betsy

Another option is to encourage everyone to come to Canada. The best timing will be when a Liberal Prime Minister is in power. Immigration will be so open. From here, they can easily find their way into the USA should they want. A Democrat president and a Liberal Prime Minister is a dream come true. Tell everyone to leave China. Use the magic word "refugee" or "asylum". Hey, the government cannot just send you back. There is a long legal process to go through, and in the meantime, it's easy to go underground and be lost among the population. Just the sheer numbers alone of your population...the same numbers that causes governments to gape in awe at the possibilities of doing commerce with you....can, and will work for you. Hordes of Chinese refugees/asylum seekers pouring in will frighten everyone. Then, most likely the world will scramble to do something to stop the flow. They'll be more likely to tackle the evil governments of China.

I feel sorry for your brothers and for you and family...for what you must be going through right now. Hopefully everything will turn out right in the end. As for killing the governments, I guess it's not as simple as that. First of all, if ever Bush and other democratic western leaders do decide to take bold actions...I'm sure that a lot of those same people bemoaning the violations of human rights would be the first ones to bash Bush and company for going in there. All the more if China happens to have oil. No immediate liberation for you, because western governments have to take the shrill protesters into grave consideration(whether they be illogical or unreasonable), not to mention other consequences that might be detrimental to everyone. Remember, this side of the world dragged its heels in tackling Hitler. Your best bet would be to have a Democrat sitting as president....and pray for another Lewinski. Distractions seem to be quite an acceptable and fair reason for bombing cities, and perhaps, going into war. AND most importantly, get Hollywood to get in on the act. That definitely ought to do it, if nothing else! At least, it seems there has been some improvements in your country's condition. I'm basing my opinion from the documentary I've seen about China on tv recently (in their preparation for the Olympics)....although I don't know how much of it is true since it was aired on the CBC. Anyway, welcome to the forum.

He-he. And this so-called "half-truth" was discussed in Egyptian Parliament. Is Kuzadd suggesting Egyptian Parliament normally stoop down to waste time on tabloid and bull? Mind you, you gotta admit....it's quite titiliating. LOL. And btw, what do they mean by "symbolic' breastfeeding I wonder? http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,2...5005961,00.html One's imagination could really go wild when it starts thinking kinky.

You've got the liberal.ca and one blog for a link. What can I say? BUT, it's not only the Conservatives who are critical of the Liberal's inaction regarding the environment. There is one other reliable source who was very vocal about it. Ignatieff.

Ha-ha! Just to think that such thing is uttered by someone supposed to be serious like this lecturer is just incredible! Nothing is surprising from people who believe that if they become an HED (human explosive device) on earth, they'll get HED in heaven. And female HED do so thinking they'll be Snow White with her dwarves. LOL! Anymore kinky fatwas out there?

It IS news to me! I haven't heard about this breats-feeding thingy....the imagery it gives is pornographic. Nor have I heard about the Palestinians being forbidden to leave their territories.

I've read the statement repeatedly....and yet I don't see how this would mean that he is calling for more terrorist attacks? Actually, this statement is doing exactly the opposite! It is actually an effective deterrent for more terrorist attacks! I bet Osama Bin Laden and all other intelligent terrorist leaders have no wish to help Bush of proving to the American people that he - Bush - is doing the right thing!

I don't want our Queen either. Does anyone here actually want to swear their allegiance to the Queen? But that is not the point.

Oh darn. I recall a conversation I had with an Iranian about a couple of years ago in a convenience store. He was gleeful about the storm disasters the US was having....saying like, "see? they are are being punished because they are evil!" I wonder what he's saying now?

If you read the scientific journals, it's not the journals that are politicking, it's the politicians. Again I must ask, is there a better alternative? I know this is directed to Scott, but I couldn't help myself from responding. Is there a better alternative? Yes. By ensuring these peer-reviews are not rigged just so to get the desired results! As to exactly how, I can only think of one suggestion which I had given to one of your post, (of course I am only speaking for myself). Surely there are experts specializing in things like this who can offer suggestions to remedy the problem. The fact is, this peer-reviews don't mean anything anymore. Because it had lost its credibility. That is the problem.

If you read the literature, you can see the debate for yourself without all the politicking that politicians add. I guess I'm just assuming that everyone has acess to these articles, but I guess that's not true. Anyways, if you are really interested in the subject, and you happen to live near a University, you could always visit the library in the University and look up some articles on the subject. WHY DO THIS HANDFUL OF SCIENTISTS WANT TO OPEN THE DEBATE ON KYOTO? Obviously they are not satisfied with the "debates" that you say had happened. Obviously, they want to be heard! And with an allegedly dire situation involving our planet....why don't the hundreds of pro-KYOTO scientists come out and agree to the debate? If only just to silence this handlful of scientists....and to squash the skepticisms once and for all? Surely.....hundreds of them banding together wouldn't find it hard to defend their position and prove the others wrong. No, I don't mean debating with the public. Right now, the word "peer-review" means squat! In other words, it had lost its credibility. If there is a serious contention or argument (like this KYOTO), it should be debated rigorously....in such a way where-in it cannot be said that the "review" was rigged. What's wrong with an open debate where-in those who are interested (whether they be students or any civilians) can freely observe and listen? Just like the debates in the House of Commons?

In Khadr's case, apparently he had ample time to flee the area of combat, along with other civilians. But instead, he opted to stay and engaged in battle.

Somewhere in this forum quite a while ago. I can't recall exactly where. But then, it was from one of the posters....so I guess it was only an assumption?

S/he's on my honorary ignore list. No, it's a he, a White English speaking Christian supporting Canadian. The minorities on this site are sometimes overwhelming with spite and hate and are totally unreasonable, due to the fact they are unable to handle criticism levelled at groups they could be part of. And to that I say if you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. I say amen to that. Especially when they have nothing relevant to add to the discussion.

Sounds like sedition to me. Yes. This shouldn't be taken lightly. Actually, I'd like to see something done about this. I feel sorry for these soldiers. These soldiers have nothing to do with decisions of war. They are soldiers. They are to obey orders. If letters should be sent, then it ought to be sent to those who can make decisions whether we should go to war or not.

Then, they shouldn't have any problems defending their findings from a very small group of scientists who are saying otherwise. You'd think that in order to squash the growing skepticism on KYOTO, and to get everybody on board...the most logical and sensible thing is to prove the nay-sayers wrong....once and for all! In a debate! Of course that is, if these hundreds of scientists are confident that they are standing behind something that can reasonably be defended at all! After all, it's hard to stand by and publicly defend a sham. Reputations are at stake.

We have gone over this list of scientists before. Many of them are former professors and have not done peer reviewed work for a very long time. Even if there are only 2 or 3 or 5 scientists who had written this open letter to Harper - and I highlighted the word "open" for it is actually meant to be read by the public -, and even if ALL of them have not done any peer reviews at all, I actually find them more believable than all the KYOTO scientists lumped together! This handful of scientists had actually, AND OPENLY, issued a challenge to all the scientists who are standing behind KYOTO! This indicates a great amount of confidence in the credibility of their findings, their justified criticisms of KYOTO....that they are literally asking Harper to make this debate happen! And they had written to two other Prime Ministers before that! Yes, this challenge is a year old. And it seems, no debate is going to happen. Because pro-KYOTO scientists don't seem keen to square-off in a public debate! And how did all those pro-KYOTO scientists respond to this challenge? Just by a very weak, childish response, "no, that's not true. We are right and they are wrong." Then the smear tactics began. Statements made to the media. And I believe, that CBC documentary is one of them! Well, why don't the pro-KYOTO scientists agree to the debate then??? Why don't they show how this handful of disenting scientists are wrong in their findings? Why don't they display the kind of confidence this handful of scientist are showing? The answer is quite clear. The pro-KYOTO scientists know they are standing behind no facts at all....but a sham! If people are really truly concern about the environment, and sincerely think that partisanship should be set aside in such a calamitous situation we could be facing.....then we should all clamor for this debate to happen. The sooner this happens, the sooner we can do a sensible planning AND huge amount of spending.....with the confidence that we are going in the right direction.

The other side is perfectly free to publish their findings in peer-reviewed journals as well. What I mean is do you have a better way for scientists to share their findings/data other than peer-reviewed journals. If so, please share. This is only practical. We are going to spend billions to say the least (and trillions if we go with Kyoto). So it's only sensible to want to be certain that we are going in the right direction. This debate that these scientists are requesting will be shared to the public. And the outcome will have more credibility since both sides will be able to voice their findings and analyses, and politicking could be set aside. As Jbg had said from his post above, this debate will be good for everyone.....worldwide! And growing skepticism in these peer-reviews is not progressive at all. If we are going to rely vastly in science, we should all have the confidence and the trust that comes along with it. Science community should have unquestionable credibility. Maybe doing open debates like this on every significant or contentious findings and analyses is the way to go, before the results get published at all.

I won't take this comment too seriously. You obviously hadn't given it much thought. But I say this.... First of all what do you mean by my secular society? It's actually your secular society. You are the ones, that is liberals or atheist or whatever you happen to be today, that tries to ignore the foundation of our civilization and society. And no, Christianity will not be kept at arms' length. Christianity is the basis of our law and our social structure. Christianity, combined with democracy, allows for the separation of church and state AND freedom of religion. None of that will be found in an Islamic state.

Huh??? Is this letter a bit dated? Open Kyoto to debate Sixty scientists call on Harper to revisit the science of global warming Special to the Financial Post Published: Thursday, April 06, 2006 HOSED AGAIN!!! Dig up an old article and pretend that it is current and factual. What a waste. I am certain that this topic was probably well covered the first time around, long before I joined this board. There is no pretense. I happen to believe, like so many others, that it is factual! Anyway, what's wrong if this letter is a year old? Does the issue have a "best before date" that I'm not aware of? And why should it be ignored? Most especially on an issue of great importance such as this....when the impact on us will be so drastic, no matter what decision is made! You mean relevant documents do not come up, and are excluded as evidence in court just because they're old? Some documents are decades old....and yet I would bet a lot had won their cases!

Yep. Want to share it? Listen to the other side. What they have to say, their own findings and opinion. Listen to those who sits independently, those who had chosen to ignore or criticize Kyoto, those who are not among the peers of this so-called peer-review.

At no such time is any such nonsense implied or agreed with. He doesn't say he agrees with the "Harper" approach, nor would I gather he would have any idea what the "Harper" approach is to GHG. Harpers approach is one of intensity targets, which increases emmissions and does not reduce them. He did not say he agrees with Harper. I said, "without his saying so, does seem to agree with the Harper approach." Can you provide a link explaining Harper's intensity targets, increasing emissions?

Huh??? Is this letter a bit dated? Open Kyoto to debate Sixty scientists call on Harper to revisit the science of global warming Special to the Financial Post Published: Thursday, April 06, 2006 And yet it mentions the Minister of the Environment, Rona Ambrose. She hasn't been minister for 6 months. But the subject is very much alive. It is very much relevant!

That's three times on one thread alone you couldn't muster up an argument which did not include a personal attack within its content. I let it go the first couple of times but from now on it's: Congratulations, you're number three on the list. What's the insult? You're confused. You don't seem to have a clue what's going on. For example, what's all this gibberish? I must admit I'm confused too. I don't have a clue what YOU'RE talking about. So I guess we're even.

Thanks Electric Monk and Scriblett.