Charles Anthony

Thanks for the insight but some of us work better with deadlines. I guess I should have asked: Do we have a deadline for this apparent homework assignment?

Yes, but sadly there is a snowball's chance in hell for that mighty big 'if'.No, actually it is quite the opposite: your participation in the Guardian Angels is proving my point. Keep it up. One step at a time. You are taking one step away from the state and one step towards anarchy. Do not stop. You are taking one small step for man and one giant leap for man-kind, thank you very much. I believe that they are a supplement to 'state policing', not a replacement. Further, it is the leniency and bureaucracy of the courts, and not the police themselves, that are the biggest problem. (apart from the crimials, of course)Sugar-coat it all you want. You are only kidding yourself. The bottom line is that you are resorting to a non-state and concrete solution to something which you entrusted to the state. You are a supplier in a market in which the state can not fully provide. Remember, you are a Guardian Angel out of your own free-will -- you can quit any time. You are doing it to protect yourself and your neighbors. With enough time, you will be asking me for a membership card.

Are you suggesting that countries need more market intervention to stay afloat? Things are a little more complicated but they may be even worse than suspected. The whole world may be in for a shock. 321gold.com

So the long and the short of it is that you are against foreigners of any kind.

It would be a daily occurence if anarchy reigned.No, it would not. If people respected eachother's rights and freedom, nobody could afford to do crime under the watch of state police. Partly, partly the dealer's fault, and mostly the kid's fault.Don't forget, crack dealers are basically predators, they know that if they can get someone to try it, they can get them hooked, and ensure more sales.I agree that they are ruthless predators. No doubt about it. However, I believe the problems with people seeking and accepting drugs pre-dates (please accept the pun) their first exposure to the predator. Parenting plays a major role and responsibility -- things that are easier to shed when there is the delusion of a state changing our diapers and picking up after ourselves. If non-anarchy reigned, this would be a daily occurence: You took the words right out of my mouth! I commend you but you are wearing rose-colored glasses. If you are not a vigilante group, what are you going to do when you come across violent crime? Sit and watch? Call the police? I would hope that you step in and exercise good judgment to stop violence. The Guardian Angels are a response to ineffective state policing. They are a peaceful and inevitable step towards anarchy. Yes it is fair. How do you explain the fact that the other kids do NOT smoke crack?? Everybody knows everything in Grand Manan -- except the parents. I believe it. Did you know any other kids who did NOT do drugs? Your kids will be exposed to drugs and dealers too. When that time comes, do you think YOU will be better prepared than your parents were? I do not know you but I think you probably will. I believe parents play a major role in forming the attitudes of their children. Children develop a sense of understanding actions-consequences from their parents. I am willing to bet that you have come across at least one child who said "NO" to drugs because that child knew the parents at home would kill him. That is what I mean. No need for inflamatory bigotry -- there is enough of that already. Unfortunately, those parents were a bit too late in exercising good judgment with raising their children. They also set a bad example. When these young people in Grand Manan get off the island, they will not be able to survive long if they try to use the same judgment when settling scores.

Do we have a deadline?

So.... therefore, it must be bad....? In Calgary, businesses are required by law to make available some place where people can tie up their horse. Seriously, if we were in an election right now and somebody tapped into this forum and found a million multiple threads extolling the virtues of the Liberal party (with all of the Global Warming baggage that often comes with it), would you want them to pull out this stupid Supreme Court ruling and shut down this forum??? Come on. It is a stupid ruling.

I do not trust the judgment of the Grand Manan villagers. Would YOU trust the judgment of adults who let their children smoke crack???? I would not. Would YOU trust the judgment of adults who do not have the discipline to control their own children??? I would not. Somehow, I do not think the adults of crack-smoking children should be meting out justice. Here is a different aspect of this situation which is disturbing: people and children throughout the whole entire world can get illicit drugs. Hell, I can walk down my street and get drugs. If our kids buy and consume illicit it is our own fault. Are we going to start blaming the car dealers every time there is a car crash??? It is not justice. It is brute violence -- plain and simple. The actions of these vigilantes is the same as a lynch mob. However, do not forget: this happened not only under the watch of a state police force but as a result of the state police force.

I am not going to argue whether Quebec is a have or have-not province. Whether it is or is not, I believe the same thing. Let us assume the worst case scenario: Quebec is a have-not province. In the case of Quebec, the people with real jobs will continue to have real jobs. The people with fake jobs (any industry or employment that depends on federal funding) will have to face the music: 1) lose their fake job and get a real job 2) move out of Quebec Either way, the mooches and the mooching will stop. Therefore, in my opinion, the people left in Quebec will be better off. I realize that federal waste -- or should I say: spending and funding and transfers and equalization? -- eventually spin off to benefit many other sectors of an economy. I realize that the people with real jobs will lose out too when Quebec separates. However, in my book, that is tough luck. They are partly mooching too. Like I said before, after all of the dust settles, the only people left in Quebec are the people who do not mooch. That is a good outcome.

You are complaining about a logo?? From the quoted website: Liberal ClimateLeave them be. Other "charities" or "non-profit" organizations rally to support parties all of the time.

Congratulations! You finally figured it out.

The answer is simple: "Calgary" does NOT have any claim to benefit from the oil in a completely other part of Alberta. Period. Who is "Calgary" anyway? This seeming paradox is no paradox at all. It represents the problem of statism. It is the paradox of statism. It would not exist if we were free of the delusion that "Calgary" or "Canada" were able to make a claim on anything.

We'd? You and .... who else?? Oh! Yeah! We have been through this already. Go back to post #131 and repeat.

I find it interesting that children usually see adult issues in simple terms. They have an easier time focussing on things that matter most. I agree that would be ideal but I would rather a child be adopted instead of a ward of the state. That sounds callous. Well, you will be spreading the family values which is likely more important than the genes as far as your adoptive parents are concerned.Maybe but maybe not. Some people are hell-bent on spreading their genes. I know one couple who has already spent $60,000 in the past year to do so through laboratory means. They have not yet given up. I do not accept this argument at all. It reminds me of a Margaret Laurence novel (are any of them any different from eachother?) whereby an unwed mother has just given birth in the hospital. The new mother wants to know if her child is healthy and the nurses want to fill out forms. They ask the name of the child's father and the mother refuses to answer. Regardless of the situation, I do not believe children have a right to know their genetics. It is a ridiculous demand. If a man is not present raising a child, too bad. It dishonors the sacrifice of motherhood to violate her privacy in this matter. I disagree and I believe you are naive. Are you open to the possibility that some women lie about who their child's father actually happens to be? Are you open to the possibility that it may be to the child's best interest that such truth never be told? I am also reminded of a comical tune from the Barbadoes of which there are many versions. The premise of the tune is that a young man brings girls home to meet his parents and with each one, his father pulls him aside and tells him that the girl is actually his half-sister. The boy gets fed up and tells his mother. Here is the punch-line: I believe that the art of geneology and the concept of family trees will go by the wayside (along with the civil concept of marriage too) because people see them as either too inclusive or too exclusive. Eventually, it will become impractical as a tool much like asking "How much does a car cost?" is impossible to address. When there were only Model-T's around, it was an easy question to answer.

There could be something else that is "hurting" the auto industry. If mink coats go out of style, would you say that the fashion industry is "hurting" the mink coat industry? Are American cars so great? Do they have to be made in North America to be good cars? If we allowed free trade in the auto industry, it might be cheaper to send all of our domestic auto-workers home and pay their exact salary in welfare with the money we save on cheaper imported cars. You could even impose an import duty.

Why were you a fan of him at that point? Are you sure Jean Chretien changed? Are you blaming that on the governments? What exactly do you fear?

Citation?

Forget about predicting the accounting. What if a carbon tax created a political back-lash that pitted one group of Canadians against an other group? What if, as a result, some Canadians decided to declare independence? I think that would be good. Would that be good for Canadians? I think so.

Citation?? Anyway, Canada does have a media that produces Canadian stories. The question is how much should the tax-payer fund? Should the tax-payer fund more than they want? or should the government tell them they should want more? Is this a way to define a nation? Is the essense of nationhood like an ON-OFF swith or like a dimmer? Is it an either-or situation or can we vary in degree? Given that Canadians do not consume CanCon and state-supported entertainment exclusively, is Canada a nation now? Actually, I think the real insanity lies in answering the question: Whatever happened to our jDobbin?!?!? [is there some nasty political pole-reversal computer virus spreading??]

Maintain order?? I do not think anybody got order in this incident. In my opinion, the do-gooders did get a free pass. Why the contradiction?? Is justice really an appropriate word for all of these instances? I do not think so. In Grand Manan, the police claim to have been in the middle of a secretive sting operation. On the surface, things may seem more civilized for the police to take care of justice. However, I think the best lesson to be learned from this is that if we are to have state-run policing, those police should be a little more in tune with the people they serve and protect. In Ghana, villagers ostracize people suspected of witch-craft: Guardian.co.ukAlso, people who fear an impending accusation or violent reprisal will flee with their family to these camps -- even if they are innocent. They have become a safe-haven for out-casts. With enough time, such justice based on superstitions can only see the population of the witch-camps outnumber the original villagers. How will they mete out justice then? How do they mete out justice in the witch-camps when crops fail? Maybe the witch-camps will become a little more open-minded than their original villagers?

By what right should the police hold the exclusive power? This might set a precedent for more vigilante justice. None of them were convicted of assault. Boston.com It is hard to tell whether their claim of self-defense was accepted.

Discussed here: Vigilante justice -- drug house burned by local residents

The difference is that the banks do not force you to do business with the banks whereas the government threatens you with imprisonment if you do not pay the government. You can call it that if you want. I call it debasing the currency. Anyway, the currency belongs to the government. Therefore, I suppose they have the right to do what ever they want with it. What do you think will happen if the banks and the governments stops "printing" money? It is a two-way street. When I go to the bank, I receive credit for my own interests. What is the public's interest with respect to the money supply anyway???? Here is something a little more exciting: Metro.co.ukHow low will the tax-man go?

I am curious to know: what attracted you initially to Jean Chretien and the Liberals? what turned you away from Jean Chretien and the Liberals?

What a shameful way to describe our fellow man.Are the Kurds treated fairly in Turkey?