marcinmoka

Scott, I realize we have a very different moral opinion on this issue, and I will admit, FORCING a priest or a minister to carry out a wedding they personally do not approve of is crossing the line. But, if they find one who is willing (and I'm sure there are), how does gay marriage threaten my heterosexual marriage and/or my children's upbringing? Lord knows many heterosexual couples do things which are equally considered sinful by all biblical standards. Having said that, I take it you are fairly devout, no? And if so, is your objection on religious grounds?

Don't worry, everyone got it, even the most docile, un controversial people. While I do cherish the right to free speech, it is annoying as funk for threads to turn into nothing but shouting matches, and stray away from the topics at hand. I come here to learn, to read.....I don't care for childish commentary and name calling.

R.I.P He did some good, some bad, same due to him, some beyond this control.

But if you are poor, regardless of race, chances are you attended a less than desireable high school. It's already part of the stigma. There was an economic study in Britain last year, where it turned out that poor whites from now defunct industrial centeres were really doing the worst in terms of school, substance abuse, major criminality, etc. It's a hard question to approach. In the US, you end having rich blacks or asians getting preferential treatment over poor whites. That only adds to social tensions further. If such an action is proposed, it should be done according to "class" rather than blindly based on ethnicity. But than again, 5 years of action towards visible minorities won't do too much harm, and it's the best of all other options, thus why I support it.

I don't care where they are from, as long as they can contribute to society. The Maghreb, or Poland, Brazil, India, Russia or China. Whatever, as long as they respect the laws, are tolerant, *actively want to fit into their host society* , are motivated to work, and have the skills and motivations to lead successful lives. They lack skilled workers, and lord knows, their tax base is not getting any larger (even though they are a rarity, with a positive birth rate). Cutting off all immigration would hurt them even more, but it is true, they need to diversify their immigration, not just from one or two regions. That only serves to prevent social cohesian as groups feel more akin to stick amongst themselves for longer periods of time.

I know, that's why I'm not big fan of American style affirmative action. But I think (as I stated earlier in this thread) that if it is capped a short term boost, like 5 years, that would do no harm. One small step at a time....

I'm not to cool to this idea. But regarding this idea: At first I was skeptical, but I realized there is one GREAT VALUE in this proposal. If you get to subsidize the mosques, you in turn get say in how they are run and control their direction. I think it is a brilliant measure. The Brits are now starting to pay attention to this idea, because their old "laissez-faire" approach has spawned radical mosques with even more radical Imams. Et le voila, 7/7 unfortunately occurred. This way the French can just veto a radical preacher,as well as monitor activity in search of fundamentalist sentiment. I too am against big government, but when Fundamentalism is a reality, and this seems a good combat it. As per Bayrou, (I too am a big fan of the Clintonian third way) I kinda of liked him, but he is not fit to govern France, at least not yet. He would not make the tough decisions France needs, and while he wouldn't be reckless with the economy as Segolene Royale, he would just slump and continue with the old Chirac approach.

I take you haven't studies in a French University recently. Free....but pathetic. And after the labour market reforms, that should be issue number II. In the first month of school, there is absolutely no space to sit. People end up sitting on the steps in classrooms. By mid year, there is about 1/3 of the students. It's not that they don't show up to lectures, it's that they drop out. Dropout rates are around 55%, i.e over half. But the government still ended up allocating resources to the 1/2 who did drop out, while the 1/2 who remains and actually is in need of the resources, are outta luck. That's why the rich families send their kids to the Grandes Ecoles, (private universities with world rankings).

I might add, 14 million is not bad out of 12 tribes, especially considering the rough treatment many, many members of the community had over the course of the past few thousand years. As per Scott, I think you will appreciate this : SAD...but true.

The funny thing is that I never implied anything, not even tongue and cheek. I was just recalling a character. So what I garner from this post is that you believe we will all turn gay if we ever witness a gary parade, or go a "anti-homophobia" seminar? This is were you and I differ. Greatly. I believe that it is indeed a natural genetic anomaly. It constantly shows up in 8-10% of the population and it's practice is documented all throughout history. It has even been recorded in dolphins, penguins, birds, sheep and chimps. Whereas you seem to think it is ones choice, correct? And most of all, how do actions of some individuals, in the privacy of their own home, affect me? I'm not disturbed by it because I just simply don't care. So they have a parade. Well, don't go. If you see it passing, turn the other way. As for the issue of gay marriage, I saw a sign stating : Against Gay Marriage? Then don't have one!! I thought that was poignant!

What province/state/nation do you live in? From what I re-call, I never remember hearing a federal decree proclaiming that *we must practice homosexuality* or else face sanction. What they (or anyone else) do in the bedroom is their choice, as long as no one gets hurt and it's legitimately consenting. I've never, ever understood homophobia. Why get your panties in a whirl over something that doesn't affect you. Mind you, I do re-call that the most vocal homophobe in high school ended up.....gay. Perhaps he was so homophobic because he was struggling to resist temptation.

It's perplexing how vocal and passionate the anti-Sarko crowd is. Mind you, having worked there as teacher, I can say first hand that pragmatism is shunned, and everyone is taught to abide by some ideal. May 68' is still the subject of lore. Example : Racism in the labour market. It exists in France (in short, I blame it on the small but vocal minority of second generation, who tarnish the image of their parents by being annoying, lawless hooligans, but that's a whole other thread) . Yet for decades, racism in a nation who's motto contains "equality and fraternity" (+ liberty) was ignored, as if it couldn't exist. Then a paradigm shift occurred in November of last year,and (outer) Paris was burning. Youth had no jobs, and nothing to do. So they burned more cars than is usual. Yet 11 candidates seek scapegoats. The extreme left blames it on capitalism.....and jews. The extreme right, on immigrants themselves....and jews. Than the center dosen't ignore it but dosen't accept it. And Segolene, well....she's just Segolene living it out in Sego-Land where everyone makes smores and sings koom-ba-ya all day. It's only Sarko who broke the taboo and admitted discrimination exists (though not towards the car-burners, because frankly speaking, would you hire them?? It's their peaceful parents who face the legitimate challenge). He proposes a few years of affirmative action, which I generally find unjust towards the poor, but not visibly a minority. But in weighing things out, it is a far lesser evil than social unrest, petty theft, and the increasing animosity amongst races, with all the derivatives that surface as a result. Yet the irony is, he is the one who is tarnished in the public eye as being a racist, despite wanting to do the most to improve social cohesion. Et ca, j'ai du mal a croire!!!!!

I think I know what you're saying. For him, in that he will slow down the decline, against him, since it will rile up bourgeoisie marxist ideaologues (an irony in itself). Correct?

And amen to that. If they do not get their fiscal house in order, and fail to provide more genuine opportunities for both immigrants and youth, we will only see twice as many Le Pen / FN - tistes rise once to take over. Only 2 days left. I'm awaiting anxiously.

Part 1 - Yes, Le Pen is absurd. If not dangerous. I'd go call him crazy, but in a legal sense, that would make him unaccountable for the things he says. One cannot excuse him. Part 2 - Sarko(zy) is the leadership France needs. Desperately. Of the three serious candidates, he is also the SOLE with a coherent plan of action. You could argue Segolene Royale does too, but I don't think anyone but impressionable young ideologues take it seriously. Most of her support, as well as Bayrou, is hailing from people who do not support them, but are simply afraid of Sarkozy, and *gasp*, anglo-saxon liberalism.

I take it you've never taken a Greyhound to Kentucky? And I'm not even talking about Alabama.

One last thing. For all the complaining about racism in Canada, let's just put it into perspective here. Canada, without question reigns supreme when it comes to racial integration. Even the number two spot, our friends to the south, is no where as close. That is an accomplishment many, the world over, would wish to recreate, and something to be proud of.

Theory????? Take another peek at the post. I stated that discrimination exists, and we all practice it in one form or another. What this "theory" was about was me trying to analyze my own discriminatory practices. How is a personal account a theory? But in case you missed it: I did not say that genuine racism and ethnic discrimination exist. In fact, I stated they do. To deny that would be a lie. Racism is a dangerous ideological practice and must be rooted out. But quite often, fictional claims based on other, non-ethnic factors are used to shift the blame towards people doing their job. True, it also does exist amongst authority, but the point I was trying to make was that it is not nearly as often based on uncontrollable factors such as ethnicity as certain people make it out to be. Sometimes people love playing the victim so as to justify them selves, even when it is unwarranted. As per the flight, I take it he does not travel often? I've been searched, frisked and questioned quite a few times. Other times, I have not. Since 9/11, it's been done more frequently. But for the most part, it is still done at random.

In light of the whole French presidential issue and constant talk of discriminatory practices, I've been trying to note my own tendancies. Namely, judgiing by my own actions, I've noticed I tend to never really discriminate against any races or ethnicities, (essentially not based on factors beyond ones control). That's the beauty of multi ethnic Canada (and the US). But that dosen't mean I do not regard people in a more sceptical light, dependant on the situation. I would say that the majority of my approaches to people tend more so to lay in factors they do control, such as dress, speech, mannerisms. When I hear of "racaille" (french hoodlums) citing racial discrimination, I'm rather vexed. Even in France were diversity is not as great (there, it is just large quantities from a small pool, whereas here it is small quantities from the world over). from what I've observed, discriminatory practices happen more so along gender (male) and (age). While some would claim that the authorities single out Arabs and Blacks for "controles" (I.D. Checks), I fbeg to differ. Throughout all these claims of discrimination, I am yet to hear middle aged Arab men and women, working proffessional jobs citing rampant discrimination ( from the state, but amongst employers I do give this claim some creedance). I've been "controled" about 6 times while there, despite me being white as snow with blond hair. But what all 6 of these incidents had in common was how I presented myself and where I was at the time. 3 times it took place at a train station, and when I travelled, I obviously looked a bit beaten and dishelved. True, I do look a little bit "foreign" (Slavic). But I was also carrying my massive backpack and looked a traveller. They probably wanted to make sure that I was not an illegal worker from Russia. Fair Enough. The 3 other times, it happened late at night, in somewhat "sketchy" areas, while I was coming back from work. Again, fair enough, since I was young, didn't look like a weakling who was lost and scared. Furthermore, I worked at a bar, so even without drinking, I was bound to smell a bit of alcohol. But what the unifying factor between all these incidents was my dress and my composure. Both after work, and during long travels, I dressed comfortably and rather raggedy. I didn't want to be constricted, and just as much, I didn't want to pass of as either : A) rich (or tourist) since both are walking wallets B ) a victim, someone who can't defend myself. The point of this little rant, is that like the authorites have no singled me out when I was dressed more nicely and quasi smiling, I to have similar practices. No matter what your ethnicity, history, social standing, I am bound to be more cautious around people who try to project an image of toughness. If you are a minority and you are swearing, talking ghetto slang, staring me down, and explicitly trying to look like a thug, or project an image of immaturity, I'm more cautious towards you is for those reasons, and those reasons only. I don't care if you are carribean, irish, chinese, east indian, italian, polish, arab persian or a wasp. If you actively try to dress like a trouble maker, I will perceieve you as such. I am just as sceptical of white boy dressed as such. Cause and effect. People will try and argue this point by stating that certain groups dress homogenously because of socio economic circumstance. That's a lie. When you're wearing a 200 Euro lacoste track suit ( France), a 40 quid Burberry hat (U.K) or a $ 180 pair of sneakers (North America) and claim you can't afford different garb because you lack the means, I laugh. People actively go to great legnths to project this tough, street wise image. So if you're constantly approached by the cops and try to imitate legitamite trouble makers....maybe it's time to take a REAL look in the MIRROR. But don't blame others and accept some responsibility. Anyhow, what are you tendancies, or trends? We all have them (those who don't tend to get rather used and abused).

And that had to have been the stupidest decision on behalf of Chinese military planners. Come to think of it, it was probably done without their input and ordered by bureaucrats wishing to show "force". Did they ever stop and think about the impact of thousands of pieces of satellite fragments traveling at super high velocity in satellite orbit. There are already tons up there, and that is partly why the US and former USSR stopped doing such tests, since we should not try and add more. Thus the reason why laser based disabling of satellites has won preference. It would be a true case of irony if one of their own principal military satellites were rendered useless through an encounter with their own debris.

But on the topic of technology, circuit boards are far different than this: (Su-37 "Terminator) Despite the protypes first flying over a decade ago, China could not even conceivably design anything like this. P.S. Excuse the grammatical mistakes in the video and thickness of the accent, but it is IMPRESSIVE to watch. A jet which can perform sommersaults at 70kmph, and literally, stop on a dime in mid flight.

Producing Gameboys and having the capacity to design wide bodied aircraft are two completely different beasts. By technology, let us say moreso original design and development, more so than production of circuit boards. Which are? I'd genuinely like to hear your insights. * I could of went further and tried to incorporate such issues as risks of pandemic, and other external factors, but hey, I am just a (young) pedestrian, and with exams, have far too little time to write something major. I'm basing all this off readily available current affairs sources and historical precedents. I have neither a crystal ball nor access to classified info, and am just making do with what I've got. The money required to develop said sources of Energy, especially in such underdeveloped regions host to the Shaklin NG projects. Gazprom would not be able to finance those on their own, and need the money and technology of the likes of Total, Statoil, BP, Shell. Did that clear things up? Cheers!

Thanks! But first, let us define Superpower. Sure, they are not anywhere near the level of the US, whereas the EU is just filled with non stop infighting and bickering over irrelevant matters. Besides, despite the squabbling and the certain egos of a few prominent Europeans (as well as Americans), the US and EU are allies and shall continue to be so. Anyhow, China, can be considered an up and coming super power because of the power they hold in the world. Sure it's nowhere near that of America, but they are starting to flaunt their veto power on the UNSC, and flexing their muscle in Africa. Don't forget, while the USSR never quite had the economic foothold (income disparities were tremendous) of the US, they too were considered a super power, though that was primarily due to their military capacity. With China taking over that role, they replaced military strength with economic muscle. While they are dependent on exports, don't forget, we the developed nations are equally dependent on their imports to sustain our own level of prosperity. Globalization is a blessing, but can also potentially be a curse if political entities ignore the fact that their own self interest is directly linked to the self interest of other parties. In theory, this prompt a new level of cooperation and understanding, but the problem remains that we do not always let reason be our guiding factor. * To clarify, by "expansionism", I do not mean explicit military intervention, but rather seeking a great deal of favour amongst the corrupt elite of the nations they deem crucial to their well being, and actively supporting less than desirable behavior ( ex. Sudan).

Resurgance of the Bear : The Shape of Russia to come By Marcin M. The recent CSIS strategic report on Russia ( http://csis.gc.ca/en/publications/commentary/com90.asp ) accurately predicted the recent announcement by the Russian Deputy Prime Minister, Sergei Ivanov, that Russia will be increasing the size of their Pacific Fleet as a means to safeguard themselves amidst a region with plagued by increasing tensions. From a geopolitical standpoint, it would be rather futile for Russian strategists to place all of their proverbial "eggs in one basket" by concentrating it's recent military rebuilding towards non existent threats from the NATO/EU/US centered west.After all , Europe relies on Russian energy, while Russia is too dependant on these sales as sources of revenue and capital investment. This mutual dependency is coupled with the fact that Russia is aware of Europe's passive approach to Geo-political issues. Despite Europe criticisms regarding their democratic track record attempts to diplomatically press for reform in the traditional Russian Sphere of Influence, they are well aware that these "soft" attempts will never run the risk of a more hostile expansion into what the Russians deem to be theirs. Even the recent rows with the Baltic and Central European states (Belarus, Missile Defence) are more just issues of ego and long standing resentment than severe threats to either parties security. And despite Putin's condemning speech (some would argue in retaliation to Cheney's), one could equally say the same for the current chill in US- Russia relations. It is a surging China which is worrying Russian military planners and foreign policy strategists. China is Asia's only other real superpower, more potent economically, but lagging severely in military terms, (granted they are making great strides recently, so much so they do not disclose their spending). The lack of an established Chinese defence industry puts Russia, the only regional military power, in a tough predicament as they try to save their own industry by supplying their potentially hostile neighbours all while wanting to maintain superiority in their own deterrent force. This careful balancing act is even trickier since the more China grows into it's role, the more they will be seeking out the energy and resources they so desperately lack. With Africa firmly in their grip, heavy handed economic expansion into the central Asian states which once comprised the Soviet Union will be inevitable, and as demonstrated with Taiwan and Tibet, they have no reservations about clashing with the West. But for the time being, Russia is just too weak, (and hopefully too mature) to attempt exerting explicit control over their former vassals. One would hope that they, as the Americans have discovered a century earlier, that influence is more powerful instrument than control, whereas China seems to have adopted Catherine the Greats old credo, "The only way I can secure my borders is to expand them". а следующая ДЕСЯТИЛЕТИЕ? That is the question we would all like to know. While Putin, a calculating, pragmatist, will undoubtedly retain enormous influence in Russian foreign policy for years to come, such is the nature of Russian politics that anything can happen, even a betrayal. But a closer alliance with the West, in facing the Chinese dragon can prove to be a plausible scenario, and pardon the expression, term, but a westward looking" Союз ", albeit a capitalist one. What do you think will be the interplay between these two nations? Will it overshadow the current Russia/ West tensions? Any predictions? * I think just as interesting would be future Chinese/Middle Eastern tensions, and how that could affect the bigger picture.

This is taken from the Gaurdian.co.uk website (not my favourite, I might add, but it is interesting to note how military strategists maybe foreseeing our future and creating contingency plans). Although it does support my own personal prediction regarding Iran. Regardless, It best to err on the side of caution, and plan for the worse. Revolution, flashmobs, and brain chips. A grim vision of the future