Charles Anthony

It is not necessary to repeat the entire post. Using the [ Quote ] Feature: Avoid using more too many quotes! Trim Your Posts and Quotes, Don't just hit "Reply" They are not going to get their money back. You are probably right with respect to overseas farmers but whether they are efficient or not is irrelevent. The issue is price. Efficiency is irrelevent. We do not need to know any technical aspects of how the imports were derived with respect to efficiency. That is correct. The consumer is entitled to rock bottom prices if an import is cheaper. Supply management = suppliers ripping off consumers It would be more efficient to put the suppliers on welfare and let consumers save money with cheaper imports.

Point of order, guys: Half of the posts in this thread contain loads and loads of whitespace and repetition of ENTIRE PREVIOUS posts. That is completely unnecessary. Avoid too much quoting! Please check out these threads: Using the [ Quote ] Feature: Avoid using more too many quotes! Trim Your Posts and Quotes, Don't just hit "Reply" Do not let threads turn into scroller-coaster rides.

No. That would make the whole family poor. Let me put it in an other different way: when parents play favorites, the family falls apart. However, I doubt this analogy will make any difference in your understanding. I suggest taking a high-school economics course. Some people have it in there head that it is best to "buy local" to insure our "money stays in Canada" but that is the height of absurdity. My sister does woodworking for a hobby. Should I get her to make my bookshelves? It takes her a year to complete one shelf and she butchers half of the planks of wood she touches. By the way, I can only afford cheap wafer-board prices and my sister only knows how to use hard-woods. None of that matters. Can anybody understand what MarGrace is trying to convey?

What is to be gained by that? Accepting a refugee is a moral act. Countries do not accept refugees for commercial reasons. It would be mischievous to tell a person that they are accepted as a Canadian refugee unless we can be responsible for promptly bringing them safely to Canada. Can we assume that extra responsibility?

He is a public figure and he may fear a reprisal. I would if I was him.He is in a no-win situation and all he can do is promote peace.

Now, your asking too much. Come on, Geo, have a heart. Step back and consider the possibility that British Columbia (and possibly other jurisdictions) seriously has a systemic education problem that needs to be addressed. We are probably just hearing from a small proportion of the population. There must be tons of other voices that are not yet heard. These students are doing the best they can to articulate their concerns. One thing that I find very exciting about hearing from these students is that they are not asking for more money to be injected into education. They are asking for better quality service. Just wait until we hear from the unions.

Correct. I see no inconsistency. Each of them should be looking behind their backs. Both things may be ridiculous but they are balancing the power. Therefore, whether you were a snivelling little hate-mongering imam or a snivelling little hate-mongering anti-imam, it makes sense for an outsider like myself to look at both of you together as less of a threat to me. You need to have more faith in your own culture and religion: pop. Give those kids television and you have instantly won the battle. An imam is not attractive. Elvis Presley came into our culture condemned as promoting The Devil's music and died as The King. Viva la Populacion!

Hmm.... I am not too sure about this..... I am going to have to sit on the fence on this one before I agree or disagree.

The archives are still maintained online: La tragédie du 2 novembre He says he asked atheists and believers. All of them were afraid. Only one accepted on the condition that his voice was disguised. This is where I doubt the journalist: he said he had no idea why they were afraid. That is a bovine submission. I think he is a liar. He never thought to ask the others why they were afraid?? More importantly, he never said what he found out from his secret recording. Nothing in his article tells you what was said in this mosque. None of this surprises me coming from the Voir. It is not a sophisticated paper, to put it mildly. It goes on the same rack as The Eye and Xtra and costs less than The National Enquirer.

Please find it because I find it highly implausible. I have "That Quebec journalist is either an idiot or a deceiver." ready to go because I know ex-Muslims who are vehemently atheist and anti-Islam. They speak Arabic too, by the way. Oh! I forgot! They still look Arabic too. Whatever is hidden can be exposed by our secret ex-Muslim-commie-spy trick. Put it this way: an anti-Western imam in a Western country should be smart enough to know that spies abound. Only stupid imams would think otherwise and I derive comfort from the following facts: - most people are not stupid - most people do not listen to stupid people - stupid people do not last Here is where you and I differ: I do not think it is necessary for anybody to say "not in our mosque" because they can vote with their feet. The highest concentration of Muslims are not in the prairies -- there is a lot of choice when it comes to mosques. Compared to The Almighty Dollar, the preacher (stupid or smart) is not very attractive. Every church (or social group) deals with that and the wacko ones peter out.

Why did the military say it was too complicated at the time?

Guys, try to reduce the excessive quoting. Tap into: Using the [ Quote ] Feature: Avoid using more too many quotes!

For the purposes of relating it to stealing the roof (thief gets less benefit compared to cost of replacing) analogy, I understand. However, you are not responsible for making sure there are enough pennies in circulation any more than you are responsible for making sure you do not take the last banana in the grocery store. What if somebody wants a banana after you take the last one? what is the cost to society? Retailers can do that now on their own. We should encourage it.

I will not defend corporal punishment however, many adults (of all races and creeds) do. What is your point? I know an old man who admits to being a trouble-maker in school and was hit on the head by a nun-teacher with a crucifix/staff-thingie. Big deal. No, I do not speak Arabic. Big deal. The argument is feeble because radical Muslims are not the only people who speak Arabic. Our commie-spy strategy can still work. We will just have to outsource leg-work. The end. Give them American television and pop music and a taste of what The Almighty Dollar can do (and how easy it is to earn) and the second-generation Canadian Muslims are on track. Agreed. I will not dispute that Fred Phelps has much less influence than big city Muslim clerics. I insist that within a few generations, the radical-anti-West Muslim clerics will see their congregations dwindle and the problem will solve itself.

No, because you have the right to keep those thousands of pennies sitting in your jar doing nothing for ever and ever. Amen. Whatever cost is incurred by the Mint to replace your pennies is imposed by the central bankers themselves and not you. The Mint could solve that problem by striking pennies with a different metal or paper or not at all. Comedic arguments of how it is "illegal" to deface currency are boring since coins are a drop in the bucket compared to how we exchange money. Furthermore, the impact of injecting $600 of copper into the copper market is so dissipated that the question is unanswerable. How is melting down your pennies different from discovering a copper mine and making more copper available to the copper market? and polluting the environment in the process?

The restaurant gets most of it. I am sure the milk-man delivery (remember those?) company who leaves the bottles at the restaurant door-step wants a bit of the pie too. You can not be serious. By limiting trade (quotas, tariffs, quality standards, memberships, etc.) the domestic milk industry makes less milk products available to Canadians. What happens when supply is held down? Prices are held up. That is the subsidy or welfare. The consumer is forced to pay higher prices. The farmer getting only $0.17 may seem like very little but it would be far less if the farmers did not collude. Let me put it a different way. If Canada was one great big family and YOU were the head of the household, would you force all of your children to buy expensive agriculture products from their siblings if they could buy cheaper produce from outside the family?? or Would you all engage in producing what you produced the most efficiently and trade outside?

The recent story of Alison Quets kidnapping her twins two years after they were born turns her children into victims of adults. The legal details surrounding this case are bizarre but morally irrelevent. Every single country and State within the U.S.A. has different laws surrounding time limts after which a mother may take back her adopted child. Incidentally, Alison Quets reversed her decision 10 hours after signing away her parental rights and in Florida, they are allowed a window of up to three days. Without knowing everything that occurred among these children and the adults, it is impossible to judge what is best for the children. Maybe nothing is best and nothing matters anymore. Children need to bond to their parents. Clearly, ALL OF THE ADULTS INVOLVED are responsible for disrupting that. At the very least, these children will grow up knowing that all of their parents loved them enough to fight to have them back. Unfortunately, that may backfire. As far as the welfare of the children is concerned, the adoptive parents could have kidnapped them from their birth mother. The children will not likely to have the capacity to be certain who to trust until after the need for bonding is completed. My arm-chair quarter-back recommendation to adoptive parents is not to accept "visitation" rights from the birth parents in exchange for a child. What I find distressing is that adopted children are now a commodity. International adoptions are attractive to avoid birth parents from demanding the return of their children. However, international adoptions can backfire. Occasionally, newly acquired children are returned to their home countries (as fuzzy-wuzzy Christmas-gift pets are returned to kennels following News Years) after the adoption-joy is over and the reality of raising an infant takes hold. Children need to trust adults since they do not have the strength to resort to coercion. If adopted children were adults, they would be called slaves. There have been a few previous threads that have discussed various issues surrounding adoption. Most notably: Blacks are accessories for whites Queering the Family Tree -- Is it possible or a bit dishonest? I highly recommend reading them. They are both a nice read and cleverly ahead of their times.

You are just being funny. Copper IS a precious metal. Everything is relative. The price of copper has gone up by about 40% last year.

Welcome to the forum.

Not being able to speak Arabic is a feeble argument. Where did you get that idea? -- and I could look at the rants in tons of other churches of other faiths. Should we start boogeymanizing Fred Phelps now? No. We laugh at him despite the fact that he advocates violence. I know of Christians who are so socially inept that they feel it is wrong to associate with people who are not members of their church. I do not mean other Christians but rather people who are not their own Reformed-Baptist-Methodist-Catholic-Presbyterian-Calvinist-ReBorn-Whatever subdivision of Christianity. They truly believe that their subdivision is the only right one and all others are evil incarnations of Satan. The extent at which they permit conversing with others (Christian or otherwise) in any social context is primarily to bring them into the fold. You would not believe how many people they believe should be violently killed in the name of God. I know a woman who was forced to sit at the back of her church because she was pregnant and unwed. It is old-fashioned backward sine-Folie to single out one or two muslim clerics. I will repeat: I know tons of muslims and they all seem to be like any other people who are raised in traditionally strict households or religions. They are the same and they aspire to the American Dream like we do.

Forgive me. I assumed you had the intelligence to figure out that I was not arguing your point but rather mine. What Afghanis are fighting against The Mission? -- and you can not defend the methodology of the poll you cited. You asked for "Anything else?" up above and I asked you something else. You could not even answer the questions. Congratulations. You are your own winner. Keep supporting the troops. Do you think they would benefit from somebody who can not answer questions??? Maybe they can.

It is a non-coercive form of leadership and government. It is a social club. [i am not going to pay attention to The Crusades or The IslamoExpansionophobia arguments until you all hold my hand and praise the glories of Anarchy. Our Elder has more patience than I do and actually explains why in his post #14 above.] They separate us from most of the animal kingdom too. So does television. [i hate smilies.]

Not only did I read your link but I read between the lines. Yeah, right. The Afghanis were able to keep the Soviets out and now they need our training. Unlike you, I am not a sucker for military propaganda. Yes. Answer my questions. 1) What Afghanis are fighting? 2) Defend your poll. The methodology of this "poll" says that people were asked face-to-face. Do you think the pollsters sought the opinion of the people fighting too?

Not entirely. I will only give you one of those -- or maybe one and a half. I do not understand Arabic -- there is one. I have been in a mosque during prayer time but without making an assumption of what sex you are, I will say there is a fifty percent chance that you would be forbidden -- there is a half. I can live with that. I maintain the Opening Post shows bias and generalizes across all muslim clerics. Given the context that we live in a world filled with peaceful muslims, I suggest that the bias is also insulting and thus a rant.

Stop right there! Before you go any further. Let me get this straight: an overwhelming majority.... hmm...... Who is doing all of the fighting?????? I guess if "an overwhelming majority" support The Mission In Afghanistan!, we could just supply The Overwhelming Majority with arms, could we not??? -- but noooooooo, that is not what we want. God forbid we should let the poor Afghanis defend themselves. We want The Mission to go our way. I call your bluff. The methodology of this "poll" says that people were asked face-to-face. I am sure the pollsters sought the opinion of the people fighting too. Who is this World Public Opinion anyway? Sounds like a stupid name.