theloniusfleabag

Dear Argus, Only later was this true, for the USSR rushed to be the first to recognize Israel as a state and tried to sell them arms from day one. They saw Israel a 'brotherly socialist nation' and thought, incorrectly, that they could exert influence over them. Dear Montgomery Burns, Israel is only a pseudo-democracy, as they have an 'apartheid policy' where only Jews can vote.

Dear mcqueen625, The question could be better asked, of Iraq, "Why isn't Canada forcing countries to accept democracy at the point of a gun?" As to China, you are bang on the money, so to speak. So, why is a non-democratic Iraq unacceptable, but ok for China? I should say that it is obvious, if the 'west' can profit from the misery of others, and the abuse of human rights helps it, it is therefore acceptable. (plus, China has a huge military) If the US and the West cannot profit from it, (such as pre-invasion Iraq) it is therefore unacceptable.

Dear PocketRocket, I must concur, the whole thing was a mess. There can only be speculation as to whether 3 extra feet of levee would have stopped the breaches, (something I doubt, as mother nature usually can easily defeat anything man can do) and blaming Bush is a political, more than factual, approach. There have been predictions of 'the big one' along the San Andreas fault for decades. When it does come, this situation will be repeated 100-fold.

Dear PocketRocket, I gotta disagree. that type of funding would be misplaced. We need more inspections/inspectors, not 'more heavily armed' ones. I coould not access the story, but it sounds dubious to me. If it is true, those customs agents should be fired. Customs guards have the most sweeping powers of any 'enforcement agency' in the country. They can search and detain without warrants or probable cause, suspicion alone is good enough. They are trained in arrest and weapons tactics (a friend of mine just got back from this training course in Winnipeg ) including tasers, pepper spray (the person I know got a faceful in training, like the police and the military), and the ubiquitous Glock. It is the sheer volume of the inspection work that is the problem. It is a greater risk that someone passes undetected than someone putting up a fight.

Dear mirror, No. Mind you, neither is the US. I did not read the links, (I don't plan to subscribe to the NYT) but the US bungled the 'hunt for Osama' since day one. Actually, since Sept 12/2001, the Bush admin set it's sights on Saddam and Iraq. Bin Laden and his ilk have stated their objectives, those being primarily; an end to the US support of dictatorial regimes that oppress Muslims (such as the Sauds, the Chinese gov't, etc), a withdrawl of US forces from the Saudi peninsula, and the end of US military support for Israel against Palestinians. None of these has come to pass, so no, he is not 'winning'. They never did, reallly. There were weeks of delay before moving in on Al-qaeda in Afghanistan, and most of the 'terrorists' had moved on, leaving behind a token force. Former pres. Clinton came closer to eliminating Osama (with a couple of cruise missile strikes and some aborted plans with armed drones) than the current admin.

Dear Montgomery Burns, The following is an exerpt from the same "Swedish Peace Institute",... They seem to de-bunk all sorts of things there...

Dear August1991, Indeed a good piece. Usually, for me 'while doing something else', I come across all those darned pop-up ads from those kinky websites....(well, not literally 'across'...) Could be an interesting idea, but half of it could be eaten by admin costs. I would rather see a surplus used to bolster the health care system, post-secondary education or our roadways, or a myriad of other infrastructure problems. Or, like Alberta should do, lend it out (at a reasonable rate of interest) and consider it an investment for the future, when circumstances may be less favourable.

Dear Argus, I have to completely agree. Martin was Finance Minister, far closer to the 'shenanigans' than Chretien could have been. The best than Martin could possibly plead is imcompetence, (ie: "I had no knowledge of the activities of which I was in charge") or he is guilty of corruption and/or theft. mirror, I am as left as they come, but I feel all 3 major parties in Canada presently suck. I would place the figure (from the last 5 yrs) as over $2 billion squandered, mostly though largesse.

Dear SirSpanky, I agree with you, but since providing news is 'a business', it's sole allegience is to profit.

Dear Argus, Not sputum, I'm afraid, but fact. I don't have a certain book here with me, but I have previously posted a direct quote from someone in the US admin. acknowledging this fact. This was not the case, as acknowledged by several key US military people, including Gen. Colin Powell. "Saddam is being kept in his box", they said, and "He is unable to project any military power over his neighbors". Religious fanatacism, no doubt. However, Osama was most critical of the 'west' (and the US mostly) for supporting brutal dictatorships (and this cannot be denied) that oppressed Muslims in their respective countries, usually for the purposes of exploiting either cheap resources or labour.

Dear August1991, Perhaps in Harper's case, (perhaps not) but the 'Yanks' are in serious trouble. Their dollar is 'wearing the Emperor's New Clothes' and they refuse to face the fact that the status quo is soon to change, and they are ill prepared for it. The US has always relied on the M-16 as their 'dispute settling mechanism', so perhaps we should be taking our trade elsewhere. Unfortunately, these types of 'best politicians' are as rare as 'hen's teeth'.

Dear crazymf, Somewhat of a comparison, granted. Marijuana is traditionally smoked unfiltered, so it is somewhat harmful. Less so than cigarettes, because a) one does not smoke a 25 pack of doobies/dayand harmful, carcinogenic additives to increase addiction are not found in marijuana. It has also been demonstrated that people under the influence of marijuana are generally safer drivers than those under the influence of alcohol. One recent study done by the police (I believe it was in Moose Jaw, SK) found that in a driving test around a pylon course, the marijuana users scored better than both the drinkers and the abstainers. Mind you, other tests have shown other results. Not so, they are very comparable, with alcohol being the more harmful of the two.moderateamericain, Many people have become addicted to painkillers of all sorts, and not everyone is prone to addiction. The biggest problem with all drugs, and 'natural plants with drug-like properties', is when mankind alters them. Marijuana, coca, opium etc all appear naturally throughout the world. It is when mankind chemically alters them or their derivatives that the problems start. Marijuana, the coca leaf, the poppy should all be 'legal' but 'cooking' them into more powerful drugs such as cocaine and heroin should be illegal, with the strongest possible jail terms or hard labour. Especially for completely 'man-made drugs' such as crystal meth.

I have said in the past, the US would have been greatly damaged by non-intervention in Iraq. Saddam was making the Euro the currency of choice for the second-largest oil reserves (soon to be first) in the world. The US dollar cannot stand on it's own, it is grossly over-valued and could possibly collapse if it gets replaced in enough institutions. Secondly, given China's voracious, and growing, appetite for energy, the US could not sit back and let China even think about controlling the Iraqi oil. China is more than willing to enter Sudan, and anywhere else that has oil with total disregard for human-rights, environmental concerns, etc as long as they can increase supply to China. I would expect that they would have (or should have) been making some major offers to Saddam before the invasion.

Dear Freshinit, Quite the opposite, really, 'mother nature' tends to selfishness, not benevolence. Self-preservation would be the second-least 'intelligent design'.

Dear Sparhawk, Your replies have all been excellent and commendable. Interestingly though, this one got me thinking. George H. W. Bush was influential in PEMEX back in the 70's, what is to say he does not still hold sway?

Dear August1991, When the bridge was built, it was agreed that there wouldn't be any tolls. (provided all was on the up&up) Then, one side put up a toll booth anyway, they were told it was wrong to do so, but refused to recognize any authority but their own gun. They are robbing the people at both ends, really, for the buyer pays a higher price than they should (or were meant to), and the seller doesn't get the full profit for his goods (if the market would bear the higher price then the seller should get the proceeds). The unfortunate reality is that the US gov't is acting as nothing more than a 'highwayman'. The only thing that put an end to 'highway robbery' all those years ago, was to apply (and enforce) the death penalty, up to and including 'being found in the woods while wearing a disguise' (which was on the books in Calgary until recently).

Dear Sparhawk, Evidently 'rulings' are moot and the WTO, NAFTA and GATT have been rendered pretty much worthless. Like the UN.

Dear eureka, I must concur, it is almost as though people believe that 'god' only existed to create man... Again, I agree. Evolution does not discount the notion of 'god' creating life. It only counters the 'biblical account' of existence, and not even fully, as the 'six days' are subject wholly to mankind's interpretation.

Dear kimmy, Genetics and heredity was the one part of Archaeology and Anthropology that I hated. However, the purpose of reproduction is to pass on genes. There are many types of reproduction, including asexual. The problem with asexual reproduction is that it does not spread out the gene pool all that much, so while single-celled organisms can reproduce, they don't much affect the other 'single-cellers'. Sexual reproduction offers a much greater variety of genes to be passed on, vastly greater combinations, and the chance for evolution (when different combinations get to take a whack at 'success') increaces astronomically. A scientist once created an amino acid in a controlled environment, I believe it was with a 'primordial soup' of kerosene, etc, and the application of electricity (meant to represent lightning). How did single-celled organisms go from single to multiple cells? or from asexual to sexual reproduction? Got me, my guess would be absorption, and genetic code mixing within the cell. The ones with the 'right combo' got to go on to 'round #2', and so on. Evidently, some scientist taught a mealworm or some such creature to go through a maze. Then they ground up said mealworm, and fed it to another, who then 'remembered' how to navigate the maze on the first try. Again, it is all about passing on genetic code.

Dear Argus, Not too many, they are almost all owned by just a few people. There are a few that at least will run both left and right op-ed pieces, even the Calgary Sun on occasion. Most of the news I get is off the internet, but again, stuff without an agenda is hard to find, and the place is filled with kooks from both sides, as well as those from 'outer space'. I am given to the notion that the bias can hardly be avoided, so I have to read from multiple sources (for international news) and try to have the 'spins' negate each other. A good, purely info 'news site' is globalsecurity.org, where you get a sterile analysis of events, plus info overlooked (or not biased enough to slant the story) by regular news.Truth doesn't need adjectives and adverbs, nor innuendo, so the less the better. Al Jazeera is another good news source for not 'colouring' articles, though the service itself has an overall bias. Not as much as people think, though. Reading a news bit from there, one can read a report on an event, most often without rhetoric or slant.

Dear Argus, Well said, and thanks for keeping the nature of a thread a priority. If the US gov't (I hate using the vernacular term 'neo-cons') wishes to retain much needed credibility, and avoid more claims of hypocrisy, now is the time to act, and Robetson just bleated his own way into the role of sacrificial lamb. If, in the near future, a 'muslim cleric' from Albequerque, (or, say, a Muslim pro football player on National TV) openly calls for the assasination of Tony Blair, I should think that the gov't or the police should take measures to deter further such actions. Whatever those measures are, they should be shown to the general public now, so that they can say in the future, "Hey, we'll even punish one of our own for inciting hatred". As of now, they are not doing it. Unfortunately for Bush, this only bolsters the belief of the left, because it only proves the double standard and the hypocricy of saying "It's ok, as long as it serves America".

Dear Argus, I have to side with eureka on this, a 'great paper' shouldn't be blatantly biased. In fact, reporting just an event without putting a positive or negative, left or right 'spin' on it, would simply be called 'news'. But that wouldn't sell, nor could it be influenced or have an agenda. I should say that eureka's comment is not a disparaging comment on how far right (or left) the paper has gone, but rather a lament on how far it has gone away from being a 'newspaper'.

Dear Melanie, Hilarious. Again, the 'right to bear arms' seems to imply 'only against gov't', rather than those thieving merchants...I went to the CHAMP Car race in Edmonton AB this summer(though I was disappointed that ther were no 'War Amp' kids competing), and it was a wonderful event with attendees from as far away as the US and China. In the newspaper the next day an American that was visiting commented, "Gee, the people are so nice and polite in Canada. If you accidentally bump into someone, more than likely you'll hear them say 'excuse me'. In the US at a car race, if you bump into someone, all they want to do is fight". Makes you wonder how 10,000 gun deaths can occur in the country with the most guns per capita, and signs on the doors of malls, etc. indicating where you can or cannot take your gun.

Dear kimmy, The Hebrews have a saying, "A Watchmaker implies a watch" (no sh&t!) but the vast eons that are required for evolutionary change are simply incomprehensible to most. I had a 'sometime drinkin' buddy' who would mock me for believing in evolution, saying "Flea's grandfather was an amoeba! Ha ha ha ha ha" (complete with a hearty slapping of the knee, that drunken laugh was both convincing of his argument against and endearing). However, one point that is often overlooked is that evolution does not, nor cannot, disprove the existence of God. An agnostic myself, (I shun atheism as merely another form of self-grandiose 'deism', where someone claims to definitively know the 'answer') I believe that there is plenty of evidence of evolution, and only one case for the existence of 'god', that being existence itself. I am not wondering. As I have claimed before, "The Meaning of Life is: to be. Evolution, is 'to be, more efficiently'. Mutation is perhaps too strong a word, because you humans think in the immediate, and can barely comprehend beyond one's own lifespan. A human life is less than the blink of an eye in an epoch. Humans themselves have only stood upright for a miniscule fraction of the life of the earth. Evolving to fill a niche means a billion organisms tried a billion variations to solve a problem, and it is more a case of adaptation than mutation that wins the right to reproduce (for the one in a billion) over the billions of 'events' that all things face.

Dear Toro, Noooo, that wasn't said at all. Just to refresh your memory. As Argus astutely points out, The UK has taken to expelling religious kooks who call for death sentences, but I'm not sure where Robertson could be deported to except the looney bin.