marcinmoka

Correction. You avoided the question. You have made that choice, fine. But please do not pretend otherwise. Paranoia? Well, you answered your own question in the phrase which follows. I just want to know the extent of your fears/beliefs? L'chaim Moshe, l'chaim. Very subjective. But the son of Gabriel's boss, so to speak, instructed his followers otherwise. So wait, so only those who have been informed directly by God, actually have rights. But than you are telling me that not all rights stem from God. You are arguing both sides of the fence. You think? I am sure millions of Grand Theft Auto players feel so too! But in the end, if you wish to protect yourself and use any force which tickles your fancy, so be it. But myself, I will gladly fork over my taxes to the men and women of our nations police forces, if it grants me protection from people like you who believe they are above the law, and exempt from the legal system. Ciao.

Yes. Exactly the same thing as the principles of sensory perception. Or maybe, just maybe, you hope this will blow over since you do not wish to go against your gut instinct, which also happens to be one that the vast majority of our fellow board members would find disgusting. Therefore, I shall ask once again (you've definitely sparked my curiosity). If you don't want to answer, don't answer, but do not play the readers for idiots and assume I threw an unrelated science trivia question out of left field. Would you condone the murders of the 4 mounties shot in Alberta a few years back? You seem to advocate that the state, and all it's organs are simply out to trample on your rights and rob you, and that you should have the right (though apparently no obligations) to defend yourself and your property with as much firepower, and as much impunity as you wish. And what are these rights? And where are they stated? Was it the angel Gabriel who whispered it into your ear? Even then, in all religious contexts, rights have also always been presented in concert with obligations. Absence of one voids the other. Sort of. Lest not we forget that the police are trained in such matters. Furthermore, they would only shoot if their lives, or the publics, are in danger. And most car thefts do not fall into that category. Whereas you just come across as angry and wishing for a high powered hand gun to shoot him. E senor, usted viven en Caracas o Calgary? Yo no se. Seeing as you hate our subjective, civilized Canada, out of curiosity, what nation is right wing and uncivilized enough for you? P.S. Remember, everyone else is crazy, raving lunatics everyone but you!

I clearly am. Organs of the state "infringing" on private property. You advocate your right to defend your own property by any means, so therefore I am asking your thoughts on a real event. Furthermore, you seem to believe the government is out to get. So? Because in the civilized world, there are no rights without obligations. Thanks for clearing that up. Unfortunately, it was not the question. Does his un-rightful act deserve the punishment of death with you acting as judge, jury and executioner and completely ignoring the very fabric of our society, that being the legal structure?

Natural? How do you know the other parties intention? Does a man stealing your car have a right to be shot? Would you condone the murders of the 4 R.C.M.P officers who were shot in Alberta a few years back?

Is he not married to Naomi Klien? That in itself would volumes about this direction of his work. While in theory, the best political interviews are right on left, or left on right (otherwise it risks being a cheerleading session, where one is preaching to the choir), CBC should smarten up in this respect the notion of journalistic neutrality in this case. Avi Lewis does not even remotely attempt to hide his bias. It is like an equally stubborn, but leftist version of Bill O'Reilly. But for all mistakes they make, the CBC does find some occasional gems, notably Rex Murphy, who never fails to bring a smile to my face. My solution: hire Steve Paikin, of TVO's "The Agenda" and "Diplomatic Immunity" to rectify the CBC's journalistic integrity. Heck, hire the entire production team of those shows.

I agree. Either do I but one cannot ignore reality. Furthermore, it is better than the other options (i.e Kandahar or Bogota). Granted, taxes will be but an afterthought and you can buy all the "protection" you want. I concur. You should all hide. The government is out to get you !!!! Look outside your window and you can see Harper dressed in full tactical gear, spying on you throughout the night, plotting and scheming on how he can squeeze every last penny out of you so that he can build his own temple of gold. For some reason, after reading on this forum, I keep kicking myself for not having invested in Alcan much earlier. Had I known the demand for tin foil hats to be so strong, I would of made a fortune. So would I, and that is to call the police on those subversives who are willing to make a mockery of our laws and threaten to be the judge, jury and executioner.

Had I known I would of made it a bit less "diplomatic". The docile hand is the entity which is their biggest purchaser of energy, their biggest source of technical know how, and their biggest source of capital funding, i.e Europe. But as I stated before, Russia knows that Europe is not aggressive, nor prone to instability and outbreaks. The same cannot be said for China, who as we know, is their main purchaser of military know how. It seems that Russia is somewhat scared of Chinese ambitions in it's own backyard, but cannot make overt threats which are meant to placate and reassure an ever pessimistic and skeptical Russian public, as that could even slightly jeopardize these arms sales, seeing as they depend on these exports to revitalize their mostly outdated arms industry. non. нет. nein.

But you are suggesting everybody wants to play in the game. While that would be ideal, it is far from the case. In said scenario, many more would benefit, but it would equally be a fools mission to argue that everyone would. There will always be a small segment of the population, for a myriad of reasons, who will loose out. And we all know that it is those who are most discontent are those who are the most vocal, and unfortunately, the most willing to be a bigger threat to the status quo. Prosperity and economic freedom are amongst the biggest reasons for which we came to this country. However, the social stability and security afforded by our nation are often overlooked, if not ignored, especially by those who were lucky to have been born here and have never experienced anything else. In other words, it is all too often taken for granted. And while I do see your suggestion (and correct me if I am wrong) : That increased prosperity will in itself induce a strong sense of social stability since everyone would theoretically be concerned with bettering their own situation as rational beings, that is simply not the case. Take a walk down to your local skid row, the homeless shelter, the Methadone clinic, or even better, ask any Police Officer. Would the knife wielding junkie be a completely different person, a productive member of society had his income tax rate fallen while he was still working at Taco Bell? I doubt it. Would he be less of a threat to my family or yours if he is at least temporarily pacified by Methadone. Yep. And it is less of a burden on the tax payer than the alternative, which is keeping him in jail. In the end, all I am trying to say that is wealth and prosperity depend on stability and security. And stability and security also depend on wealth and prosperity. It is a careful balance of both. Remove one, and watch the other free fall as well. While Rubin/J.F.K said "A rising tide lifts all boats", they had a point. Unfortunately, not all boats are seaworthy.

I thought this could of been a good topic, but it seems to be shaping up to be a usual shit flinging fest between daydreaming socialists and libertarian idealists. But I shall try... Do taxes stifle economic growth and prosperity? Of course. One would be a fool to argue that. Should they be lower? But of course, seeing as we should eliminate pork spending and be far more intelligent and discriminating in how our services are being delivered. The fact of the matter is, a small but significant portion of people do take advantage of our systems and institutions, it's just that you (a.k.a the white suburban champagne socialist who is fuming right now and planning a harsh rebuttal) have not been taught that in college, because he or she too is a white suburban champagne socialist who has never actually seen a housing project in real life. Should we eliminate taxes? Well if any of our anarchistic/libertarian friends had their way, Calgary would resemble Kandahar. And despite my urging of these people to move to the outskirts of Bogota and Kandahar so they can enjoy the fruits of their labour, I am not aware of any who have taken up my suggestion. While taxes might be a drain on your material prosperity (it is true), they have one redeeming factor, in that they provide a certain level of services which more or less ensure us from social instability. Remember, we live in a democracy. While some of the "losers" in a capitalist system may start violence (which is detrimental) they are much more likely to just vote for some quick fix ultra populist a la Chavez who promises everything to everyone (which is even more detrimental, albeit on an even longer term, as Venezuela shall certainly find out). In other words, it is safer to throw the dog a bone and avoid more serious confrontations down the road. It is just that maybe we think over more diligently which bone to throw and to whom seeing as we have plenty of room for improvement.

But Russia cannot attack the docile hand that feeds them.The Western front is a charade for the tensions brewing in the East. You just cannot make overt threats to your biggest clientèle of weapons purchasers. That would just be bad business.

Just for a second......I thought your Al Gore fetish may have dissipated and you posted something pertaining to a different topic, but after expanding my browser window, I was put back in my place. By the way, is that Atlantis, to the east of Po'Hang?

Sounds like something Obama said, albeit in a far more diplomatic tone. Agreed. I just wish more people listened.

*On a side note* While I am no day dreaming idealist on security and am passionately pro-Nato, it is funny to note that Jaques Chirac was the only head of state who actually had first hand experience in the occupation of an Islamic nation, one which he volunteered for as a proud Gaulist a few decades back.

Touché Bingo. And while intelligence alone will not work (we need sticks as well as carrots), it goes far in dealing with the issue. This is a point far too often neglected. In contrast, terrorism is not: While some fanatical "actors" have been sold this simplified version of why they must fight, the foundation of terrorism is as an ECONOMIC TOOL, a final gasp by a elite of a society "the directors" scared of loosing the existent power structure which has made them subjectively "well off" up to this point. It is important to discern between these two streams. And we must not forget that many groups are disenchanted, but most do not take up such tactics.

Code name for a group of atheistic Chinese entrepreneurs who saw a gap in the market and prey upon our naivety.

Will the Biblical figures be compatible with G.I.Joe kit and accessories? I'm sure the image of Jesus with his matching Apache Attack Helicopter would certainly not be passed up as potential propaganda tool for those on both sides of the conflict.

And the people and nations of Europe have no say in their own future? Turkey is a formidable ally and a precious strategic partner but Mr. Sarkozy is right, Europe does not border Iraq, not in geography nor in spirit. A Mediterranean Union could use Turkish stewardship, but the thought of Turkey being the driving force of Europe (reflecting projected growth rates) does not sit right with many Europeans, and with due reason.

Nah. These "Bears" have been flying in and out, though primarily along the periphery of NATO airspace for the past 40 years. It is safe to assume we do the same.

It's more a P/R move than a radical shift in policy. To this day, major European bases and key installations are still "targeted" in spirit by the Russian "deterrent" forces. The only difference between the cold war status of ICBMs and those of the present day is nothing more than a mouse click. It is militarily insignificant. The eastern sky? It is a (relatively problem plagued) defense system, thereby lacking any ground targets. Furthermore, it does NOTHING in regards to Russian MRV warheads, nor was it designed to. Russia may be (relatively) poor, but they still have plenty of ingenious aeronautical engineers and physicists. Plus budget constraints often work wonders by sparking real ingenuity. I would say more pride than bitterness. If there is bitterness, it is against the world, not just the west. It's ingrained in the wider slavic personality. Agreed. Even though Putin will run the show behind the scenes, Ivanov irks me for he seems far too sly and deceitful, and the type who would cross Putin in his own quest for power. Medvedev on the other hand seems much more likely to carry forth the Putin-esque status quo. Sadly, while he seems to be a more effective manager, he seems less capable of manipulating the public and less likely to tap the nationalist nerve of the ordinary Russian, compared to Sergei. Medvedev 2008!

The single biggest polluter in North America is none other than....... Nanticoke, outside of Hamilton. But this is statistic in itself is deceiving. While it does pump out more CO2 than ANYTHING else on this continent, it's rather reasonable compared to most other coal plants, notably the dinosaurs in the Rust Belt, when compared kWh output to CO2 output. It is the sheer size of the operation which distorts the figures.

Are you referring to the diagonally placed dense aluminum tubes which on the inside of a door? We are talking about crash protection, not building an armor plated vehicle. If I had to compare an aluminum baseball bat and my skull, I would choose the Louisville vis a vis direct impact. But in terms of the 2005 Consumer Reports Saftey Rankings (Active and Passive measures combined)........drum roll please. Upscale and large sedans. The best The Lexus ES300 Audi A4 BMW 330i The worst Buick LeSabre Limited (Much heavier) Chrysler 300M (Much heavier) Family sedans. The best The Volkswagen Passat GLX (V6) Toyota Camry XLE (V6) The worst Pontiac Grand Prix GT Oldsmobile Alero Pontiac Grand Am. Small cars. The best VW Golf TDI Honda Civic EX Volkswagen Jetta GLS TDI. The worst Hyundai Elantra GLS Chevrolet Cavalier LS. Compact crew-cab pickups The best Toyota Tacoma TRD (V6) Nissan Frontier (V6). The worst Dodge Dakota SLT, Chevrolet S-10 L5 (V6) GMC Sonoma 5LS (V6) small-sized SUV category, the top vehicles for safety were the Saturn VUE (V6), Honda CR-V EX Hyundai Santa Fe GLS (V6). In the midsized category, t The best Lexus RX300, Acura MDX Toyota Highlander The worst Chevrolet Trail Blazer, GMC Envoy a Jeep Grand Cherokee. As for minivans, The best Honda Odyssey EX, Toyota Sienna LE Mazda MPV LX The worst Chevrolet Venture LS, Oldsmobile Silhouette GLS Pontiac Montana * Has anyone ever seen a Pontiac Montana post accident? I was traumatized. The thing behaved like a pop can and looked like an accordian. Pre-1990, I would agree. AN 88' Pontiac Parisienne clashing with an 88' Prelude would spell disaster. But now that the domestic firms are trying to produce small cars, and the Japanese have successfully produced full size cars and even brilliant full size pickups, we can confidently compare apples to apples. Since the introduction of the Camry and the Accord, the rules have been re-written and consumers were finally given some genuine choice, and we realized a different world exists. For the sake of our own industry, let us hope the "medium" three now catch up. Unfortunately they have a reputation for shunning innovation with a Stalinist Iron Fist. Power corrupts when one is not forced to be nimble and adaptive on his toes. I doubt you would disagree.

Troops look like Conrad Black. Odd. But even better, the fact Russia doesn't have the strategic need either to engage in a race with the U.S. China, yes, however you cannot rile up nationalist sentiment by making overt threats to your biggest client of Military Hardware. While the Russian political power base is centered in Europe, it's vast resource wealth sits to the east of the Urals, in a region were China has increasingly more economic and military clout.

So a GMC Suburban has better crash results than a Toyota Yaris. Good observation. I was kinda hoping you would pick up on the relative size comparisons. Pound for pound, imports are more carefully designed. More than often, imports must meet multiple crash regulations, in Europe, Japan as well as America. Making a car capable of passing all three makes for quite a safe vehicle. Note. The base Cobalt coupe is 100lbs heavier than the base Civic coupe. Both are front wheel drive, 4 cylinders and thus in the same class. Perhaps the weight is negligable in this case, but still, 100lbs could (and should) translate into better side impact protection.

Caveat. Insured (Private/Medicaid/Medicare) Americans. But in the macro picture, we spend less, our children are more likely to survive, and we tend to live longer. And though we complain about our health related tax burden, few raise a stink about the American burden seeing as per patient care is astronomical.

Proof? I am just curious whether this figure also includes the deductible. *Note, this should say 2, not 3. Je m'excuse. Proof ? If we look at infant mortality? Or life expectancy? I am not saying the U.S doesn't have brilliant healthcare, I am just pointing out that they pay a fortune and seemingly do not do better in many realms. The knee jerk reaction of saying that quality will suffer is nothing more than that. The claims is made over and over, but never backed up by anything. We? No. But is there anything you would like to share? For $40, that bath sponge best work miracles. Yes. Yes they do. But they still spend twice as much money doing it and getting the same, or worse results. I'm sorry, but will take take the OECDs word over your gut feeling, that is unless, you have some thing to back it up.