ScottSA

Oops. Here's Woody making an ass of himself, again. He embarks on an argument claiming that the Nazi party is not a German party, then blows a hole in his hull with the side announcement that Nazis abound in Canada and America, and continues to sail along through a number of broadsides until he runs aground on google. Seeing a chance to salvage something...anything...of his shredded dignity, he hoists an article showing that there weren't that many German Nazis after the allies got finished with them after all, but finds that he has also hoisted himself and his original argument on his own petard. Good job Woody. Say after me: "By 1945 the Nazi Party and the Nazi state were no longer capable of separation. When the German armies surrendered to the Allies in May 1945 and the German state ceased to exist, the Nazi Party, despite its 8.5 million nominal members and its nationwide organisational structure, also ceased to exist." That seems to suggest that the Nazi party has just a hint of German ownership, what do you think?

I hesitate to start taxing people for things. In a sense, once we allowed the state to take over responsibility for our health, we also gave up the freedoms we once had. If the state is going to foot the bill, then the state can also set conditions on that largesse. But taxes just piss people off and they certainly don't stop the behaviour or no one would drink or smoke. Tax incentives, on the other hand, are a far more palatable way of producing the same result. I do think user fees have a place in healthcare...I don't know what the stats are, but whenever I've gone to a clinic in Vernon, at least half the folks waiting there are low-lifes who live an intentionally unhealthy lifestyle. In Manitoba I remember before they had walkin clinics, the emergencies were almost always tied up with morbidly obese people. I also know my ex-wife had my kids in to see the doctor everytime they had a sniffle, and that I saw as not only an unhealthy choice for the kids, but a damned unfair action for everyone else. I suspect its the least productive folks in our society who use the health system the most. I don't see a problem requiring unproductive first gen family class immigrants to pay insurance premiums...nothing irks me more than to see some old turbanned fart get off the boat, produce squat for the country, but hobble down to the nearest clinic to deal with his ailments on my dime.

Hey, I hear the Conservatives are gonna put troops in the streets to make us all turn into fundamentalist Christians and like be American-style and stuff. That's probably why they want aircraft carriers too. Stop the MAN before it's too late!1!!!!!11!!!

You will never accept reality, will you? I guess more correctly, you'll never be able to fathom reality.

It certainly is. However when you shine a light on what the sustainable development crowd advocate, there is no difference. The sustainability crowd: 54% Ganja-smoking hangerson who think peasant life is a romantic romp in the fields roughly comparable to a Marxist utopia where folks "hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner" and presumably shag a la free love all night. The reason they think peasant life is like that is because their sole experience with it involves buying hemp sandals made in some peasant cottage industry sweat shop and reading Che Guevarra slogans on the bottom of red posters. These folks are the ones who sign petitions calling for the banning of dihydrogen oxide on the grounds that it causes sweating. 30% New worlders who use the environmental movement as a vehicle to A ) bring about a single world government based on "fairness" and "equity" (read: communistic). 10% People with some basic grounding of knowledge who actually believe that manmade actions are heating up the planet. 5% Opportunists who use the movement as a vehicle to secure cash. This includes folks like Suzuki and Gore, who see a bonanza in donation money and speaking fees; and the academic world of grant funding, which explains why so many scientists in fields wholly unrelated to weather manage to find an angle vaguely related to weather change...the funding taps are as open to global warming this decade as to AIDs last decade or feminist studies the decade before that. 1% Scientists who sincerely believe that global warming is manmade.

Don't be ridiculous. I'm not a constitutional lawyer, but to claim that something in fundamental opposition to the intent and purpose of the charter cannot change is inane. Civil war? Civil war between who? The CF and a bunch of beer bellied braves armed with hunting rifles and dressed in way cool camous bought at army navy surplus? I wonder who would win?

Uncomfortable Questions: Was the Death Star Attack an Inside Job? Like many citizens, I have many questions that I would like answered: was the mighty Imperial government really too incompetent to prevent a handful of untrained nerf-herders from destroying one of their most prized assets? Or are they hiding something from us? Who was really behind the attack? Why did they want the Death Star destroyed? No matter what the answers, we have a problem. Below is a summary of my book, Uncomfortable Questions: An Analysis of the Death Star Attack, which presents compelling evidence that we all may be the victims of a fraud of immense proportions. http://debunking911.com/questions.htm

Ummm, woody, I see we've moved on from the claim that there were more American and Canadian Nazis than German, and are grasping at all sorts of straws. I think you'll find that virtually all of the parties you're touting are either set up by the Germans in occupied territory or fostered by the Germans during the war. Some are just fascist parties or even wannabe fascist parties. I'm not sure what you mean to prove by introducing 19 students in Taiwan setting up what amounts to a club in their spare time, but whatever turns you on...

I remember seeing a picture of JFK in the late 60s in a peasant's mud hut in Hydrabad India. Don't think for a moment that America didn't fight and win the cold war.

I don't think there is anything wrong with the planet, I think there is something wrong with peoples heads. Exactly. I bet they don't even get the irony of pointing at snowstorms as evidence of Global Warming...oops, I mean "Climate Change".

The committee had extended invitations that were not passed on, isn't that the case? Dion's passive shun of France and Canada (where he is a proud citizen of both) is really unacceptable. I'm no nationalist... I don't take pride in the fact that some unrelated people suffered for the freedom of some of Europe versus the rest of Europe. I thank them for their sacrifice, but I'm definitely not proud of it. I think Canadians (and most people in the world evidently) are arrogant for being proud of something they had no hand in. People don't need to die to define a nation (how I'm defined by Vimy, I'm unsure). I think alot of vets aren't neccessarily proud of what they did. I don't know of any that are comfortable talking about killing the enemy. They realised the reality of the situation, the necessity. They certainly shouldn't feel guilty. But talking to a few friends that are vets of Kosovo and Afghanistan, killing people is never a proud moment. One friend that was operating with the forces in the South of Aghanistan reflected on his feelings after taking a small town, inflicting massive casualties on the Taliban. I wouldn't dare ask if he had personally killed anyone... but it was very evident that the aftermath of the attack will be with him forever. That was witnessing the death of people that were fully committed to killing him and waging war on the West. The feeling of watching the death of those that were forced into combat, it would be unimaginable. The suffering of the victors is great as well. They deserve thanks, and I think they should expect thanks, but I don't think they'd want our national image defined by one of the most terrible times in recent history. I can't imagine the anger that those Canadians felt as they advanced on the German lines, knowing that they were about to kill people that were not interested in Hitler's goals or ideology. Truly terrible. Canada didn't win at Vimy, we lost nearly 3,600 men, and many others were permenantly injured, emotionally and physically. How of the families back in Canada, the UK and even in Germany. The Germans lost 20,000 men, most of which were conscripts. Humanity lost at Vimy... though it was a necessary loss to prevent much greater suffering. There is no glory, nothing to be proud of (alot to be thankful for), especially not for those that weren't there. 200,000 men died at Vimy in total. Millions were affected. It's all very uncomprehensible, very unnerving. I'd never be proud of sending someone to kill someone else, never. I'd be thankful for their necessary sacrifice, but I can't see how we can be proud of the suffering of everyone involved. But I'd pay my respects for their sacrifice (those that died and fought at Vimy), their courage paves the way for me to live as I do today. And for that, I'm thankful. Dion doesn't really seem very interested in being respectful... he's far more interested in partisan bickering. Sorry for leaving the political topic for a bit with my little rant on my feelings about war, ignore and continue if you wish. It is precisely because of the horrors of war that moments of definition come from it. Participation in war is often the standard by which a man measures himself. That's hard to understand for folks who haven't been there, and very hard to understand for feminized men, one of whom will no doubt immediately leap up with a petty line item snipe, but it's true nonetheless. In fact, it's only within the last century in the west that war has become a great evil...no doubt corresponding to the advent of total war and air attacks on the value targets of its participants. Between the enlightenment and the 20th century, war was something largely undertaken on the battlefield between armies, and only incidently involved civil populations. The first world war was perhaps the last such war...aside from the Zeppelin attacks and the destruction of cities immediately adjacent the battlefield, civilian populations were largely intact (although mostly due to the techological failings of both sides). The second world war was a plunge into the dark side of total war, and it's when the west took a turn away from the glorification of war. But that doesn't take away the power of war to shape the specifics of an individual or historically define a nation.Unfortunately total war has never touched our current enemy, so they don't know the whirlwind yet.

Quote of the day :lol: Yes, we won't want scientific nonsense to cloud the ethereal visions which prove that the Black Hand and Bushistaburton made the WTC fall down...

You've obviously never had your life rudely interrupted by a group of murderous fiends. There's an element of truth, I suspect, to the saying that a hawk is a dove who's been mugged.

With respect, I live in Vernon, right in the path of the epidemic. It has happened before and will happen again. However, it so happens that the mountain pine beetle attacks only lodgepole pine, and the two have co-existed with each other for a very long time with episodic but far reaching attacks every few years. The pine beetle attacks in BC have included major attacks from 1930-45, and from 1980-85, and then again from 2000 to date. The forest is still there because the pine beetle attacks mature lodgepole, leaving young lodgepole (and every other type of tree still standing). To arbitrarly blame this current outbreak on Global Warming is completely off the wall. Weather systems are for the most part localized anyway...while it's been warmer in BC for the last decade or so, last winter was, I believe the coldest winter in Edmonton for the last 100 years. Funny thing is, people are noticing that while some places heat up for a few years, others get colder...hardly a stirling confirmation of Global Warming.

Transcendental importance for Canada? A bunch of British soldiers kill many Germans and take a big hill in a meaningless battle that did not change the course of a meaningless war. How is that really relevant to Canada? I doubt one person in 100 in Quebec could say anything about Vimy. Stephen Harper is using this for contemporary political purposes. Vimy is seen by an entire school of Canadian historians as the crucible that defined Canada both at home and on the world stage. My grandfather took my mother overseas to see the dedication of the monument sometime in the 1930s...long before Harper was a gleam in his father's eye. Harper is simply reviving the practice of honoring our vets, after years upon years of fashionable scoffing at them by the Libs and NDP.

I will resist replying to CB until such time as he formulates an actual argument and stops making up silly strawmen like claiming that I'm arguing "that whites are all good, and non whites are all savages". How silly.

Higgly, until we stop worrying about how not to talk about things because it's "racist" or "bigotted" or [insert PC no-no], we're going to get nowhere. What's the point of looking for euphemistic ways to say things. Do you not realize how silly it is to claim that the word "Indian" is racist, while Indians claim cash on the basis of race deem it quite appropriate? What IS racist is paying wergeld to a bunch of people defined by race and demanding ever more money on the basis of race. They were here first? Well, how bout if I start demanding cash from the Chinese and East Indians because, after all, my race was here first too relative to them. What's even more racist is to claim that Indians will never be able to make it on their own without wheelbarrows full of cash.

I'm still waiting to hear what buildings in the US the commies blew up Woody. I mean, sure, there were some stones thrown in the 68 Democratic Convention, but hey, that's the Democrats for ya...but not many buildings went down that day.

Cool. I'm always willing to learn new things. Please direct me to the tools used by North American Indians at the time of Columbus. I'm very interested. I do though know a little about the ridiculous revisionist thesis that the Iroquois Confederacy spawned democracy, and it's based upon the mere similarity between a tribal law and advanced democracy and hung by the tenuous notion that Franklin met with some Iroquios leaders before he began promoting the Continental Congress. Sorry, but it's nonsense. We can rewrite history all we want, and we can pretend that things weren't the way they were. We can even pretend that everything Bwana ever did was bad, and that the moral virtue somehow accrues to non-whites by virtue of historical oppression. That's the joy of history. But when we actually start to believe nonsensical revisionism, that's a bit of a danger. CB: I have read Diamond's book. I found, like most, that he's trying to concoct a grand theory out of a great deal of speculation. Sure there's a connection between animal labour and human advancement, but to extrapolate from that to why industrial society became what it is goes a bi8t beyond reasonable analysis. The most reasonable explanation I've ever come across as to why western civilization shot ahead of all others by several orders of magnitude is the sectarianism of Europe. While other societies had the luxury of reclining in the relative vacuums of large territorial domains, Europe was broken into small fragments in a state of chronic competitive turmoil, which forced its fragments to advance at a much faster rate and embrace innovation as a 'good' after the enlightenment, when other civilizations thought of innovation as an evil. Before you type up some retarded line item counterexamples, take the time to think things through...this is a bit more complicated than you might think.

Let me mislead you further then, by explaining something you may not know: Nazi stands for "Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei" or, in English, the "National Socialist Party". It was a political party in Germany. It was limited to Germany. One of its fundamental platforms was the superiority of the Aryan master race, which the philosphy defined as the Germanic tribes. According to Hitler, the true master race existed as Germans, and was indeed the justification for both Liebenstrau and the "homeland" demands Hitler made of the Sudetenland and the Rhineland. (You probably don't know what I'm refering to here, so it's a good chance to go google up some embryonic knowledge to shove into the eggplant that perches atop your neck). According to Hitler, AFTER the Germans came other "races", including the British and the Scandinavians, and most of the Americans. The fact that there were offshoot parties in Britain and America doesn't change the fact that Nazism is inherently a German philosophy and a German party. It's entire ethos is Germancentric. You are mistaking fascism for nazism, and fascista for Nazis. Of course, the claim that there were more British and American Nazis than German Nazis is...well...interesting to say the least.

Thats called throwing money at a problem and hoping it will go away. It doesn't work, and a government and people should instead work together to find a better solution. Whiteyguilt, classic. Buddy, your the most bigoted person on here. Weren't you saying something about how all FN's want to live in the stone age. Which simply tells us all how little you actually know about Native history and culture. Well, it's a one time throw of money at the problem to stop the ongoing flow of money at the problem, so I think it might be worth one last throw. Don't be dense. As for my bigotry, here's the deal: I don't hide behind euphemisms. It's a fact, whether you like it or not, that pre-Columbian north American society was at a stone age level. To argue otherwise is to display your ignorance of what 'stoneage' means. Now if you know something no one else knows about "Native history and culture" that corrects this widely accepted knowledge, please share it with me so that I don't make the mistake again. "Native history and culture" wasn't, as latterday legend would have it, an unending frolic through sylvan utopia whilst burned sweetgrass and communing with nature; it was a nasty brutish and short subsistence punctuated by sprees of intertribal slaughter, which goes a long way toward explaining why Indians want nothing to do with it today. It's great politics for Indian lobbyists to play on ignorant Whitey's guilt by claiming the inherent need to return to a harmonious state of Noble Savagery which never existed, and it's been damned successful judging from the number of fools who buy into it through some need to feel guilty about being white, but it's utter nonsense. It's just good politics. It's also a continuation of 19th century paternalism...which, not coincidentally, oozes out of every pore of your apologia for "Native history and culture". Indians don't need your help. They are every bit as capable as you of making a success or failure of their lives out in the wide world. Their lobbyists and activists, like Black activists in the states, do nothing but act as crabs in a barrel by perpetuating a ridiculous self-enforced apartied that frowns upon any notion of integrating with hegemonic society. Shame on you for helping perpetuate it.

Far too simplistic. My BMI is 28.5, yet my bodyfat percentage is low. That's just because I go to the gym a lot. I'm 6' and 210 lbs, and carry a lot of weight that's not fat. I daresay I'm not at a startling risk of any medical condition. I agree that there ought to be a difference in medical costs due to lifestyle and consequent health risk, and I think healthy folk ought to somehow suffer financial hardship less than obese useless slugs, but that's really hard to do in the presence of universal healthcare. Seems to me that the solution lies in a combination of user sticks and nonuser carrots. I sure don't have the solution, but I know one MP tried to introduce a private member's bill for something as simple as making gym memberships a tax credit, and I see no downside to that at all (especially since I have a part interest in a gym). I don't see how to apply the stick in any sort of reasonable way, but the carrot aspect...to reward folks for good health...is a great idea.

Right. But what about a one time settlement of $250,000 for each living Indian, followed by the abolition of the reserve system? Would that assuage your whiteyguilt? Oh, and btw, calling someone "first nations" is no different from calling them "Indians". In fact most Indians prefer not to hide behind euphemisms.

I met Harper in 93 when he was a lowly MP under Manning. I also worked with him and Herb Grubel on the finance critic's portfolio at the time, and he is truly one of the most intelligent men ever to walk the halls of Centre Block. A little short on personality perhaps, but very smart and very clever and very politically savvy. He has out-maneuvred the other parties easily, and I expect he'll continue to do so in the future. As an added bonus, he also does pretty much what he says he's gonna do.

Our choice under Kyoto would be to destroy our economies or pay blackmail to the third world backwater failed marxist economies. It is not crazy it is simple math. http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Cor...04/3914710.html Just ignore CB...he is in love with strawmen.