marcinmoka

Touché. I never knew baking was amongst Henry VIII's many talents. As per the shrove, it never even crossed my mind due to my being an (ATTN : Mike David, do not read) immigrant with all these damn cultural differences. We have a habit of eating spherical pieces of deep fried, fruit/confiture filled dough. Same premise, different product.

Commonplace? Ummm........*silence*.

Though based on a stupid premise, it's better he try to express his anger of defeat through batsh*t crazy legal claim than with tear gas, some broken bottles and various pieces of gardening equipment. This is the Champions League after all. Does anyone know the reason for the creation of the "Croissant"? I just ask myself that if the Ottoman Turks had won, would they of celebrated by baking a flaky, buttery cross to mark their victory? Or at least a piece of baclava, complete with a Jesus shaped pistachio.

I would not know.

A. Gazprom, B. Re-shaping the Russian economy thereby softening the blow of transition for the common population C. Putin's campaign Yes, are you surprised. What did you expect? Let me remind you of an old diplomatic maxim: "Diplomacy is the art of telling someone to go to hell in such a manner that they look forward to their journey" Wrong? Maybe you should actually read my post prior to jumping to conclusions. This is exactly what I said, and yet you claim it's wrong. This is probably the most absurd statement of them all. It does matter. The reason Putin chose someone as complacent as Medvedev is because of the aforementioned reasons #1 & #2, that Medvedev will play by Putin's rules but without engaging in the antagonistic rhetoric so common amongst the old guard of the security establishment. Russia has severely tarnished it's image in the eyes of the west, but it also knows it can afford to do so no more or else it runs the risk of more severe consequences, i.e the abandonment of foreign investors and accession to the WTO. That is why they chose someone who is far more pro-business. And your rationale?

Not quite proof, but as a tongue in cheek manner of showing that trying to extrapolate anecdotal evidence onto the whole means squat. If we use MikeDavids 'close counters with the third kind' as a basis, it would seem that ALL immigrants are violent and unwilling to change, whereas mine would indicate the opposite, and both parties would ignore the fact that while it does happen more frequently in certain segments of the immigrant population, it is far from being a rampant widespread problem he makes it out to be.

Mike, do you ever tell your "friends" that they are "3rd world trash" to their face? ------------------------------- Wanna hear a true story, I swear am not making this up. I am an immigrant. My wife is an immigrant. Neither of us have ever been pushed, burned, disowned, abused.........in fact neither of us have ever incurred anything more than a slap to the back of the head by our respective mothers for not having finished out (english language) homework.

With a mortgage (gage a mort i.e wages till death) in Forest Hill, one needs to make sacrifices. Though I'm sure I could toss you a pair of headphones. This clip is worth it. I suggest noting it for future reference.

In case anyone has never seen it (and I strongly recommend) The Human Cost of Immigration http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEedZJka1HQ P.S. Mike David and anyone else who may be inclined, it is SATIRICAL.

This is messed up, and to be honest, I feel almost ashamed. I'm going with Lesters Blue Helmets.

Bingo, at least my predictions have come true. In that respect, Medvedev has many *qualities*. 1. He is a competent manager. 2. He provides a somewhat amiable face for foreign investors and politicos alike. 3. He seems far more easily influenced, if not controllable by Putin & Co. 4. He is not as antagonistic as Ivanov. Granted, but if we apply this standard to Canada???? *Not that I am claiming, by any stretch of the imagination, that Russia is in fact a democracy*

He or she may very well believe so, but those who are paying for those suicide belts and provide the 'martyr money' to their family certainly have other motives (since obviously, they are not strapping the belts to themselves) What about those who enlisted for WWII, or more recently, Afghanistan. They to are ready to die for a better life, albeit not for themselves, but for their nation(s) and family, i.e survival. See above. Remember, there are far greater amounts of people who are willing, and have, died for an earthly cause. While as repulsive as their actions may be, giving a one off example of a bomb belt laden Jihadi unfortunately translates into little in the bigger picture.

Yes, with prime examples being: The Napoleonic Wars WWI WWII The Cold War Korea Vietnam Iraq All perfect examples of religious wars........oh wait.... ------------- If you seriously believe the above statement, I pity you. Religion can, and sometimes is used a pretext, but the real reason is power, wealth and the desire for preservation (all of which are inherently linked). Religion is just the tool to get certain segments of the population a bit more riled up.

Obviously you have yet to go to Eastern Europe, or pay any attention to E.U - Russia relations. You really don't get it. There is a tremendous difference between persons of religion partaking in government, and persons of religion infiltrating a government for the end of it benefiting their OWN CHURCH. In the end, it comes down to with whom your allegiance is. Nah.....you don't say! I'm shocked.

Yes, some religions are better than others. In business, you would do a cost benefit analysis, i.e how much public good is done relative to how much public bad. Suicide cults, such as David Koresh's or the Temple of the Sun/Heavens GAte firmly would fall into the latter. Infiltrating? I thought a persons Christianity was more often a promotional tool, and I highly doubt that members of said churches were running out with classified documents and handing them off to the Archbishop of Canterbury or whatever. So wait, I need a double take. In this above statement, you claimed that a) Christians and Jews ARE GUILTY Muslims are inexplicably "targeted' for NO REASON, and should be absolved of these accusations, of which only Christians and Jews can be implicated. Well, no point in arguing if you have already made up your mind. I guess so, since I am yet to hear of the church of FSM being implicated in murder cases.

Granted, I've seen a philosopher using formal logic to try and prove the existence of god, but he defined "God" as an uncaused-cause, sort of akin to the notion of the singularity in physics. Guess it depends on your definition of God. As per L.Ron.Hubbardism, dangerous, I dunno. I generally seem them as wierdos trying to shove pamphlets in my face concerning the evils of psychiatry or offers of 'free stress tests'. However that is only MY OWN view of the matter. Substantiated or not, there have been many reports of extremely coercive practices, brainwashing, blackmail, espionage, attempts to infiltrate government services and unlawful and unethical, if not just plain disturbing attempts to wreck all dissenters and critics with their 'fair game' policy. And if certain governments can substantiate these actions, and do deem this a threat to their nation, than so be it. It is their purpose to protect their citizens from threats.

Link: Statscan Damn them and their respect for education and hard work. In fact, when it comes to the children of Chinese immigrants, I think the figure is closer to 1/3. How can we as Canadians accept this barbarity. In terms of the valorization of education, hard work and perseverance, I think the Jews are facing stiff competition, were it not for their secret weapon, the perpetually nagging triumvirate consisting of the wife, the mother and the grandmother.

At least those in the Interior Ministry and domestic security services agree. Link : Globe & Mail And this leads to the question, what constitutes a religion? I hope the requisites are more than a circle of followers and a tax free status.

Even more absurd is the environmentalist movement against nuclear power stations. Ah, the miseries of missing out on the big(ger) picture.

In stark contrast to Jarislawski, The Globe & Mail

Many Portugals? Economically speaking, maybe Slovenia and Greece. And if you think that those little nations have "equal" power to the big players (i.e. the collective Franco-German 'motor'), dream on. In fact, that is almost laughable, since even Italy, which is a quasi-big player has almost no impact at the E.C.B, and I doubt Cyprus will have better luck. Besides, the purpose of any Central Bank, at least in the developed world is to act to the stability of the overall economy and without political interference.

I take it you have never been. Pitting the economic levels of Portugal against that of Germany makes the difference between Canada and U.S seem trivial. ------------------------ My camera. A German engineered lens milled in Midland, Ont, with a body & processor produced and assembled by Matsushita in Japan. And this was a fairly low level product, and very commonly used. Once you get into the upper echelons, you would be a fool to offer anything not produced in either Japan, Sweden or Germany.

Regan-esque mythology dies hard. Do you honestly believe that a statement by Regan caused the soviet union to implode? The pressure being applied, perhaps did speed up the process, but hostility against the soviet union was in short supply. Someone else (a Belarussian in fact) asked me this earlier. I think Leo partly answered this, since energy reserves do matter, especially with an up and coming China in their backyard. This is just silly. The fact of the matter is that Belarus does not posses energy, nor a massive weapon stockpile, nor control a strategically vital part of Asia, so why bother posing far fetched scenarios. Granted if said elements did pertain to Belarus (as well as a population 15x it's size, I doubt the outcome would of been any different.)

But what is the point of running if you are only running into the ground. In continuing your analogy, those 9 years of lessons resulted in more bruises and fractures from the relentless fall-downs, and thus the Russian public's enthusiasm for new methods of making the transition. Russia is not Poland or Hungary, and that is something many foreign observers tend to forget. Maybe after some real stability is established can they go on an continue with a more legitimate democratic process. Till than, we should just hope for the best.

And yours is a Chaotic Kleptocracy such as during the Yeltsin years? Is it genuinely better?