ScottSA

This is such a profoundly silly analysis that I won't even address it.

Fat is a health issue. It's just peachy to spit defiance at everyone, but when I have to pay for an operation because her ankles or knees can't carry the weight she so loudly flings around, anymore, then it's not quite so heroic anymore. And "fat bigot?" Because some guy isn't turned on by her and won't ask her for a date, he's a "fat bigot?"

I'm talking about corporate welfare too, yes. However, I suspect the reason you get a good chuckle from this kind of "brain washed rhetoric" is that you don't understand the rhetoric. Do you know what a welfare state is? Hint: Its not confined to welfare cheques.

Why don't people do their own research? The legislation has either just been tabled or it's about to be, and the "Muslim community" is saying two things at once, as usual.

Nope. Not even close. Just not an amateurish writer. My assumption is that Chinese soldiers are not going to be flying to Africa in commandeered jetliners. If they do, you'll have long ago crawled under your bed, becayuse WW III (or IV, depending on your viewpoint) will be in full swing. Thucydides was the first, but by no means the last, to recognize that peoples (and nations) fight for survival, and that the best way to achieve survival is to achieve hegemony. The US has hegemony. Thucydides also recognized that when challenged for hegemony, a hegemon is at its most dangerous. Despite the current hype surrounding China, it's decades away from an ability to challenge the US in extraterritorial wars of any kind, and if it tried it would be stopped in its tracks. China may be able to stack more soldiers in a paddy field than the US, but that is meaningless.

That has long been the Catholic conception. The lake of fire thingy was popular back when Christians acted like fundi Muslims do today.

Hang on. He's gone to check the Statute of Westminister for its immutable wisdom on this issue.

"Firstly" is a phrase I used to try to break first year students of. Second, the US, to name one example, has a standing ability to commandeer airlines any damned time they want in an emergency, and I strongly suspect canada does too. They don't need to be "at death's door" any more than China does, although like China, it doesn't make economic sense to do it on a weekly basis. Yes it is, which is why we have nuclear deterrence...something you lot spent the last two decades trying to get rid of. The cost to Chinese value targets through deflection and second strike capability would be far more than the cost to the US, so that's not something China is about to try. What in God's name are you talking about? Oh, so the lift capacity you told us a moment ago that we all laughed at doesn't matter anymore? So you seem to be confused. A minute ago you were educating us about proxy wars and here you are back at flying Chinese soldiers again. The chances that planes full of chinese soldiers flying into Africa would be attacked are quite good, actually. There would almost certainly be military transport planes with substantial air defence flying US soldiers in the other end of Africa at the same time anyway. Whatever happened to the proxy wars you spoke of? And who do you think would win a proxy war in Africa? I recommend to you the outcomes of various proxy wars in Africa over the last four decades.

The mailings were an issue for you and one other person. And the veils wouldn't be a problem if the Muslims would remove them.

These long drawn out and snide rants of yours always seem to be against anyone who wants to maintain their traditions and culture, while giving the impression that you're above it all. But somehow you always manage to set yourself up as special, and squeeze in the fact that you're Jewish. Why is that? You also post frequent tomes about how Israel should do exactly the opposite of all other countries. There is nothing at all wrong with people wanting to live with people who are like them. 50 years ago it was treated as common sense. They don't need a reason, the fact that they prefer it is quite enough. There is no moral imperitive for people in a given society to change for newcomers. Newcomers can take it or leave. And Quebecers also have to learn the same thing about English Canada...they can like it or leave, but Canada shouldn't have to change for them either.

This guy went to jail for tax evasion, just to start with, and his site is covered in all sorts of denials and diatribes against "false accusers" (classically paranoid) and diatribes against "International Catholicism." Did you bother to read any of the footnotes in this nonsense? They don't support the accusations in any way, and they're nestled in with such tidbits as "Was Jonestown a C.I.A. Medical Experiment?" It's outrageous that you take this crap and spread it around.

Only if you're a woman.

And I imagine that except for the nasty rumour floating around about you and little boys, you're just peachy. I'm sure being way too ugly to attract adults must be a terrible thing, and you did what you had to do in order to get your rocks off. Shove it asshole. I don't care if I get suspended for that...just making crap up and flinging it at a good man is unpardonable.

Ahhhh...so this was a personal Jihad, and not the fault of a hijab, eh? We should ban Islam and not have to worry about either. *snicker*

How not? Why is God at odds with science? Scientific discovery is a subset of religion, not in opposition to it. Sure, there's a great wall of snow thrown up by some religious folks and some of the atheistic set, but there's no real argument on most things, or at least there doesn't need to be. I strongly believe in God, and while I'm only nominally Christian I believe that on balance Christianity has been an enormous and defining boon to the western world. I also am a believer in any science proven to be factual, including to a large degree evolution. As well as certain creation ideas, but they are often not at odds with science either.

There is, however, unanimity that a tax cut is preferred. It's a breath of fresh air after years and years of Liberal tax grabs and nanny statism. I only hope that once Harper gets his majority, he starts slicing off the accumulated fat and dismantling the welfare state. Canadians need to relearn self-reliance after years of being encouraged to whine for hand-outs.

Not like the egregiously horrible and highly dangerous <<<<<Holiday Card Scandal>>>>> (reverberating intonation), eh?

It almost undoubtably will happen again. However, committing a significantly disrupting terrorist act and occupying Africa are two different things. Just ask Lord Chelmsford.

The exact details are that except for a small reserve to maintain bank liquidity, the banks does exactly that with your money. That's why savers get interest...it doesn't come out of nowhere; it comes from the interest spread between lending it out and saving it. Except equities, which go directly to the economy through a corporate entity.

I can just see fleets of passenger airplanes transporting hordes of angry yellow peril to Africa over US aegis destroyer pickets, aircraft carriers, and squadrons of fighters picking them off 10 at a time. Are you serious? Oh, and btw, the US or Canada wouldn't hesitate for one second to commandeer any national airline it wanted in the event of war. We're not operating under those constraints either.

I think the categories of religion and science are not mutually exclusive. For some reason atheists have managed to portray them as such, but they're not.

Only my biceps. I don't pretend to know what you're talking about here, but since changing the way one uses gasoline is far easier said than done, and in fact well nigh impossible, as evidenced by the first world's response to the current hysteria of "global warming" and rising gasoline prices, I suspect that building more jails and spending more time busting drug addling criminals is the only available solution. Enabling them and removing responsibility from them in favor of the state is hardly the best solution.

What do you imagine will happen? They don't have the force projection capability to float themselves to Taiwan, much less Africa. Since the PLA is semi-autonomous, it's not even clear that they'd embark on the orders of the central government even if they DID have a massive armoured junk building initiative. I know it pains the left no end, but while the "Chinese Century" makes good book fodder, it is far more likey to descend into another century or so of warlordism than it is the be the next global hegemon. And that makes it more dangerous than ever, but not the way you think.

That's why war is a better option, no?

I love the kneejerk treehuggery in this thread. Did anyone read the actual reason the thing isn't licenced/ To wit: "The car is considered a low-speed urban vehicle with a regulated maximum speed of 40 km/h. It's designed for areas where speed limits are 50 km/h or less, such as city core or neighbourhood-type driving, said Clifford." So outside of school zones, the minimum speed limit is 50 kms, and this thing won't go that fast safely. It's one thing to have slow motorized bikes travelling on the side of the road or on bike paths, and quite another to have the entire lane blocked by a vehicle that can't go the speed limit. Further, unless they can find a city unlike any city I've ever seen, anywhere in the world, there are fast flow roads throughout the city that this thing couldn't go on, yet have to go on in order to go from one end of the city to the next. I can't think of a worst menace on the road than to clog them up with vehicles going at different speeds. Good grief, the death toll in new delhi was horrendous, what with scooters, cars, bullock carts, bicycles and camels all using the same roadway...the last thing we need here is that.