myata

Another key one being of course, the summit security (G8 and 20), with the total price tag of 1 billion (G&M: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/g8-g20/news/g8g20-security-bill-to-approach-1-billion/article1580865/). Lots of jobs there forget Adscam with its paper flags.

It must be yet another brilliant stimulus measure: Canada wide seal hunt to kick start the economy and reduce unemployment.

No sorry, you seem to have been misinformed. For Palestine the deal was a swiss cheese state (interspersed with sought to be legalized illegal settlements) and formal abandonment of any sovereign claim to their capital East Jerusalem. I recommend trying to stay more current on the actual situation next time around. To DoP, etc, let's just say that nuke Korea and Iran scare me no more than nuke Israel. This is because I attempt to base my conclusions on facts rather than idealistic notions or emotions. After all, of all the states and regimes that ever held these weapons, we all know which one actually used it against humans, mostly unarmed civilians as needs to be added. Civilized democracies have no lesser aptitude at justifying and rationalizing even most atrocious acts, and when they do perhaps I'll find their claims of moral superiority better grounded in reality than as of present.

Nope. The only possibility in this situation (where openly provocative and agressive behaviour by one party is smiled upon, apologised and ignored) is the continuation of conflict. Forget all peaceful cermons, the act does it all.

Really? When was the last time you looked out the window? Guessing, some 20 years ago? Yes more token of shining democracy, like that.. Afghanistan? Sure.. complete with the notorious Shah's secret police There you go. "Western ally" simply has to "most liberal" and so on, regards of what the reality wants to show us, right?

The whole premise that one side in the conflict should be allowed to possess these weapons itself undermines possibility of fair settlement to the extent of near impossibility. Continuing massive support of Isreal regardless of their act puts last nail in the affair. Till Israel is put under the same pressure to refrain from agressive and illegal policies as their counterpart, they'll have no reason to change anything and reciprocal injustice and violence will feed the conflict as ever.

But of course it is. The only question is, who decides what and how constitutes the terrible threat to "security"? One jerk thinks it's bare bottom, while another - covered face.. how do you pick between the two?! Because you really, have to!

Small government, fiscally responsible policies, transparency and accountability, Canadian taxpayers paying for their own brainwashing.

Or any other, no less (and probably much more) deadly -cracies: Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan, Russia (by far incomplete list only from the brief history of the 20-s century)

Layton as the leader of official opposition? Layton star political performer? Layton uniting progressive political forces in the country? OMG. It would have been funny if it wasn't so .. boring.

Well, somebody massively finances Israel despite its openly aggressive and provocative policy in the territories it occupies. As balance is always establishes itself in the nature, somebody's had to be found to finance the other side. Study the natural order of things! I do hope that no war is coming in that long suffering region, this summer or next or as long as possible.

Indeed you were asked specifically about what "compromises" pertaining to integrity of your control over your body you would be willing to accept. And all we get in place of intelligible answer is the standard offhand "left" blabber. Talk about hypocrisy.

Or you think that when you want to dictate what people should be allowed to do with their bodies; or what they could wear on their heads, as opposed to their bottoms; it would be anyhow different from those you want to keep in ridicule and moral inferiority? Nope, it makes you quite similar. In fact, as similar as an identical twin. Try to understand that.

There're people on neverending morality quest right here around us (believe it or not!) so why go far, all the way to Iran, you can express your astonishment and disbelief right here and now.

Nope, no answers. Only silence as dead as in the heart of Wahabi desert at about 1.59 past midnight. But no worries. We only have to wait couple of weeks/months for the same people to pop up with the same old unprovable and irrational but nonetheless highly cherished ideas that simply have to be imposed on everybody else in the world.

There are many who'd speak on behalf of Canada with unknown mandate to do so, but what Canadian voters appear to be telling us for a while now, is what no one party can speak for Canada, or even any one side of political spectrum of Canada, and parties have to find a way to cooperate and advance common priorities for the benefit of the country.

No, Iggy will wait till the country comes to its senses i.e. falls under his intellectual charms. Even if it'll take forever.

No I'd rather see liberal opposition fragmenting a tad further, perchance leading Tories into majority territory with popular support in low 30s. If that wouldn't stir us into thinking seriously about our political system, it'll be sure sign that it's the time for all us to go to sleep, politically.

"Right" in what sense? Since the times of great apes (and probably long before them, maybe even as a basic principle of life) "right" really means "can". So, we either terminate them (and call it something, like e.g. "harvest of intelligence"). Or, the other way around. Either way, the fittest will survive and life advances.

Together, Liberal (25) + NDP (15) + Green (12) = 52% But, coalition is big and scary boo for Iggy's partocrats. They have much better idea, they only have to figure out how to break it to us (we can do with more power... all of it.. now!)

Not gods, for sure, as we're almost certain to find a way to screw it up. But it'll sure add more fun into the equation... even if we don't really need any more, busy as we are sorting out what was already created before us.

Oh, it's too long to explain, but it must be here somewhere, this or the other thread. No it's not about Alberta, but it must have implications for Alberta too because, as pointed out multiple times and by many, the reason for this change has never been unexplained rationally which leaves some of us puzzled(and worried about exactly what it is supposed to signify).

Dr Venter institute has reported creation of bacteria species controlled entirely by artificial DNA: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science_and_environment/10132762.stm This sounds like stuff right off sci fi shelf. It's sure to spark discussions in many disciplines.

As well as questions still waiting to be answered.. even if in another thread. So we'll have to try again: What exactly is the reason for Harper's government to stop funding for abortions where it is allowed by laws of the country? And since it reverses a long standing policy of Canada, and is inconsistent with our internal status quo, what implications should be drawn from this government act for Canada itself? Are we looking to reopen the debate? Why? What? Which? No? Then what's the meaning of this remote policy change?