betsy

I haven't really followed the current details of Khadr's situation, but from what I understand the US military would rather keep Khadr indefinitely? At least that was the assumption I've read several months back. They're saying in that scenario, we can all probably kiss bye-bye to Khadr. if I'm not mistaken, right now we're just talking "IF" here? Why do we have to make a special advance "preparation" for his eventual return - like as if he's some kind of a significant dignitary and not the big embarrassment that he is! Aren't we just giving a tad too much importance to this fellow?

Well at least we cleared that part. We were responding from different angles. I was responding to the real issue I see with this incident. I didn't latch onto the thuggery-muslim-whiney part, understanding other possible likely factors that went with that obvious expression of outrage. To me, the expression of that outrage was not the real issue. Some may comment or question its utterance, but focusing on it would simply be just quite petty. In fact, dwelling on it would detract from the real issue - that something is wrong with our system. If someone cried "OUCH!".... my response would be to go for the cause of that ouch....and not waste too much time criticizing, or going ballistic or agonizing over how it was uttered.

No, you go ahead and vent your outrage against Jewish demands for Kosher...after all that incident happened in your own country! So why should I be outraged over that? Right now my outrage is over this incident that Scott had brought up that happened in my own country.... this blasted Muslim and the moronic judge who had just started a precedent here it seems. So this means we'll probably be pandering to every religious demands from every inmates!

I agree with you Sharkman.

Hah! If we're talking cost....and if we're going to be bleeding hearts about this...I still stand by the opinion that the Jewish Kosher is not comparable to The Muslim's pork aversion scenario! So yes, we have to shell out money for kosher since obviously the Jew will be deprived of his religious requirement....and we can offer a protein substitute in lieu of pork for the Muslim!

I am not anti-immigration. But I do want a closely screened immigration policy. A lot of ethnic minorities I've talked to (asians and blacks and latinos)...we seem to share the same opinion: we came to this country, therefore we adapt to it. So all these ridiculous demands for more cultural rights must be coming from radical activists or those who stand to gain by something.

Who's talking about cost? You did not mention anything about cost. You were spouting off about meeting religious requirements. Keen to do the comparison between a Jew and a Muslim. And I showed you clearly how the two are incomparable. So? Whether it be a Muslim or a Jew or a Cannibal....all you proved is that there is a terrible flaw in the system! That is highly debatable.

I am from the Philippines. I am a Canadian now. What do you mean by "close the door behind me?"

I have no evidence. But it is normal reaction. If you had gone to my original country and start demanding our ways back there be changed to suit yours...if we see our own culture being swamped...I would resent you.

According to wiki: "Kosher foods are those that meet certain criteria of Jewish law. Invalidating characteristics may range from the presence of a mixture of meat and milk, to the use of produce from Israel that has not been tithed properly, or even the use of cooking utensils which had previously been used for non-kosher food. For an in-depth discussion of this tradition, see kashrut." This case regarding the Jew cannot be compared with the bacon issue regarding the Muslim. Obviously the religious requirement of Jews lies in the special way of preparing their meals (which the inmate Jew cannot follow)....whereas the bacon issue stems from the belief that Muslims must not eat pork - which can easily be followed by this inmate simply by not eating the bacon. So clearly, he can still follow his religious diet. I agree that balanced diet should be for all. Depriving someone of nutritional value is akin to abuse. There should be another protein alternative other than the pork. However, this said inmate was not deprived of a balanced diet. Protein in the form of eggs was still available. In fact, without the bacon, it was a healthier meal.

There is some truths in what Leafless had said. This multi-culturalism is only adding fuel to the fire. It is building resentment. In some ancient post I've made, I expressed my concern that the supremacists will be able to lure more to look at things from their own point of view.

If this guy had asked for a replacement such as an extra helping of eggs in lieu of the bacon, and he was denied....then I would concede that yes, he has cause for grievance. However, from what I understand he asked a replacement in the form of halal. And reading again from that link, who was that jerk official who suggested that bacon be taken out of the menu altogether???

The doctor interviewed was proud to announce that they did a 5 year research on hpv vaccine. I would like to use a 9-year old girl as an example. They want to vaccinate girls as young as 9 years old. Did they do a study specifically focused on 9 year olds? Girls go through complex changes during puberty and beyond. What could be the consequences giving vaccine to a girl as young as 9 compared to a 16 year old? Did any of these 9 year olds that were studied ever gotten pregnant and had given births - keeping in mind that this was only a 5-year research? If they do not know the answer as to the preventive capability of this drug after a few years...and that they admitted studies are still on-going.....then how could they know such details pertaining to the effect this vaccine might have on these girls depending on the various ages and stages they were in when they were vaccinated? yes we have advanced technologically therefore it shouldn't take half a century to find out about results in most cases. However just because technology had advanced, it doesn't mean our biological system had dramatically changed as well. Modern technology or not...this is a substance you're going to put into a human!

Well I'd like to know sufficient details over that before I give a comment. Can you provide a link?

Take what anymore? He can eat eggs! That's protein! Nothing lost there in terms of nutritional value! So just give him a double helping of eggs, or whatever else is being served in lieu of what he couldn't eat! That's how we do it in some restaurants: I couldn't eat potatoes so can I please have an extra toast instead? Why should we taxpayers shell out more to order in something just to pander to this inmate? He is not in a bleeding hotel! At least he should count his blessing that in foregoing bacon, he cut down on his cholesterol! Something is definitely wrong with our system when nonsensical and frivolous complaints such as this one is being accomodated and being rewarded!

I understand that parents would want their children to be safe from contracting hpv virus. The mentality frame of the parents in this situation is that they want their children immuned NOW! I emphatize with the desire - it's only normal. And frankly, it's a reflection of the kind of society we have now that clamors for instant gratification! It is negligent on our part to let ourselves get caught up in a hype and push our daughters into something that's not been researched thoroughly! And it's not only negligent on our part if we embrace this vaccines just because some religious group or conservatives are rejecting it! The knee-jerk reaction dominating better judgement. Perhaps it's the next generation who will benefit from these vaccines when there will be enough data and findings to sufficiently - if not confidently - conclude that yes, there will be no side-effects at all....not even to your daughter's own children! History had given us some dire consequences. The thalidomide that was administered to pregnant women that led to deformed babies, as an example. I'd say that we need to wait and learn more about this vaccine. That parents should not be pressured and driven by hyped information.

Let me just show you how long it took to do the research on polio vaccine. How a Vaccine Was Discovered Vaccine developments for polio had begun in the early 1900's. However, early attempts failed, partly because researchers did not know there was more than one virus. We now know that polio is caused by three strains of quite stable viruses that are a part of the enterovirus family, which have RNA as their genetic material. These viruses can remain infectious for long periods of time in water and foods. To be effective, a vaccine has to confer immunity against all three strains. Ironically, before the 1900's, immunity was acquired primarily during infancy because sanitation conditions were poor and efforts at sewage and water treatment were primitive. Babies were frequently exposed to polioviruses. These infants did not contract the disease because their mothers¹ antibodies were passed on to them through breast feeding. The babies then developed their own antibodies to the virus. Paradoxically, when sanitation improved, infants were no longer exposed at an age when they were protected, so they did not develop antibodies to the viruses. Consequently, when they were exposed to the virus in later childhood and adulthood, they were at risk to contract polio. This understanding about the nature of polio grew through painstaking research over the first half of the twentieth century, much of it funded by the March of Dimes, a grassroots organization founded with the help of President Roosevelt. The organization decided to enlist the services of a respected researcher who was certain he could find a safe vaccination. Jonas Salk, developer of first successful vaccine. Photo by March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation, 1996. Dr. Jonas Salk had begun his medical research career studying immunology. In 1947, while at the University of Pittsburgh, he began his research on poliovirus. His research was greatly helped in 1949, when a method of growing poliovirus in cell culture, instead of having to use primarily monkeys for research, was discovered. Salk needed to find a way to process the viruses so that they were less infectious, before using them in a vaccine. In 1952, Salk was the first to develop a successful vaccine using a mixture of the three types of virus, grown in monkey kidney cultures. He developed a process using formalin, a chemical that inactivated the whole virus. What followed was massive testing of the vaccine in clinical trials in the United States and parts of Canada, begun in 1954. The scope of the trials was unprecedented in medical history. The results were dramatic. Cases of polio fell spectacularly in the vaccinated test groups. In 1955, the government quickly granted permission for the vaccine to be distributed to the children of our country. Child being administered the polio vaccine. Photo by March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation, 1996. But, there was a problem with the original Salk vaccine. The vaccine actually induced 260 cases of poliomyelitis, including 10 deaths. The problem was traced to incomplete inactivation of some virus particles, which was soon corrected. Since then the vaccine has been highly effective, with a 70 - 90% protection rate. In 1957, in an effort to improve upon the killed Salk vaccine, Albert Bruce Sabin began testing a live, oral form of vaccine in which the infectious part of the virus was inactivated (attenuated). This vaccine became available for use in 1963.

Mandatory HPV Vaccination Public Health vs Private Wealth Lawrence O. Gostin, JD, LLD; Catherine D. DeAngelis, MD, MPH JAMA. 2007;297:1921-1923. Earlier this year, Texas (by executive order) and Virginia made quadrivalent HPV vaccine mandatory for girls entering sixth grade. However, the Texas legislature recently voted to overturn the governor's order and Virginia granted parents generous "opt-out" provisions.12 Nearly 20 additional states are considering similar legislation,13 and some medical experts in Europe are calling for mandatory HPV vaccination.14 Routine use of the quadrivalent HPV vaccine undoubtedly is beneficial to the public's health, as it is likely to reduce the incidence of cervical cancers. However, the rush to make HPV vaccination mandatory in school-aged girls presents ethical concerns and is likely to be counterproductive. http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/297/17/1921

I will. Cos I truly find it funny!

Speaking of Bush, I saw his latest press conference. He's a charmer! He knows how to play with the media...and the press couldn't resist finding him amusing. One reporter asked: Do you see yourself as an asset or liability to the Republican presidential candidate? Bush promptly answered without batting an eyelash: A definite asset! A few seconds lapsed...I guess the reporter was taken by surprise by Bush's quick response. Then the reporter asked: Can you follow that up? And Bush answered, along with the right tone and facial expression: Noooo! Then moved on to the next reporter. And you could see the grin on the faces of the other reporters.

Well I don't know what the big deal is all about Jbg's post. I find it heart-warming. And he's just expressing himself...freely. Surely there couldn't be anything wrong with expressing one's patriotism and pride for one's own country, is there? And for such commotion coming from you American Woman, who ironically is whining about your own so-called non-existent freedom of speech. Granted you may not feel the same way as he does about your own country....at least let him have his moment in peace. Perhaps that's the reason why you have a free speech zone? So no one can rant-dump on anyone anytime and anywhere they please?

The emergence of the liberal state was a true liberal philosophy where-in independent thought and control of one's own destiny was the concern. For example: capitalism, democratic government, land/property ownership....not the modern liberal state that insists on regulating and controlling its subject. The liberal state when it emerged as you say would make our right-wing conservatives (God bless them) look like looney-left radical socialist NDP tooners. You don't know what liberalism really means. You only know what your gods like Pierre Trudeau have shown you - Marxist Socialism - with the pretense of democracy and independent thought. Who else could imagine what John Lenon, addled in drugs, could imagine? Shake your head.

The difference is clear. Only a liberal can't see. The liberal tries to control everybody - not just their own sheep. The liberal flock is being controlled without them even realizing it. The Christian flock - for I know this is aimed again at Christianity - not only realizes that God is in control, but wants it that way. They have the choice. Nobody is getting dragged into church to be baptized whether they like it or not. Furthermore, the liberals are not content to stay out of the church or to remain unbelievers....but they dare interfere and try to control the church!

My biggest concern is the mandatory vaccination of these girls. Although I don't think it is mandatory yet in Canada - correct me if I'm wrong - the fact that it had become mandatory in some of the States next door could mean that eventually that would be the way it is here. There is a tremendous amount of coersive pressure being put on the parents. Not only are they using the "guilt" card (like how awful it would be for a parent who denied her child this vaccine if the child ends up getting cancer)....they are using the financial aspect as well (let them do it to your child in school now and you save $400.00). Who doesn't want to save $400.00? Like I said, if this vaccine is that crucial to have, then why shouldn't it be available for free anytime a parent decides it's time for her daughter to have it? Why does it have to have that connotation of "it's now or never?" These low-down tactics are setting off warning bells in my ears.

Yeah. If McGuinty hadn't been there we have to assume that he hadn't been in power for 4 years. What are you on about? What do you think this debate is all about? You think Tory should've gone there and said, "Yeah Dalton, you did a fine job. Let's elect you again. And I'll see you again in 4 years." Duh. Our system fortunately allows for open debate and allows us to change our government when the one in power has proved incompetent and corrupt. That's the point. These debates are simply a reflection of our system. For Tory, to get up there and not point out the flaws in the current administration's governance would render the whole system pointless. We may as well have a single party system. Fortunately, we do have an alternative. And an intelligent electorate will understand that and change the current administration. Unfortunately, we don't have an intelligent electorate.