Machinations

I would agree. I think that some Americans conflate criticism of current policy decisions with anti-USA sentiment - but then again, in America these same people would accuse many of their own countrymen for being 'Anti-American' for wanting to pull troops out of Iraq.

War. War is how nations are made, my friend. The history of the world is bathed in blood, and the lines were etched though battle. As a previous poster has said, should I be able to return to Scotland and tell the British to get out of our land? Did you think that the nations and empires of the earth were made with handshakes and tea? While this may be unpleasant - its the truth. When it comes down to it, the conquerors of history had military advantages that resulted in their victory. That does'nt make it right - but it is the way of history. The groups involved in the incident in Caledonia are, as I understand, involved in a legal matter currently. Could they not have awaited the decision of the court? Or were they sure to lose, and are using this stunt in an attempt to influence the decision politically? Please - dont expect us to sit on our hands while you spit on the law. ___ Your question: how would I feel were the government to seize my land? I would by unhappy about it, no doubt. Of course my unhappiness would be allayed somewhat if I were to be compensated for the land - you know, given something in return. In fact, government land seizures happen all the time. In the United States, this process is called Eminent Domain and is used to seize lands help by private owners intended for public use. For instance, parklands, making a highway, etc. They are paid 'fair market value' for the land, and then the title is seized. While this is hardly fair, it is necessary, and if I am compensated fairly, I bear no ill will to the government. I can simply go purchase land somewhere else with the money I received, no? Whats that they say about taking lemons and making lemonade?

I ask you this, Mr. Burns: who has more fun? Also, is'nt Bill O'Reilly on Fox News? How anyone can claim FNC is fair and balanced with falafel Bill in da house is beyond me.

What are you saying, then? While I agree, the UN has flaws, at is, as I understand, undergoing 'reform' - it does not change the fact that an institution like the United Nations is required in the world, if only a place to broker disputes between nations in a forum that is as public as possible. Religion and nationalism - pick your poison. Both of these ideas are detrimental to the advances of a global human civilization - one that stops spending on gigantic nuclear place-annihilators and starts the science down the long path of colonizing space. Spreading our eggs to many baskets - if you will - seems the natural destiny of the human race, for what are people if not explorers? We don't even have a national space program. Oh yeah, we have that robotic arm thingy. Yay. Meanwhile, the International Space Station begins to mothball, and the United States is using a space-plane designed and built in the 60s using solid state electronics. Was it really surprising that there was a critical failure? Most space based programs are satellites designed to aid a military system of one form or another. The irony.

Why? Is talking with our philosophical opponents not more likely to produce peace than simply refusing to talk, and raising our fists? I for one believe the most profound insights come from debate with our ideological enemies. I believe, conversely, that it is insanity to NOT talk with our opponents. How would the Cold War have ended if the diplomats didn't talk? More importantly, MEMRI (the source of the article) is well known for cherry-picking the most outrageous reporting from across the Middle East and presenting it to a Western audience as though it were the standard. I would suggest that while Chomsky met with Hezbollah, he hardly made the remarks you quoted. Here's some criticism of MEMRI for you, its interesting reading. The lens with which we see the world can often be clouded by invisible hands. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MEMRI (specifically, check the section under Controversy and Factual Errors)

The problem with this news story is that noone can confirm it. It appears to have been made up by Iranian dissidents who want the United States to go in and depose the current Iranian government, presumably so they can take over. Here's a link: http://hotair.com/archives/the-blog/2006/0...ges-story-true/ When people make broad inflammatory statements like these, its best to check the veracity of the claim. Its interesting to note most younger Iranians are (mostly) very pro-US and pro-West. The reason they passed an Islamic dress code (applying only to Muslims, bad enough sure but far less odious than a mark for each religion) is that the young people are dressing increasingly 'American' (jeans, sneakers, tshirts) This apparently is freaking all the hardcore clerics out, thus, they pass a law forcing people to dress 'conservatively'. Interesting though, how the press picked up the story, didnt check the claim, and ran with it. What a sleazy bunch of sensationalists.

/agreed Registering the keys makes no sense. WEP is not really 'secure'. A weakness in WEP's encryption key derivation implementation makes it possible for an attacker to derive a WEP-protected network's WEP secret key-the encryption key used by all clients on the entire WLAN-after capturing a sufficient number of packets. In other words, against a determined attacker - its useless. Most high security outfits have tried some kind of rotating WEP key system - this works, but the overhead it introduces is huge. So in other words, if your average 'script kiddie' can hack a WEP key with a laptop, 15 minutes and the backseat of a car, imagine what a real attacker can do. Registering the keys is pointless - the government can brute force a PGP key given a few hours, doubtless - a WEP key would be broken in moments. So if they need something, they can get it. I'm not sure why they would need a registry, or what purpose it could have. Here's a site that gives you an idea of the scope of the problem: http://www.wardriving.com/

Malkin, Coulter and Savage are cut from the same cloth. Vicious, petty and attention-seeking, they pander to the most extreme elements of their political base. Their arguments are spacious and easily refuted, so they are distingushed not by their elegance of discourse or for their sagacity - but rather the VOLUME they use, as they shout themselves hoarse, spewing their factually-challenged ideology. That's the word I was looking for. They're not thinkers - they're ideologues.

Quoted for truth. Please, the 'bringing out the mace' ceremony costs how much, again? And the Governor-General? Hosting the Queen and her relatives when they deign to visit? Dont get me started on the costumes. Are'nt we past court ceremonial? Christ, I hate pomp.

The linguistic policies of the Quebec government would not stand a constitutional challenge, of that there is no doubt. One wonders why noone has the intestinal fortitude to forward one - from within Quebec, of course. That being said, most separatists are, inside, conservative - and therefore, economic realists, if not capitalists at heart. The Tories will siphon lots of supporters - and many, rightly, are disillusioned about a 'free' Quebec - what does that mean, how is it different from what they have now. Few now but the radicals are willing to accept huge economic changes in order to force an idealized state. Hopefully in 50 years one will be able to open a business in Montreal without worrying about what the suits are doing in Quebec City.

There were as many as 100 million bison in North America around 1800. By 1900, there were at most a 1000 or so remaining. Some link Let's be fair here - buffalo were certainly overhunted by the natives for trade with the Europeans, but the incentive was there - guns were a huge technological leap over bows and arrows, so you can hardly blame them. (not crossbows or composites mind you, just ordinary bows). However, the nail in the coffin of the great buffalo was the train. Settlers would and did fire indiscrimately from trains at passing buffalo herds, leaving the carcasses to rot. There is blame to go around in this regard. That being said, the editorial is hardly racist or as the OP offhandedly remarks, 'redneck'. Care to back it up? In so much as the article says that the rule of law should apply equally to all citizens - thus advocating the arrest of the protestors who have caused property damage - I agree with the author.

Most of your posts are characterized by your antagonism and your seeming refusal to accept lines of argument which contradict your own position. I hope what you saw in that shameful video today, as I did, was the beginning of a sea change in Canadian policy vis-a-vis the aboriginal population. I noticed you neglected to report the use of a backhoe which has not only ruined the road, but also knocked out the power to the city of Caledonia. All acceptable actions, no doubt, to you - against the racist monolith that is the Canadian government. If a few innocents were inconvenienced, who cares - I mean, clearly their ancestors were evil racist oppressors as well, and therefore, this is karma. I would appreciate if you could expound on what exactly you would like to see the future hold for the Six Nations people. Should Canada continue to maintain what is, essentially, a two-tier society? I think your vision of the future is vague, at best, only seeing some sort of permanent relationship that involves, what, a seperate state? What aggravates most right-minded individuals about this the most is the double standard. No ordinary citizen could hold a protest which involved the destruction of public property (the road and the hydro lines) and not be held accountable. This is the single, unalienable fact - there is a rule of law in this country, and it should apply to all humans equally. If the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty occupied a road and denied its use to ordinary citizens, they would be arrested faster than you could shout 'discrimination'. In fact, Ill cite for you: From http://nefac.net/?q=node/103 Surely my cite is as valid as the ones you have used in your various and rambling screeds. You try to spin the argument into various tangents about historical wrongs - all of which are irrelevant. The fact is, the protesters are breaking the law. Ergo, they should be arrested. As an aside, one tangent does intrest me - your declaration that the Indian Act is somehow a treaty between the Six Nations and the Canadian government. As I believe has been pointed out to you repeatedly, this is not the case - it is in fact a piece of Canadian law that made political concessions to Six Nations leaders - however, it can and most certainly will be changed unilaterally. Further, concerning those treaties undertaken by both the English and the French governments which present courts have accepted as binding - I presume you are aware that the foundation of that decision is based on Canada being part of the Commonwealth. Were Canada to abolish (as many smart people propose) the link to the Crown, we would in one fell swoop lose the useless office of the Governor-General and the rubberstamp authority of the British Monarchy AND the outdated treaties signed hundreds of years ago by foreign governments. Imagine. The current confrontational attitude we are seeing in Caledonia and from Teragami's posts will only inflame the resentment amongst ordinary, non-racist, help-your-neighbour Canadians. You can only tolerate this kind of lawlessness for so long. Say what you will about the past, but we live in the present and for the future. This kind of action, as we're seeing, reminds me of the precept: 'An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.'