watching&waiting

I really can not se where Global warming really has people all upset. I can see that the way it is portrayed to garner the most reaction from people, is something I actually thought most would see through. I we have another mild winter it will be global warmings fault. If we have a winter with large snowfalls and if we have a cold winter it will be be that iceages are a coming. there was a volcano eruption last week and it spewed as much gas and debris as man has for aleast a couple years. So where is the hue and cry? Some will say because we can not control that but we can control what man does. So Tell me just how you yuorselves are cutting back to make this change, and if all those who say they are, actually did do as they say then there would be little left to chnage now would n't there. If as is claimed that the vast majority of Canadians agree they must change their ways to help against global warming actually do then should our emmissions not have dropped? I guess it is only those vocal few we hear from over and over again. The last article I read said something about if man continued to increase at the same level for the next hundred years, there would be problems of glaciers being melted and sea rising by 3 meters 100 years ffrom now. Well I do not plan on being here when that happens and since it looks like this would mincrease any way even if we all stopped but instaed of 100 it may take 200. So I say lets split the difference and keep it where we are and be good for 150 years. So if I do not thing about the future that far ahead, as you and I both know that by then science will have learned many things and will probably be able to do wonders that we can not even think of today. So I really wonder just what these "sky is falling crowd" really are doing. Me thinks thou does protest too much.

Let me see now $600 for the equipment and $49.95 per month that comes to $1200 for the first year and $600 for the reamining years. So if one was to setup this say at the punlic library, and have say eight computers for online use, it would serve the community of say 100 people more then enough to meet any demands. So even if there were only 10 families in the communities, it would come to $10 per month per family. Or about 1/3 of the cost of a 24 of beer. So if it is need so badly, is it too much to ask these people to foot that bill? You see many atvs in these villages and skidoos etc., so if they can afford them they can afford this. The education and the tools there of are a provincial jurisdiction and should be looked at there. The federal government supports many of these people thru welfare and other things. They get twoo free trips per year to any destination in the south, and yes they could even find work here, if they wanted. Since they chose the way of life that is old and tribal, then they should not be looking for the modern internet unless they want to join in the modern society. That same society that saw many northern towns fail because the mines were played out etc. There are no people living there today because that is just the way society works.

They changed the policy *before* the last election. Did the Liberals break a promise beause five year ago Martin said SSM wasn't on the table? Think about it. Wait that would require the ability to think. Fu#k you and your idiotic insults Ricki! That should get your motor running. I don't care when they changed their policy, a broken promise is a broken promise. Gerry you really have to quit telling people to Fu#k themselves. It is not very nice and you should be taken to task over it. But to get back to the topic, you say that the fact that certain policy changes having been made, then makes this a broken promise. Well just like when you joined here you said you would not abuse the people on the site or use foul language, so you then also are breaking promises. I also will contend that the importance of those broken promises of both you and harper are of about equall importance in the eyes of the people. So yes a broken promise is a broken promise, and should be looked at in their proper context. If you are still here after your latest attack, you may want to consider that.

What I posted is the cost and I do know of what I talk about. I gave my brother a satellite company years ago and he is one of the main installers for Explornet for eastern ont. The prices are real and it can be had anywhere in Canada even the artic. There is no need to have the federal government pay for this access and if I can afford it as a single family then so can they. The fact that were quoted in the original article are totally false and the costs are nowhere near what they say. Also the point was made that this can easily be networked to give many families access to the net. This is not a right wing agenda, but just a good old common sense reaction to a wrongful story. It takes all of two hours to have it installed and running, and that includes stopping for a coffee. I would guess if you had to have someone fly north to do this it would be more, but I can teach a person from scratch in less then a day, and then their community would have that ability themsleves. Once again this story was a non starter and shoudl never have been used in this way, as it only makes the writers of it look bad.

You just did it again. You are accussing Harper being in lock step with Bush, when you know it is not so and you also know that there are no negoiation with the Taliban that have any input from Harper. You are getting a career in smear. First off you never admitted you were wrong when you stared the thread that negoiations were being done and you basically inferred that this was with the Canadian troops and the Taliban. Just because O'connor set the record starigh about what was meant by all this, then we all could see that what was talked about was talks with the Taliban and the Afghan government. So your were wrong and then instaed of just saying so you try to smear the facts so you do not look like a total dick. And also just so you can address it, you were wrong again about the protection of churches legislation now weren't you. It is not so bad, we all make mistakes, but the liberals just seem to make many more then others.

Now just how does one enforce such a law in international waters? Who can be there to say that the nets are scraping the bottom, and just how will we prove such a thing. It is all well and good to say we say it is not a good thing and we will tell you to stop. But I can not see it getting any results. As it said in the article that there has to be a better way. Also the big thing in this was said in the line about we allow this pratice to take place in our own domestic waters, so how can we condemn it in international waters. Seems to be a lot of saber rattling in todays news. I guess they just can not find a story and so they trawl the bottom for one Oh and yes I can not let this go by without a comment, since this story is about the harmful affects of trawling the bottom, maybe we should just ask the liberals for their expertise, as they are the top bootom trawlers here in Canada.

I can say that from what I have read, it seems to be a bad situation. I would have to say that many of these youths are unhappy to be in France and accept their good fortune. So of course the answer would be set them free, and give them work passage on as many ships back to their origins as can be found. The gang mentality is usually unlawful and shoudl be treated as such. Since they are rioting maybe machine gunning them down with rubber bullets would get their attention. But just like all free nations around the world, when you have immigrants that seem to setttle into neighbourhoods of their own kind, it then is a cause of concern. They tend to not try to blend in and more then likely feel this is their new conquored land. I am all for multiculturalism, but only if it can be accommodated into our own country's culture.

this is just so much BS that I have to laugh. Anyone anywhere can now get full interenet access by satellete no phone required any where in canada as long as you have a computer and of course the hydro to run it. The initial cost of the equipment is $600.00 and the plans start at $49.95 per month. So where it there a problem here. You can get this any where in Canada. There is no need for the Federal government to be involved with any of this, as it is affordable and reliable, and and it makes any llandline based internet look down right slow. So it is about time the government realised this and got out of the internet access business See here for details http://www.xplornet.com/

If the bloc was not there, we would see a CPC majority, as the liberal would not have any more seats then they do presently in Quebec. The NDP are not helpful and they are only grandstanding the far left because they know that is their own base support and they are playing to it as expected, but Layton just does it in such an awful way that I can not see him ever getting more seats then he did last time out. In fact it looks to me like they will get fewer seats next time round.

Gerry is that the best you can do? You are still trying to sift thru the muck where the Liberals stand now looking for things to use as wedges. But first off you need to get out of the crud of where you stand and then climb up the side of the barrel and then get into the barrel and slowly rise to the top. Then you will find the things that Harper is really doing and maybe you will then find an issue that you can take a stance on it. I know that climbing out of the crud and muck to a liberal would be called social climbing, but you first need to get into the barrel if you want to try and rise with the CPC. Also be careful of the quicksand there in Liberal land, you must know the pit I am talking about, the one filled with corruption, under tabel envelopes of cash, entitled to entitlements and the many many more things the liberal have around their necks. Come to think of it, maybe you have already made a large climd to just read the crud in the muck on the underside of the barrel. Maybe give it a rest before you over exert yourself.

How soon you forget that the Forces are being enlarged to 85,000 from 58,000. So there will be many more troops to do the jobs that are asked of them. Also that number may even increase more then that in time, if we can keep the liberal out of power. The fact is we as canadians know that for now all has beenset until 2009. There is no need to discuss the feeling that are against that, as it will not change anything. When the time is appropriate for discussion of extending that or pulling out, then and only then should it be brought up. The Liberals are planning to make the fact that some do not support this a major wedge issue and have even started a stop Iggy platform so they can still use it. That to me shows they have no decency and only care about grabbing power at any cost. Even if it costs some lives. Maybe I am being a little touchy but it is something that needs to be said.

I can not let another of these "harper is hinting at being there beyond that time", post go by without saying that these people must not think very hard about this type of thing. Of course he will hint that Canada will be there for the next decade he may even say he is thinking it would make a good new province to Canada. For god sakes people we are at war, and stupid lips cost lives. Only a low down liberal would try to use this as a wedge, and by the way that is exactly the plan according to liberal insiders. It just reeks of total turn coat, do not want you even in my country type behaviour. It should not be a hard thing to understand that defeatist talk about turning and leaving goes does the whole Nato operation harm. We are there till 2009 and we will at that time see just how much further we will need to be there. That is it. Nothing is going to change that, so why is it the traitorous liberal spouting their yaps about no support for this and that and where are their entitlements. I may be getting a little too upset with this, but it has been hinted to before that it is not wise for them to do that, and they did not take notice. I believe this kinda makes this point quite noticeable even for them. It really was not how I wanted to end the thankgiving weekend, but if the line is not drawn here then where do we do that. Every little thing that happens here in Canda seems to make the news and the world now even in Afghanistan do watch international news. We must be very careful here as it was not that long ago we as young people found that our protests and marches did stop a war. It was Vietenam and while I believe it was for the best many still will argue that. I do not want to see any such thing happen here. We have lost 40 men in this, but since Friday across Canada we will have lost at least that many in traffic accidents, drownings and hiunting accidents etc. The loss of those 40 were the ones that fighting for a better cause. To them I say you all are heroes and it is to you I will give my greatest thanks this day.

The only negotiations with the Taliban are those done with the Afghan government. There are none done thru Nato or any of its member states. This has been the case since day one. It is the case in most wars of today and there is nothing that should make it any different now. Yes there are some moderate Taliban leaders, who may well be brought over to the government side, and if these leaders have say 200 men under them, maybe it would be a good thing. Most want government jobs etc for their return, and for now I think that would not be out of the question, but again it is not my call. For evey leader that can be swayed it would be like another 200 people out of the enemy forces, and maybe even 200 more for the government side. It seems that now we are seeing the mercenary types and those who sougth position and power, Not the hard line its our way or death type taliban.

Gerry if you took the time to listen and not just spew your own view, you would see that the whole story about the protections etc was nothing more then a ruse that the Liberals wanted something so desperately to jump upon to discredit the CPC that they jumped on this and then fell face flat. Once again by those who will know the truth, there have been no discussion in Cabinet or with the PM on the issue of protections of those who would have religious reason to not perform SSM. Vic Toes could may have said he has looked at that, but that is his job to first look and then make a decision if it has merit. So far no merit, no thought of ledgislation. Your need to find somethiing to jump upon was made clear the other day by the old cronies of Chretien government, that if Iggy was to get the leadership the liberals would be deprived of their prime wedge issue in the next possible election, which was afghanistan. Now that was saying alot as they had no chance to take the CPC record to account as it will be a big fact to vote CPC. They definitely will not be able to use Honesty and efficiency as they tool, so the only hope for a wedge issue would be to try and make scarey again the thrust of next election. Does anybody really think that will work again? Gerry your liberal are a ship with out a leader at this moment, and they past people still open their yaps and harm the party. It looks like once they get a leader he will be hard pressed to find wedge issues to seperate the two parties. If it was not for the fact all the old party cronies are still there and pull many of the strings, I would say that the two parties would grow more toward each other. But we both know that when those cronies pull a string they think there shoudl either be money or power on the end, and they will scream hoendously when they find there is nothing there.

I watched something on the new the other day that had a safe house in Kandahar where Taliban leaders were able to come and talk without the threat of arrest and fighting. It was interesting to see that most of these guys wanted government jobs and money and I would guess that along with that would also come power. They did not seem to be the hard rule Taliban but maybe moderates. I think I would agree that they could be given much of what they ask for, but the power they seek should not be able to bring them back to the old days where women are chattle. But again that is not for me to decide. The hard liners did not stay and talk as they were more curious then serious, but if the leaders who wer there represent say 2000 fighters, well that would be an interesting change. Also if they could also have their fighters now join into the afghan army, maybe we would see a tidal shift. So to that point I can say I think talks can be good. The problem is you need to be able train enough of these guys and the true moderates to work with each other, and then maybe this will end better then I would have thought. I usually do not take much of what I see on the news to heart this seemed to be a good piece and it did seem even sided.

I really do not know where to start, but lets say that maybe 5% of what you have said has some truth to it, and the rest I can only see coming from someone much more in sciencefiction then reality. I won't say more right now on this as I would have trouble not making it sound like a put down, and I would not want that.

Geoffery I have to disagree with you on several things. I do think that this quarters release of expenses does show a very different type of character in the MPs over the last liberal counterparts. The CPC by their very nature and what they stand for should in almost all cases be a much more frugal person with our tax dollars. That was part of the Liberal scary Harper story during the last elections. It would be wrong now to say that because this now is shown not to be scarey but rather a saving for the taxpayer, should be a black eye for the Liberals. They looked for it and now they got it. It does not sadden me that they have a tough time spinning it, but rather I take joy in seeing it. I would be very disappointed to see the CPC not be able to find areas where there could be billions saved over the lavish times of the liberals, because it would have meant then the liberals were doing a good job, and we do know that is not what people believe, and with all the things that the CPC are now showing only confirms that the liberals were just as dirty as they were painted in the last elections. These are just small revealations of just what the differences are and the basic roots that they come from. To show this in these contexts is a good thing for the CPC, but of course the NDP and libs will take issue with this, as it flies in the very face of what they are about. So as I said, yes to the black eye to the lefties and a good start for the right in a long path to come.

Of course the liberals do not get it. They only know they are entitiled to their entitlements, and they believe that every government should increase those entitlements not reduce them. That is why they are in opposition and will stay there for many more years. Because even when they are supposed to be on their best behaviour in a leadership race, they can not help but get tied into a scam or abuse of power scandle every week or so. It has just been so god awful, that you wonder if they are just going for the sympathy vote, as not one who thinks with their minds, would ever vote for them otherwise.

It was made very clear today what was meant when the general said that talks and negoiation are going on in Afghanistan. But people here seem to have a hard time understanding things, so here is a try on my part. The Afghan government is and always has been in talks with the Taliban, and it is the only one who has the authority to do so. There are no talks between the Nato troops or even Nato command and the Taliban and never will there be. The only enity that can negoiate with anyone for things in Afghanistan is the Government of that country. So when it is said that talks have been ongoing it means with Taliban and the afghan goverment. Not with anyone else and this will never change with the present way of this mission. I hope this clears that up some, as even I thought different until see the head of DND explain this, and show exactly where people are running off the path of this subject.

RB I find most of the stuff Gerry posts to be offensive and downright insane. I do not like him for his style of politics, but I must say though that once in a while he does have a small edge of truth in his posts. Of course they are always blown way out of proportion, and Yes I can say that there are times I would like to give him a slap just for good measure. But that is somethign I can not do so I walk away for a bit. Gerry has a right to be here, and yes I do believe he has broken the rules a few times, but so have I. If I say he is lower then nat piss under a cow muffin, that would be wrong, so I won't say that. But everyone knows gerry for what he is and yes many have just ignored him as he probably does more harm to his own credability the he harms the site. So do not get so would up in this.

Now just what is a moderate Taliban person. Is he someone that only whips and beats a women publicly for being raped? Or if her veil shows some face is she then only given 10 hashes then the usual 20? I would really like to see what a moderate Taliban looks like. Because they are still ingrained by there old religion to follow the ways of a much older time. There are no grey areas in that religion and that has been the problem to begin with. None of those who still believe in the Koran as a word by word way to live their life, can ever be a moderate in anything. If we take their teaching and look at them, we are inhuman and we deserve to be treated like cattle and death to us should be seen as a good thing. Now just how do you moderate that? I do not think we should even allow any of these types to have to wait so long for their trip to glory. We need to give them all the expressline to their heavens, asap. Only once that is done will we be able to correct the errors of that way of thinking. Sound sad and mean spirited by it is what works for today. I believe no discussion at all. The only thing we should offer them is that express ticket. The ruled like rabid dogs and that is how we should solve the problem. We could though sent Jack over there to meet with them though, as that would alos solve the problem where the village idiot of parliament is, now wouldn't it?

Drea believe me when I say that back in the 50's and 60's when I was growing up, there would not even have been much of an investigation into the man going missing after he was found with a child under the age of majority. In those days it would have been looked at the maturity of the two. Now if a 21 year and an 18 year were together that would be okay, and even if the girl was say 16 and the 21 year old was backward a bit, that would have been ok. But lets say 13-15 and the man was normal mature 21, well the community would have made it impossible for this guy to be seen in public and as I said he would be kind of encouraged seriously to moving on. If and when that did not happen, well as I said most would not have been heard of again or found for that matter. The police of those days would have done a minor investigation and that would be it. You just need to look back to those eras to see that this was true, in much of the Canadian society. Hell until homosexuality was made legal arounf 1967-68 I believe, it was not uncommon to find many gays who were using bathrooms as a place to meet, to be found beaten and unconscious in and around places like the Lord Elgin Hotel in Ottawa, and many other places in Canada. It nearly destroyed the Lord Elgin Hotel as a good place for the government to use between posting, for high level staff, becuase of the reputation it got from the gays using their public washrooms as a place to meet others. It was Trudeau who I believe changed the laws for this, but I am not sure. Now remember I am saying what would have happened back in that period of time. These have changed, and I am not so sure if it has al been for the good. But today we have given our right to self reliance and even self defence to the police, who just can not be there to protect you and yours all the time. There has to be a movement back to where people will again come to the aid of someone being beaten, or even to the aid of a child that seems to be indistress. The "let the authorities handle it " is not what I believe should happen.

The debate on just how each gas affects the climate, can and will go on for ages. But can anyone dispute the fact that one volcano like Mount St Helens give us many thousands of times the emmissions in one eruption then man has contributed in over 100 years? I remember back when Mount St Hellens erupted there were scientists saying that the gases it gave off during the eruption would make mans contribution insignificant. In the times after that there were dire predicts about nuclear winters etc. I am also pretty sure this was again said with the Pinatubuea eruptions as well. So if just normal day to day gobal happenings can overshadow mans contributions in just the blink of an eye, then should we not question the effects that man really has on his environment. There are many under water volcanoes as well that erupt all the time and these could also affect the temperature of the oceans, but has any of this been looked into and added to the equation? The answer is no, because when you do all this, you will find just how insignificant mans contributions are. Now that does not mean man is off scott free. While his emissions really do not affect climate the way some want to say, it does affect the health and welfare of the people on earth, and should still be looked at in that category.

I guess there is some kind of feud going on here between some of the posters, from a long way back, but that to me does not mean that the whole idea of age of consent is a hot topic. I like the old day where if some one was seen as abusing age and consent type things, the community basically made this person and outcast and if he persisted in remaining, he would be found beaten very badly some where and by the time he recovered in hospital, he pretty much chose to move else where. Those days were not that long ago. I am talking of the 50's and 60's. The community as a whole were more family oriented and all adults would keep an eye on any child that was appraoched by an adult who was not known or known to be of questionable taste. We protected our children as best we could. Yes there were those young kids that did inappropriate things, but that was looked upon as curiosity of the young. There were not very many pedophiles that could stay anywhere for very long. Now we look to the police to do the lawful things and we are seeing a vast increase because the police just can not cover the area like the community of yesterday could. The Pedophiles can now remain in the community hunting and people will not know until the worst happens. While this way is probably a better and more lawful method, it just can not stand up to the community of yesterday and the standards that were there. The day we made homosexuality a legal thing, we then made for them to openly move in ourt midst and we now allow them to even push their lifestyle to the young in our society. Will we do the same for those who want sex with younger and even more innocent children. While I really was not a supporter of legalizing homosexuality, I can live with it as long as it stays like the sx lives of the majority of people, and that is behind closed doors. We have already gone too far in the Gay rights argument, and it has cost us way too much money. We simply should have the vote or referredum, and end it right there and then. The age of consent by law is one thing. But if I had a daughter that was found with a 21 year old guy, he would never again be heard from period. You can guess exactly why that is. It would not matter what the law said was age of consent was. When the difference is such that it allows for question of coersion, then I will act accordingly. Maybe if more fathers did this we would not be having organization like NAMBLA.

Dancer you asked if I was gay curious and the answer is no. But at a very early age I was introduced to same sex touching by a boy a few years older then myself, and I can say that it never made me want to be gay and I did not get the feelings and arousal this kid did. So yes I had a moment of curiosity and that only confirmed my beliefs. Now you answer my the same questions? Are you gay and when did you know this? To me if what I knew now was available to back then, I never would have even allowed this person to the touching or anything else. It does seem though that woman have a more open view of same sex touching etc, and it seems to be more socially acceptable. I do not see why it should be though