to buy gas and complain about it, no matter what.

Ya got me there! I must relay the truth to my misinformant.

I find guilt is a useless emotion and can be debilitating if allowed to persist. Awareness and taking some personal action works better, but maybe that's just me.

I see, and I agree such arguments aren't helpful and often derail threads on dispute over comparative conditions. That's not my wish. Perhaps I somewhat misinterpreted your point of introducing Canada's lack of moral high ground re Aboriginal people, in relation to Israel's Palestinian issue. I think I took it to imply something like 'Canadians can't talk because ..,.' But of course we can talk and acknowledge some commonalities, and I outlined some. And we don't have moral high ground as you said, and we certainly can't criticize Israel from any lofty heights. 'Canada' doesn't officially at all to my knowledge. I wish Israelis and Palestinians well in living together-side-by-side. Different geography - we have a LOT more of it - but another commonality with Canada perhaps? Nobody's going anywhere. When all's said and done, we'll all still be here. It's just a bit tricky finding the ways forward, and Israel's geography constraints complicate things tremendously, and Canadians aren't used to thinking in those terms. But no, I'm not suggesting we 'resettle' the Palestinians here in Canada's expansive geography for you, . though Palestinians and Israelis are all welcomed through the usual channels, of course. It's not something Canadians can solve or even imagine solving, ya got that right, if you were hinting at that.

From AW's link above: Well I can see why they're ticked off. I don't really see the 'freedom of the press" issue Sun TV's blathering on about. This is advertising, and pretty sleazy attack advertising at that, but not news or commentary. Is he implying that SunTV is part of the 'grass roots' (ya right) EthicalOil group itself? I personally think it's over the top, bad for Canada's international reputation, and the oil industry and just bad form. I guess the courts may now get a chance to rule on its legality (truth in advertising? Defamation/Slander/Libel?).

Not consistently. See #61 above. Bob's terminology for "Arabs/Muslims" - "filth" "animals" is extremely racist, offensive, and an embarassment on a quality Canadian discussion board. GostHacked and wyly made good points too. And from other accounts I've heard, it's true that the influential extreme right wing and (some?) Israeli military do hold these views. Sad. Dehumanizing other people must, I think, dehumanize oneself too.

Our right to vote (or not, as we choose) is not our only democratic right. Freedom of expression, freedom of assembly ... ring a bell? And yes I do see evidence that lots of people are concerned about the Walmarts(urban sprawl, loss of agricultural lands), oil sands(air, water, soil contamination) along with government corruption, corporate and banking standards and ethics (ie, apparent lack thereof) and many other issues. One piece of such evidence is the existence (since 1985) and success of the Council of Canadians: It has more members than all political parties put together. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Council_of_Canadians As I said above, it is not all about what party is in power as they all try to maintain the status quo and improve their own position within it. Libs and Cons do their well-worn dance with each other, the NDP is as yet untried nationally ... none of them are going to make any substantive changes as they are all led around by the nose by the banks and corporations, domestic and 'foreign'. Read that quote again ... would have allowed (domestic and foreign) corporations to challenge Canada's federal laws if our laws hurt their profits. And without public outcry and lobbying, our little puppet government would have signed away our birthright ... control over the land. Our responsibilities don't begin and end at the ballot box. We are all responsible for the land and its continuing ability to support life. In Indigenous beliefs, each responsible to the preceding 7 generations and for the 7 generations to come. Makes a lot of sense to me.

Yes the public holds the land and resource rights, administered on our behalf by our governments, until such time as they are leased/sold on our behalf, and under the conditions of those sales/leases which will include paying taxes back to the public based on amounts extracted, and perhaps also in relation to damage caused - one would hope.I think you're a bit off the rails here, Derek. If Walmart purchases or leases land and the right to build a store, they can't build a factory instead. Land rights are not absolute and unfettered: We-the-people, via the governments we elect to administer the land for us, retain some control and interest in that land. [Note to self: Insert special clause clarifying the fact that we live on Indigenous Peoples' land by treaties, and our governments are supposed to administer the land according to those treaties, but haven't, so we-the-people have some unfunded liability there.]

Nice fantasy. Despite distortions and devious deviations, always keep your eye on the truth.

Canada has no moral high ground. Canadians who protest Israel's treatment of Palestinians often also protest Canada's treatment of Indigenous Peoples. The parallels are well known.The differences in education and social problems are squarely at Canada's door: Over a century of intentional, systematic destruction of Indigenous religions, governance, cultures, traditional livelihoods, treaties and trade relations, communities and families: Six or more generations of children incarcerated, terrorized, abused beyond belief, and dying en masse in Canada's 'Indian' Residential schools. When Israel formed after the Jewish holocaust, the Canadian slaughter of Indigenous cultures and children was peaking because the UN was developing the 'Convention on Genocide' and Canada's crimes against Indigenous Peoples risked international exposure. Canada didn't ratify the Convention on Genocide until 2000, four years after the last government run residential school closed. If the gas chambers were cranking out Jewish death full blast as the allies closed in, as some say, the parallel ramping up was occurring in Canada in the following two decades in residential schools, institutions, foster care/adoption (the 'Sixties Scoop'). Thousands upon thousands of children died, and many more were intentionally separated from family, community and culture. Hundreds of thousands are still finding their way back, and perhaps even more have given up or have no knowledge of where they came from. No, Canada has no 'high ground' to stand on and many Canadians know and acknowledge that though some are still in denial, it's true. The corporate greed for unfettered access to the land, government complicity in policy and practices (eg, not keeping records of enrolment/death) Christian religious fervor in converting 'heathens' conjoined into a genocidal stew pot for Indigenous children and families, at its peak during the 'cold war' years, some say with the assistance of former Nazi doctors and 'scientists'. It wasn't random either: Families of traditional leaders were targeted for disruption, separation from community, death, sterilization, incarceration, etc. No the Palestinians haven't suffered to that extent under Israel ... but is that a point in Israel's favour in the 21st century? Canada's 21st century begins with a court-ordered, UN supervised Truth Commission, now in progress but apparently pretty much hidden from most of us who don't seek out the information. The argument "Others do it so why pick on us?" just lowers the standards for human behaviour. The Jewish holocaust happened; Does that mean somebody else gets to do it too? I think Israel should be speaking up LOUDLY about Canada's crimes against Indigenous Peoples ... but they aren't ... possibly because of the existing parallels (tho different in scope) between the occupations?

Dp

Yer askin me? Libs and Cons are peas in a pod to me. Mainstream politics really isn't my thing because politicians of all political stripes have a huge stake in maintaining the system as it is because that's the system they've trained for, schmoozed for, and been elected in. ... but ... Someone posted a graph of debt under the Libs and Cons, and public debt rose under the Cons (corporate welfare?) And peaked and fell under the Libs. Who benefits from that public debt? Obviously the banks/big investors who collect the interest. Logically, it would make much more sense for governments to do what we strive to do, which is to put something aside during the good times to collect interest and carry us through the bad times. But our governments don't do that successfully. Why is that? Is it because big investors - who build their megawealth from investments without producing one damn job or product - benefit greatly from that cycling of debt? Ya think? And do we all know for sure that those reaping windfall profits from our public debt are 1) paying full taxes on those profits? And/or 2) reinvesting in ways that actually produce jobs and products/services? Or are their windfall profits just going offshore, untaxed? Clearly I don't know everything I'm talking about. That's why I'm asking questions of 'you guys' - above average earners/wealth holders - and digging for information myself (eg evidence of offshore untaxed money in Swiss banks). Because what I do think I know is that average-and-below earners/wealth holders cannot pay down this debt and deficit. So if above-average earners/wealth holders refuse to pay more in taxes, that leaves the superrich to do it. But 'you guys' are telling me they shouldn't have to either, even on the wealth they've stolen from our common resources and labour and never given back payment ... our 'royalties' in the form of public taxation. To the extent that the 'hidden' wealth of the superrich comes back as reinvestment in Canadian enterprise producing jobs and product, I have no problem with it as that's covered in tax breaks under Canadian tax law. But I doubt it all gets recycled that way, and meanwhile above average earners (but not superrich) are going to take the brunt of it this time. Personally, I think Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, Obama, and the wealthiest people in France are really onto something that resonates with the vast majority of people. It is time for the rich, especially the richEST, to pay a bigger share of taxes: Time for them to bail us out of the mess they created through greed. And as we see in history, when the gap between richEST and the other 99% of us gets too big, revolutions happen, heads roll, and chaos reigns until new systems stabilize. I know what my preference is: Moderate though my means are, I like my life the way it is. Chaos doesn't appeal to me at all.