Chuck U. Farlie

No way of knowing without testing the theory, but I bet MMP would have got a lot more votes if YES came first on the ballot instead of second... I bet a lot of people that voted NO just checked the first box without reading the question (or being informed about it)

Although speed might play a factor in some of the accidents that occur, it is not the biggest problem. Limit the engine sizes and top speed all you want, and you will still have accidents everyday simply because a lot of people simply cannot drive or will not drive in a safe manner, and police are not arresting people for their bad habits - basically because it is a lot harder to convict someone for an improper lane change or tailgating than it is for speeding... With speeders cops merely have to wait at the side of the road and point their radar... easy... This summer in Toronto has been horrible for the number of truck accidents, but limiting the truck's speed won't solve this problem because the majority of these accidents that were the truck driver's fault were rollovers due to too high of speed entering curves... You would have to limit the truck's speed to 50km/h to avoid these accidents... the better solution is to enforce proper training and testing for a person to get a license... and maybe people should be retested on the road every 5 years as well...

FTA... what can be done to fight automatic punishments such as this that put too much power in the police hands? Is the only way to fight it is to get busted somehow while not actually doing the crime (maybe asking a prostitute for directions or something)... and then fighting it in court? Or is there some lobby group to join? Or how?

Yet again we are letting our rights slide away on the slippery slope... I have never and will never drive drunk. I also never speed at 50km/h or more, or stunt ride, or race, or what-have-you, but: First they brought in the instant guilty assumption for drunk drivers... automatically suspension of their licenses and impounding their cars before any trial takes place... we put up with it. Now it is the racing law... weave in and out of traffic, speed too much, etc, and you are hit with an automatic license suspension and your vehicle is impounded... again, without a trial. So why do we continually put up with this erosion of our rights? I, for one, am not at all worried about being busted for the above crimes, but that isn't the point... What is next? What else will they decide that we can be guilty of before proving out innocence... more than a year after the alleged offense and long after the damage is done (money lost, possible jobs lost, reputation tarnished, etc)?

In what way? You mean like paying less tax or paying less (ok... none) tuition? Yeah... they have way less than recently arrived immigrants. Give me a status card any day... I will make good use of it.

I thought a terrorist is someone who willfully acts on such threats. The definition is getting more and more broad as we along eh? It can merely be threatened force.... which he has done.

How is he a terrorist? I think he can be compared to a terrorist because Brant said they have weapons and are prepared to use them... therefore inciting terror in the citizens who may be confronted by these protesters, as well as with the police who may have to face an armed conflict.

I had no plans to travel Eastward this weekend, but I can understand how it must feel for the thousands of people who would like to visit family or friends and cannot due to these massive blockades of major roads and rails. What can we as the general voting public do? How can we let the politicians know that we will not stand for the tolerance of this lawlessness? All of these native protesters should be rounded up off of the highway or rail lines and imprisoned, if they resist they should still be taken as resisting prisoners, if there is violence towards the police then the police should be allowed to use all means to quell the violence. It irks me to know that they are getting away with this, but what can I do? Will a letter help? Will a telephone call do anything? If they want to protest, go ahead and do it outside of the government buildings... they are definitely not helping their cause with the general public by pulling stunts like this.

Their criteria, in case you were too lazy to find it yourself:

how exactly is it Ontario biased? They compared salary with housing costs, unemployment rate, growth rate, murder rate, climate, etc... How exactly did any of these factors unfairly choose Ontario?

oh... that wasn't hard to find... here it is: http://www.canadianbusiness.com/rankings/b...tolive/list.jsp?

I heard one of the guys who wrote this article and did the research on the radio today... Apparently they tried not to use any subjective criteria like: nicest people, prettiest view, etc etc... They only used things they could put numbers on... like average income, average housing cost, etc etc... to me it sounded like a pretty fair and accurate way to compare places. I would also be interested in seeing the entire list...

If you are so worried about the changing ethnic mix here, MikeDavid00, then do something to solve the problem... Do like the Catholics suggest... throw away your birth control and get breeding. Tell your neighbours and family to throw away your birth control and get breeding... maybe if everyone has families of 8 or 10 again then the government won't have to allow so much immigration...

I guess we have to start searching for some new planets...

Are you sure about this? I lived in the region and have been to Malaysia more times than I remember and I don't seem to remember many reports of beheadings there. There were some school girls beheaded in Indonesia... on the island of Sulawesi...Central Sulawesi, somewhat near Poso... where Muslims kill Christians and Christians kill Muslims fairly regularly... maybe that is what you meant. I think the non islamic non sharia world has a lot more to worry about in Indonesia than they do in Malaysia... Certain places in Indonesia are already adopting Sharia law, such as: City of Padang, West Sumatra, school girls of any religion must wear head scarves. City of Tangerang, West of Jakarta and the area containing the international airport: Women must be off the street after dark... in 2004 a pregnant school teacher was arrested for suspicion of being a prostitute because she was waiting for her husband to pick her up in the early evening... There are many many more examples... but I don't feel like finding them... just saying... Indonesia is much more of a worry than Malaysia in regards to adopting sharia law...

Am I the only one thinking 'Who cares?"??? I like to talk about my own death (hopefully a long way off) as 'kicking the bucket', is that a disgusting way of putting it?

That is likely exactly who this guy was, Argus, and I wouldn't be surprised that his weapons were legally purchased and registered (if required) as well. I think it is useful to make weapons difficult to get though, and I like some of the suggestions August1991 made in another post about gun control. I like to think of my own example... I know how to use a weapon. We had some where I lived growing up in the country, and I fine tuned my skills during my brief time in the CAF. However, if I were to 'lose it' any time soon, I wouldn't even know how to get a weapon. I have zero under-world connections so I guess I would visit Lebarons and ask for an FAC application, or whatever it's called. Presumably I would have to take some sort of course and get some sort of license... all before I could even buy a gun! By that time I would likely be out of the killing mood. I think for the average Canadian leading the average life guns are not even thought of and would be very hard for them to get in the event that they 'lost it' temporarily - which is a good thing. Making access to guns easy only increases the chances of gun violence during periods of rage or depression, and I don't believe that the threat that other people might be 'packing' will change the actions of one who is acting out of rage or depression. Have you ever seen someone 'lose it' without a weapon? They go ballistic and often towards people that can easily control them (i.e. cops, bouncers, etc). Their state of mind at the time isn't clear for them to perceive or care about the threat that other people pose... they only want to lash out with the rage that they have. They are not operating with logic when in such a state of mind.

From the star today, see article below. What concerns me is how are they going to differentiate between speeding and racing? For example, If you get charged for racing, how can you prove that you weren't racing that other guy doing 120km/h, you were merely speeding and coincidently he was going the same speed... maybe he was trying to keep up to you. The police might catch you and another guy, both complete strangers, doing 120km/h on the 400 - since they caught you at the same time they might call it racing - how can you prove otherwise? Hell... they might even catch someone 5 minutes later and just argue that he was losing the race. What if you are not racing, but the other guy is... you are not even speeding, but are driving aggressively by accelerating fast, corning fast, etc... this guys sees you and tries to keep up - now the cops ding you both for racing? I think this legislation, if passed, may be too fuzzy and some people are going to have some difficult court cases to go through.

How did they take it out? A couple of trucks full of gold? Since money of that amount is typically in electronic form... can we really say that it 'resides' somewhere? Anyway... back to the demolition of these buildings.... From watching Discovery we see that even with moderate sized buildings they do not just strap TNT to a beam and let'er rip. They actually have to drill holes into the beams and strategically place the charges... So you are saying that on the night of the 10th and the morning of the 11th no one noticed the hundreds of government guys running around with core-drillers and hammer drills placing the charges, completing the wiring, etc.? All of the 24 hour security was oblivious to the noise and dust, and even when people started arriving at work and parking in the garages they didn't notice any demolition activity? Sounds like a very far-fetched and impossible scheme to pull off to me. I didn't read the 47 pages of this tripe... is there any where in there where people asked real destruction experts for their advice? If Yes, who are these destruction experts? Do they still stand by their word until this day? If they were to have taken down these towers, what would the process entail, and would it be possible to do while keeping the buildings in operation and having no one notice... not even the security guards?

Give me a break. You are suggesting that independent contractors were hired to run thick wires from supporting beam to supporting beam without connecting it to anything? Don't you think at least some of the workers would be asking 'What the hell are we doing this for?" "What's the purpose?" Wouldn't there have been at least a few contractors who have spoken up and said: "Yeah, I was in WTC 1 in June 2000... they had me for a week running some 5 gauge wire in basement 3.... but I didn't connect it to anything... weird shit!"????? All of these theories you are giving to us are so far fetched and unlikely... you have to be quite the dreamer to believe them. Occam's razor: All things being equal, the simplest solution tends to be the best one. Fuel laden jets were flown into buildings.... these buildings burnt and collapsed... get over it.

I'll give you one reason: I talk about indisputable evidence and listen to & quote experts. I can prove 911 was an inside job using undisputable evidence. Dyer speaks from his rectum, there is a lot of demand for that these days which is why he publishes in 100 news sources. O'Reilly is payed attention to by even more people than Dyer - you an O'Reilly fan. I have a degree in engineering but program for a living. I think there are 17 pages or more on this forum of amateurs disputing your evidence... I could only imagine how experts would tear it apart - I hardly call that indisputable. So what is your undeniable indisputable proof?

Hahaha... you are smarter than Dyer? For starters, he can spell. Secondly, he is published weekly in 100's of world wide newspapers. What is it you do for a living? Give me 1 reason why I should believe any of the crap you type on a discussion forum versus an internationally recognized journalist, columnist, broadcaster and lecturer on international affairs who has served in 3 navies? The choice is easy for me... whack-job? or respected journalist? hmmmmm... hard choice. from http://www.gwynnedyer.net/

I like Gwynne Dyer's point of view about 911 in the article posted below... makes more sense than the conspiracy theorists...

Sorry... not intentionally being dense, but I don't understand the paragraph written above, nor how it relates to accents or even appearances for that matter... Can anyone explain it to me, or should I just forget it?

I remember my sister once talking about some cultural training that she got from IBM for international business relations... she was in sales at the time. Apparently during the course they taught that if people have a British accent, be careful not to over-assume their intelligence... basically assume they are dumber than what they sound. Conversely, in this course they instructed the participants to assume that Americans with a southern drawl are actually smarter than how they sound - and not to assume they are dumb based on their slow speech. (They might have missed the mark on this one! ;-))