Jerry J. Fortin

I like this idea! You have to have a clean slate to have a seat on the Security Council. There is an idea worth promoting don't you think? That would mean that everybody who doesn't have a clean slate would have to leave the table right? Its got my vote!

What are you suggesting Topaz? That the CIA did the deed? Do you really believe that they would murder their own citizens?

Yup, that about sums it up nicely!

Morals and religion have failed to provide protecton to citizens. Actions not concepts determine fate. There should be a law against the political use of either in the administration of a country. Governments should stop telling people how to live and instead figuring out an easier way for citizens to realize there potential. Just as the day of the city state has passed, there is a new age possibility where the nation state will cease to exist in favor of globalism. When society finally gets to the point where national protectionism is no longer required as a means of preventing citizens from harm originating outside of their borders the entire question of morality and religion will return to where it belongs in the homes and communities of citizens. Such things must never be enforced on individuals, they can only be accepted in consent.

Missile defense is a good investment. Defense being the operative word. It is not an offensive weapon and as such should give the average human a little hope for the future. These things are not the rudimentary nuke verses nuke system that the Russians developed decades ago, but instead are very highly advanced interceptors. The present kill ratio leaves a lot to be desired, but it is better than nothing at all and it poses no threat to any nation. North Korea is a problem, and it will stay that way until they get a chance to blackmail our American brothers. What Korea whats is money, and they WILL use nuclear blackmail to get it. That is why Bush wants multilateral negotiations to spread out the cost of dealing with this wingnut. This is obviously just my opinion and I have nothing besides supposition to support it but we are all entitled to our opinions. I see two options with North Korea, pay the price or don't. If we pay now, we will continue to pay forever. If we don't pay now we will have to stand together and accept the fact that a nuclear war is a likely outcome. Millions of people will die, and the clean up costs will be horrific, but I don't don't see any other possible scenarios. Sure you could use conventional weapons to take him or his infrastructure out, but there exists a possibility that he has assembled a warhead already and an ICBM is not the only means of delivering one of the damned things. He could be prepared for a first strike of either conventional or nuclear origins and have developed a plan to attack either South Korea or the United States with a completed weapon in something as common as a cargo carrier or something. With Japan talking about a premptive strike, you simply can't ignor his possible response to such a thing. Remember that Japan is the only nation to have witnessed the horrific use of this type of weapon. They are not likely willing to be on the receiving end again. These are dangerous times people.

It is the sheer scale of the endeavor that is daunting! We are talking about literally millions of authors involved in the current environment and that will only expand. But is possible, that I admit. My question is why bother? Why not simply incorporate an independent columnist site with huge server capacity and have that specific operation provide guidelines and editorial oversight. The concept of regulation within the industry to provide authenticity is noble, but again how practical is it in reality?

Granted a lot of injustice did happen, no contest on that. That is ancient history, Attempting to use the mistakes of the past to profit from is a little over the top don't you think? You want land? Which land, is it occupied? You want money? How much? What is it that you truely seek?

I think that instability is already here. Some people, actually a lot of people use blogs to voice their political and social opinions. It is becoming very common to research things on the internet and come up with blog sites as referance material. Having said that the internet is the greatst thing since sliced bread when it comes to democracy and free speech. A rating system may be preferable but I don't think it is feasible within the internet environment. In order to do this it would required service provider intervention, and that is censorship.

I am no science wizard, but it seems to me that there is something going on with the environment. Open ice at the north pole, ozone holes at the south pole, chuncks of ices miles long and wide breaking off in the Antarctic, these things are not "normal" Perhaps on a global lifespan scale they may be, but not in my life time. I live in Alberta, and I remember the Columbia Icefield used to be a damned sight closer than it is now to the parking lot. Eskimos have seen lightning, that is beyond not just living memory but beyond the story telling experience of those folks. Something is happening. By the time the acedemics and spin doctors have decided anything I figure that for all intents and purposes the equator will seem to have moved about 15 degrees north! When the Americans run out of water from draining that big aquifer in the midwest, opinions on this "junk science" will change I think.

Actually I had never heard that description before, I always believed it to be the Commonwealth Air Training Program. That was in error I see now with looking into it to refresh my memories. The scheme itself did not provide much industrial infrastructure in Canada though. While it did build a lot of airbases and support facilities, I don't think you can point to those places that still exist and say that they were the basis of our industrial development. I will ask a simple question, would the Allies have won the war without the help of the United States of America?

I think the future will revolve around streaming media into cell phones. Personal, portable and relatively inexpensive. Look for a complete elimination of long distance charges for everything but international calls soon. I think the next little treasure will be print on demand booths! Instead of a phone booth, you walk in, plug in and down load to a pay per print facility. Cell phones have GPS capability, so I will suggest that local mapping technology will rolled into a sort of super yellow pages to give people complete directions on how to get to a place for shopping. Printed out at a pay per print booth of course! Times are achangin'!

Augest may be an acedemic, but I am a realist who lives in the rural end of the world surrounded by crop and cattle farmers. These are tough time for our farmers. Low cereal crop prices don't properly reflect the added expense of rising fuel costs. BSE hurt the local industry atround here pretty bad, some fellas went under. Its not a glamours lifestyle being a farmer. Most of the kids move out to get jobs in the cities and there are farms for sale everywhere because of it. With the government not at least trying to make family farm efforts fruitful enough to survive we will lose a part of our heritage. There is just no question in my mind about that.

About one in every six jobs in Alberta is oilfield related. Did Klein stand up for the interests of Alberta in a word yes. Is he right, no. The fact that the tar sands consumes a double digit portion of our clean natural gas production to turn into steam a double digit amount of our fresh water supply to create a dirty energy resource is worth looking at though. Are the tar sands worth developing,yes. Is the economic effort in the best interests of Albertans, yes. Will this continue, hell yes.

That comment shows a frightening ignorance of basic economics. Jerry, have you ever taken an economics course or read an economics book? If not, I strongly urge you to do so before you state more silliness. What is the state of the family farm in your area August? I like to buy as much produce as I can at a local farmers markets, when they are in season. I get some pretty good deals there too. But to answer your question, no I have never taken an economics course. I have read several books about the subject though. So lets examine this piece by piece. My point was simply that; Now once again, as a nation our government is required to protect its citizens, isn't that right? I do not advocate subsidizing our own industry you understand, I never said that. What I do advocate is providing our citizens with equal footing in matters of trade. Hey if you can produce something cheaper, and export it here, and then sell it here power to you. But if another nation has to subsidize that operation I declare that an unfair practice. Tell me what is so silly about that. Where is the economic wisdom that would allow such a practice to prevail in this context? Speaking about economics, that is far from an exact science my friend. There are also several different views about methods and applications as well. So much so in fact that it rates up there with the split in opinion about global warming. Granted that there is in fact a mainstream opinion, but even that changes from time to time doesn't it?

I would tend to think that without the "largely paper exercise" we would remain at best a junior partner. If a public majority could ever come out in favor of it I would hope to go through the motions and do it right. NAFTA is a business deal. It does little for citizens, outside or the interaction with with business, at all. The same thing will happen with every other agreement with the United States. They are not fools, the will press any advantage given to them. Aside from that we have different political systems that would require harmonization and integration in order to function as a super state.

Silly? Do you really think the Americans are amatuers at this stuff ? Do you think that after having set a precedent that they will not use it when they deem it to be necessary? The Canadian government agreed to restricitions to market share, they agreed to export taxes, they agreed to to cease litigation. Is any of these things innaccurate?

Probably for the same reason we don't teach our kids about the influx of Ukaranians or anybody else, small numbers dude. Original landowners? That is the big arguement here? Does that mean the nations need to turn back the clock a few thousand years and roll everything over to some ancient being. I thought that the "Tribe" owned the land, are you suggesting that the individual band members themselves own the land and therefore they have an ancient title to it? Give me a break, what kind of nonsense is that, what the sins of the father is your arguement so punish the decendants? Back the truck up buddy, we the citizens of the nation whose leaders you call facists and racist have done nothing to you other than build you schools and houses and literally pay you. For this we get what? We ask nothing of you in return for what you have been given by us. We are not talking about old Uncle Fred's grand daddy here, we are talking you and me. Where the hell did you get that notion from! Go back and check your facts! The British created concentration camps in the Boer War to handle civilian detainee's. Wasn't the reserve system what was asked for in the first place. A allotment of land specific for your own use, that was what was asked for and granted by the government of the day. Again go back and check your facts my friend. South Africa had a population of a few thousand Pygmies at the time the British began to colonize it. Everybody else was imported into that land. What Mandella stood for was human rights, are you suggesting that you have no human rights in this country? Forget Alcatraz? I can't forget it because I don't think I ever heard anything about it. What happened there? Poor attempt at a threat! You have to hide behind words better than that. Give me a break. I invite you to do your research http://www.ainc-inac.gc.ca/pr/trts/hti/site/index_e.html or read this book from Harold Cardinal "The Unjust Society" or Bonita Lawrence "Real" Indians and Others" you may find some interesting issues that still pertain...you may even begin to educate yourself on what First Nations peoples have known for years....let us trully understand the history of this nation that we are building! chi meegwetch, Anishnawbe Kwe--The UrbaNish weyha hey! This nation is a political mess. There should not be a need to discuss First Nation issues because you should already have self government and it should not be any of my business. I find the subject way out of my league, its like my opinion about abortion. I am a man, so what does my opinion mean when I will never have to face the decision.

I certainly have no wish to anger anyone with what I am about to say but here it goes. I would like to see the First Nations issues resolved, I really would. I will therefore suggest that self government be granted unto any First Nation group that so desires it. Give them their land and let them chose their own path. When a first nation citizen lives outside of that land they are Canadian citizens and subject to the laws of the land. Conversely a Canadian should be allowed to live on First Nations land and be subject to those laws. If that self governed first nations land decides that they don't want to tax their citizens, that would be up to them to figure out how to provide watever services they desire. Hospitals and schools are not cheap and neither are ther professionals who staff them. Land claims? Lets look at that for a moment. If a treaty was signed it should be honoured no question about it. If a treaty was not signed or one is sought after the fact then the problem should be viewed in a squatter mentality. If you improved the land in any way, increased its value, and nobody has tried to throw you off of it this land it should be yours. But you only get as much of it as you can prove you were using and had improved. I simple don't believe that there are any "rights" at issue. From all I have read it seems that privilege is a more realistic use of terminology. Convince me I am wrong folks because I think what I propose is fair.

Bush Leaugue Economics; using economic growth to fund the shortfall created from tax reductions. Works fine as long as there is substantial growth, the plan looks less good if or when growth slows or the economy contracts in recession or depression. Tax reductions have fueled economic growth, true. The growth in the economy has raised revenues for the government, true. On the other side of the street is the increased immigration and increased spending associated with that economic growth. There are two sides to the ledger. On a balance sheet you have incomes and expenses, what the US has done is shine a light one only one side of the books. If you listened to the speech, the other side got a one sentence form of accounting. The government can no longer afford the ongoing expenses with medicare, drug plans and social security. Bush has a single economic agenda and that is rolling over tax dollars into the military industrial complex. It keeps lots of jobs on the books and produces plenty in profits to the shareholders. You just need someplace to unload your production on. Don't expect any cessation of hostilities in the near future.

The real deal here isn't rocket science. Keep the peace, take your civil suits to court. Civil disobedience is one thing, but violence is another.

Its sort of Bush League Economics isn't it? I mean they are talking about cutting their deficit in half, not even contemplating the debt at this point. Beyond that their solutions have so far been non-existent by their own admission. They cut taxes which didn't reduce their expenditures but did reduce their bottom line in revenue stream calculation. In his own words, I watch the speech, the government used growth to reduce the deficit. Then he dropped the other shoe.....heathcare, medicine, pensions all bad things that the government can't afford anymore. So I guess I am not in favor of this form of economics.

Excellent points! In truth it is because there simply isn't sufficient demographics at this point to undertake cutting the country up. But it is really up to the folks in Ontario and Quebec to decide. The rest of the country is a colony of Upper and Lower Canada, lets face the reality here. You folks have the population and you have the political system in your favor over there. We are a minority that can be abused at will according to the law of the land. Of course that won't breed the cooperative environment that Canada both wants and needs but it is the case even so. All it is going to take is leadership for Alberta to go out on its own.

There is nothing wrong with free trade, in fact its a good thing. The question is where do we find such an animal anyway? There is another question that hasn't been explored properly and that is of the marketing boards. These things are two edged swords which can cut both ways. The real issue in my opinion is what do we want the fed to do? How much control over our lives do we want to give them? Free trade would be an excellent place to start, and with that the agricultural sector. Look at the subsidies in agriculture all over the world! You want to make a democratic dent in the system start there.

If Quebec tries to separate, then it will face the possibility of a first nations attempt to seperate from Quebec. Don't get me wrong I favor them making their own decision in this matter, its their choice to make. With respect to territory for a sovereign Quebec doesn't the constitution state you can only leave with what you had to start with? In other words "Lower Canada". Or am I wrong in this?

The whole idea of this thread was a discussion on dumping. It has morphed into subsidies. For my two cents,if a foreign country is dumping its products in Canada in competition with our own industry then we need to take a position to protect our own producers. If the country does not protect their producers, there won't be any. Its okay to slap a tarrif on soft wood, or duram as long as it comes from Canada, but if it comes from the states its okay??? Give me a break. Corn isn't the real issue here folks..........