Moonlight Graham

Oh yeah i forgot, ITS REALLY HILARIOUS!!! Isn't a lie repeated worse that a lie told once? You can lie once & it sometimes be a mistake, but 20 times and its just B.S. The question should be why doesn't anybody care now? 935+ lies, many just simply inexcusibly BLATANT, made to trick the world into a war responsible for civilian deaths in the six figures. And yet no substancial legal action has been taken againt those responsible (oops i forgot poor Scooter). Bush, Cheney & co. should be impeached and convicted. Rumsfeld should be in jail too. But of course the Democrats are too afraid to ruin their election hopes to actually do anything. Congress will force baseball players in front of a grand jury for lying about steroids, but let this slide? Disgusting. I just don't understand why the American people haven't risen up & overwhelmingly demanded Congress to remove these criminals. Its bad enough that all this has happened, but what exactly has been done to prevent this from ever happening again? Scary.

Didn't see a link posted to the actual site that lists the 935 "false statement" (or as i call them, "lies"). Here it is. http://www.publicintegrity.org/WarCard/ WARNING: Site may cause your blood to boil.

I think this deserves its own topic. Look at this regarding the Manley Report: Hmmmm.

The title to this thread is stupid.

Yes, that would suck for the landowners. My family owns a cottage in Ontario, and i know that you don't own the shoreline of your property, so basically anyone can run along your beach & you can't do anything about it. Similar to how you can't stop anyone from turning around in your driveway i guess. I don't remember how much of your shoreline is considered "free-game", i don't think its very much.

i guess you're right. My post was mostly in jest. I would say incest is considered wrong because we know the genetic defects it can cause if related people have a child together. There may be social reasons factoring themselves in the ethics of it, like how the majority of people would consider the idea/act of having sex with a sibling or a parent as repulsive.

So if i somehow build a small mobile house that could hover a foot off the ground, would i be able go set it up on some nice waterfront property & live there? Heh heh i know these are weird hypotheticals but i'm just trying to get a sense of what property right laws are in terms of airspace. A more realistic example is if i was playing with a boomerang, would i be legally allowed to toss it across my neighbour's backyard all day a few feet off the ground & they couldn't do anything about it? I guess these issues would depend on the by-laws in your given area of residence?

By owning it, doesn't Canada have the right to do absolutely nothing at all with it in terms of development?

For me, i don't see much practical reason why anyone should be allowed to own anything more than a hunting rifle or shotgun. No handguns, no automatic guns etc.

Not sure excactly where to put this thread. But i have wondered this for awhile: Let's say you own a house on an acre of property. We know an average person can't walk on that private property without your permission as it would be illegal trespassing. However, how much "airspace" above your land do you own, if any? For example, if i had a toy remote controlled helicopter, could i legally fly it over to my neighbour's yard & let it hover a foot from the ground? 10 feet? 100 feet? At what height does it become public airspace?

go have sex with your sister and tell me how you feel afterwards. That will answer your own question.

bing-bing!

Canadians understand we are in Afghanistan, but the majority have little idea what it actually means and/or have little knowledge on the history of the region.

hurray for U.S. interventionism!

This kid is NO victim. He is the luckiest 17-year-old guy in the world. Any guy in here will tell you that he's not sitting somewhere right now crying about his abuse. He probably has a giant smile on his face actually. These events have not caused him disturbing nightmares, but rather some wet-dreams. The teacher is an idiot though, she should be punished for going over the line with a student.

Whichever democratic candidate will install the purest universal healthcare sysetm in the U.S. (with pure, i mean less private insurance, less 2-tier care) will be best for Canada. Canada's healthcare is in a crisis because many doctors have left to work in the U.S. because they will simply make more money down there. A universal system in the U.S. will cap salaries for doctors more, thus letting us keep our best & brightest & improve Canada's healthcare. Right now i'm not sure which major Democratic candidate (or Ron Paul?) will try to put forth the most non-private universal system, basically because they all lie through their teeth (like most politicians). Not so charged on Hillary with this issue, very skeptical she can get rid of these private insurance companies. I don't know how the U.S. can institute true universal healthcare when there are so many big insurance companies which will have to fold, which seems unlikely. Plus some of the candidates have insurance companies funding their campaigns so connect the dots.

Well i don't want to square off with anyone, but most of the people who support torture have never had it done to them or had it affect them. I'm sure if an American citizen was take & tortured because they were thought suspicious, even before any trial was done, these same torture advocates would be up in arms. John McCain was tortured & he's the man up on the stage during the Republican debates chastizing the other Republican candidates for being in favour (or hiding his opinion, like Romney) of waterboarding etc. I also think its is similar for many of us who support military efforts somewhere. We know the violence is horrible, but the vast majority of us have never experienced it or truly empathize with it. None of us in North America have experienced major military fighting in our cities like those in Iraq, Afghanistan etc. We've never hid in our basements when the bomb sirens went off, while holding a family member in your arms whose limbs have been blown off, sitting in a pitch-black house that hasn't had electricity for weeks & your toilet is filled with week-old urine, frightened to death while bombs are exploding all around you praying you won't get hit this time. I really couldn't even imagine the horror. We are so lucky where we are, protected by oceans, physically isolated from most of the bad news.

It is attitudes like this that make the world a worse place to live in. Universal Declaration of Human Rights The Geneva Conventions

In my opinion, i think a part of it was. People were very angry after 9/11. Don't make me quote a Toby Keith song! Ahh what the heck: "Courtesy Of The Red, White, And Blue (The Angry American) by Toby Keith American girls and American guys, will always stand up and salute. We'll always recognize, when we see ol' glory flying, There's a lot of men dead, So we can sleep in peace at night when we lay down our heads. My daddy served in the army where he lost his right eye, But he flew a flag out in our yard 'til the day that he died. He wanted my mother, my brother, my sister and me. To grow up and live happy in the land of the free. Now this nation that I love is fallin' under attack. A mighty sucker-punch came flying in from somewhere in the back. Soon as we could see clearly through our big black eye, Man, we lit up your world like the fourth of July. Hey, Uncle Sam put your name at the top of his list, And the Statue of Liberty started shaking her fist. And the eagle will fly and it's gonna be hell, When you hear Mother Freedom start ringing her bell. And it'll feel like the whole wide world is raining down on you. Ah, brought to you, courtesy of the red, white and blue. Instrumental break. Oh, justice will be served and the battle will rage: This big dog will fight when you rattle his cage. An' you'll be sorry that you messed with the U.S. of A. 'Cos we'll put a boot in your ass, it's the American way. Hey, Uncle Sam put your name at the top of his list, And the Statue of Liberty started shaking her fist. And the eagle will fly and it's gonna be hell, When you hear Mother Freedom start ringing her bell. And it'll feel like the whole wide world is raining down on you. Ah, brought to you, courtesy of the red, white and blue. Oh, oh. Of the red, white and blue. Oh, hey, oh. Of my Red, White and Blue."

Well i'm probably not going to find any surveys of people saying they straight-out wouldn't vote for a woman or black, even if they felt that way. I'll take it back for it being "a fact". I respect your posts, & i also don't want this debate to go down an ugly road down somehow so i'll give ya the win on this one.

The Canadian public does not vote for the PM, they vote for an MP in their riding. The PM is whomever holds the confidence of the House, almost always coming from the party of majority. The PM is, technically, determined after the federal election is over. However, i understand your point.

Just google it & you'll find a lot of stuff like this: http://www.cnn.com/POLITICS/blogs/politica...r-black-or.html http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/14824/ http://www.niu.edu/PubAffairs/RELEASES/200.../research.shtml

Since when does "vengeance" equate to justice in American society, or most countries in the west for that matter? When somebody murders a family of four, the courts don't order the murderer & his 3 closest family members to death. When you use violence to seek justice for violence, all you do is create more violence. Americans know this, that's why your system of law isn't based on "eye-for-an-eye", and you have laws protecting against "cruel & unusual punishment". So why is U.S. foreign policy (and many western countries, including Canada at times, for that matter) not consistent with its domestic policy? That's not to say military action wasn't needed after 9/11, but i don't see how we are any safer long-term, and i certainly wouldn't call what the west has done to Afghanistan & Iraq "justice". Abu Ghraib, water-boarding (and the continued debate of it among presidential candidates!?!), gov't sponsored foreign regime changes/coups/assassitions (or attempts of), military actions based on protecting delicious oil, non-military action based on it not protecting delicious oil (Rwanda, Sudan), pooping on the Geneva Conventions Why does the U.S. not extend its respect for domestic human rights into its foreign policies? It is not only the U.S., many in the west do the same, but the U.S. is by far the biggest perpetrator.

My American friends know quite well how i feel about their government. Most of them agree with me. As i said, Canada's independence from Britain was mostly peaceful (save minor rebellions in Upper/Lower Canada) and did not involve a violent revolution. Canada's independence was a counter-revolution, which was a direct result of the U.S. Revolution, where Britain feared would be repeated in Canada & thus granted us responsible gov't and eventually came the BNA Act in 1867. The U.S. Constitution is an amazing document which has influenced the democratic consititutions of many countries & the spread of liberal democracy throughout the world. People like James Madison, responsible for things like the seperation of powers, checks and balances, and federalism in the constitution, were indeed brilliant. I admire the system that the U.S. governs itself with, but that doesn't mean i admire the actions of some of the people who have held power in that system. There's a huge difference.

Its a wonderful system as i have stated, but i am just questioning the actions of some of the individuals working within that system. Not that Canada is perfect by any means, nor could i even say that Canada would have done a better job if we were in the U.S.'s position of power. That doesn't mean i can't criticize the U.S. gov't for its failures (just as i would my own gov't). As the great philosopher Ben Parker (Spider-Man's uncle) once said: "With great power comes great responsibility".