xul

I'm not sure I'm the representative of "your guys", but it seems I'm the only guy fit for these under the post here. So, I like to discuss the issue with you. This is absolutely correct. If a Canadian visits some Arabian country, I guess he also need to obey Islamic laws, such as hood his wife and daughters. Only a diplomat could "out law" while living in a foreign country. Mostly but not absolutely right. Immigrants allowed to immigrate Canada include several categories. Most immigrant case belong to skill workers. Applying this category applicant must educated, reach a certain English/French level and have many years working experience, and there is a age limits to limit a person who is too young or too old to apply. CIC calculates all factors by a score system. Only the one who could get a certain score beyond CIC criteria would allow to immigrate Canada. Immigrants also are asked to have enough money in bank to support their first half year living in Canada. Now the money requested is about $10,000 a family, according how many people the family has. Some immigrants come as investors. This category does not request English/French and Education but assets. Usually the investors are asked to invest a certain amount of asset (usually several hundreds thousand to several million dollars, according the Canada local governments) in a certain region. Some immigrants come sponsored by their parent or children who are immigrants or Canadian lived in Canada. Usually the sponsor was asked to have enough income to support the person who was sponsored. Some "immigrants" accurately are refugees. Some of them are real refugees who need help. Some of them just are illegal immigrants who were covered as refugees by their refugees lawers. These lawyers makes up a lot of vivid storys for their clients such as they are forced to take part in Communist Party (impossible, in China, being a Communist is the first step to be a corrupt government offical and a lot of pleasant want but can not join CPChina because, use the actor's line in the movie Star War, "their skill do not fit for the use of darkside." ) So, speaking English/French is not absolutely necessary to every immigrant. If there is a rich guy who have enough money to support his family, Canada government do not ask him to speak English or French because he does not need work or as a investor, he can hire a manager who can speak his lauguage to take care of his business. In my opinion, Canada immigration policy has some problem. 1. The criteria of money request for skill workers seems to be decided in 1970s, it is not fit today's Canadian living cost. These money only can support a family 2 or 3 month in Canada city and I doubt even a pure blood British specialist could find a job in Canada in such short time. This is one cause there are a lot of skill works doing unskilled job. 2. The family members(spouse and children) do not request English/French. This is why there are a lot of immigrants could not speak official language well. 3. To investors, if his assets is not high enough to hire a manager to care his business, he will have problem to run his business while he could not speak English or French well. 4. To those madeup refugees, I almost could have no willing to say anything to Canadian. This guys, if they are Chinese, some of them are corrupt communist government officals and most of Chinese believe Canada judge refugee them for this guys brought billions dollars of money to Canada. Some of them are poor peasant but they are not poor enough to be a real refugee, or have enough education to fit skill works. So they pay illegal immigrant traffickers and Canada refugee lawyers about several tens thousand dollars to buy a refugee identity. I'm an engineer and I believe in science. I guess anyone here may see which kind of people strolled about the verge of hate, racism, fundamentalism if he or she treat everyone fair and equal. The only words I can say to this guys is cling on the ways of hatred, racism and fundamentalism is not good to others, to nation, especially to themselves. They could not use these trashes to change any bit of world but only can make them indulge in a daydream far apart from reality.

If there was a culture absolutely "up" than others in the world, why would we care to be assimilate by it? If there is a culture that some part of it is better than ours, why do we refuse to assimilate this part of it? Which culture around world is a "pure blood" culture without mixed with other culture in some historic period? I just doubt there exists a uniform criteria of "Canada Culture" like a law to present to immigrants for assimilation. In other words, just assume there were not any immigrants in Canada, but if Canada government try to write a uniform criteria of Canada culture to enforce all Canadian to obey it, I guess this country would go into civil war.

If anyone asked me how much should I like to be assimilate to Canada Culture, I would ask: In this forum, whose behaviour is the representative of "Canadian Culture" ?

I agree. But spanking is useless to help kid learn English and other knowledges. It only can make rebellious kids who made their parents, teachers, wishfully not eventually police headache. I guess there are a lot of Chinese immigrants doing low paying work because their English is not good. Do you think Canadian government have the rights to spank them to achieve their English for their good future? Each kids are different, not every one fit for the "future" their parents designed for them. If we allow them to lean what fits them, they make progress rapidly. Parents' duty is to help them to be what fit them to be, not force them to be what not fit them but their parents expect them to be. I think "designation of kids' future" is the main shortcoming of Chinese culture. In China, there are a lot of these spank-made and unqualified government officials, CEOs, MBAs, doctors, lawyers and judges, all corrupted and dull. These guys contribute both society and even themselves nothing. They were forceably to reach the position they hold by being spanking by their parents, for in China carpenters do not have a decent live and their peasant parents of course don't want their kids to be poor like themselves. But they have no interest in their job but some entertainment I suppose they lost in their childhood. I guess most chinese strolled in Las Vegas casinos are these guys. I want move to Canada mostly because these dull social clambers are taking over China because city born people like my parents and me are only allowed to have one child and these guys always have a dozen of kids so those Chinese like me will become rare species if not be extincted a hundred years later.

I don't think proud to be white is wrong. If a person can proud to be a member of a football team or a student of a school, why he or she can not allowed to proud being a member of a nation or race or a group of people identitied by a certain aspect trait such as stature or skin color? But when we proud of to be the group of greatness we belonged, we must be fully aware it will not guarantee the greatness of ourselves. For one if a movie get a Oscar, it does not mean every actors in the film is the best around the world. The achievements of them eventually depend on their individual efforts not their group's. In a country with several of different races, using the same way to retaliate the insolent assaults from some mumbers of other races is not a correct way for good of the country and the race we love.

I doubt this kind of parents really care of their children's future. What is the future they defined? To be a CEO or MBA something? If their kid fit and like to be a carpenter or plumber, why don't allow them to choise their won lives?

Very sad to the 3 kids for they have such parents. The post did not state very clearly but I guess the father was arrested for spanking his children. If what I guessed is truth, I think the principal and police was doing the right thing and the father deserved the punishment. Spanking is not a correct way to raise our children. In China, I sometimes see some parents, mostly born in peasant families though they may be intellectuals now, spanking their kids to achieve their education----the sequels are that their kids have 5% opportunity to become corrupt communist government offficals and 5% opportunity to become criminals, both of these categories like spanking others, and 90% opportunity to be what like their fathers worked in sweetshop spanked by those 10%.

If ape authority psychologized or pathologized every abnormal ape and cured them to normal, there would be no men left today. I'm also not sure I have correctly caught on the issue. I think it is about some parents and teachers over-pathologizing their kids because their kids' behavior seems not as normal as other kids. They don't understand each kids are different. Sometimes they lack some kind of ability temporarily does not mean they will not have these ability permanently. Einstein disliked mathematics when he was a teenager and fortunately he father did not pilled him to normal. I think most of rebellious kids don't caused by pathological problem but only by lacking of proper instructions or these instructions don't carry out in time----I mean, parents' instructions usually works more effectively before kids beome rebellious by lacking of instructions.

I think this is a good issue to discuss. Unfortunately, from scientific view, modern men are the descendants of a couple of abnormal ancient monkeys. And some famous scientists and inventors does not represent very normal as they were kids and teenagers. How could we define abnormal depends on how could we define normal. The only problem is---who is the normal man?

Technically, if the accident took place in the plane's landing or taking off stage, it would be caused by wind-shear. Wind shear is an atmosphere phenomena that the air may suddenly shear down in a certain small area. If it happened in the way of a plane takeoff or land, the plane would sink down tens meters in a second, and pilot would have no time to reaction before it crashed into earth so it may lead to fatal problem. Unfortunately, modern technology has not an effective way to detect wind shear. Accidnets happened sometimes. Usually a big plane such as BE747 is safe than a small plane when it meets a wind shear because it has more inertia and wind can hardly change its way suddenly.

t If you meant that America troops based in some Arab country made China government headache, I would say it was not fact. China is a country with different cultural from America and the nation has lost its ambitions of conquering world for two thousand years. You could not suppose Chinese and their government would think as your way. If Admiral Keating questioned every Chinese generals he met in China about in which Arab countries America resides its troop, I guess no one could figure it out. I did not try to judge American presidents from the view based on China interest but on America interest under this topic. If I stood on Chinese interest, I would say: Bush administration is the most friendly administration China government has ever had since the end of cold war. There were too many "old friends" of China government in Bush administration. Mr. Bush's father, former President Bush was a former American embassador in China and China incumbent minister of foreign affairs is his former translator then. Mr. Cheney is the a main advocator of the policy of associating China against Soviet in cold war. Even Mr. Rumsfeld, who was supposed as the most unfriendly official to China by public media, also invested $500,000 in a fund benefited from China stock market . Bush visited China two times in his first term but Clinton had never visited China in his first term. During Bush administration, China entered WTO made China economy booming rapidly. Bush administration turned American force to mideast so Taiwan was neglected and the ammunition Bush sold Taiwan has never become reality though this is not Mr. Bush's fault. Both you and American Woman did not figure out how nice China government treats to Mr. Bush but he knowns. The refusal of several warship port call Hongkong is the most slightly reaction of China government to the ammunition deal between America and Taiwan, During Clinton's time, usually military offical visits was also been halt for several month. Considering Bush administration did so mang things for China, as a Chinese or a person who carry a China passport now(at one point I agree with you: I am voting by my feet), I think I should suggest supportors of Mr. Bush could defend their president by this: Yes, both Bush and Clinton were liar. But Clinton lay for himself, and Bush lay for his country and people's interest, though things did not go to the direction as he hoped.....

Unfortunately every "system" around the world were designed for favoring those who suit for them. Though each designer of them declared they were designed for "more hardworking more gain", but they were not. The reality is, with exact words, "more hardworking to change youself to suit the system more gain"...... There was a story like a joke. When I was a teenager, one of my classmate fell into "racialism". He told me, "I think white guys are better, because most Olympic champions are white guys." I "felt" he was wrong, but could not figure out which part of his conclusion was wrong. When I grow elder, I know why he was wrong-----Most Olympic champions are white guys because the Olympic game came of Europe and the rules of Olympic games were writen by white guys, so they more suit to white athletes. If a Asian could modify the rules of games, he might put 100 posts on a soccer field so every player had to dodge agilely to avoid any collision, he would ban all body contacts and use handgun duel instead of boxing... , then we would see more "Asian faces" on the medal podiums. As a individual, we usually feel powerless in front of a "system". Using a slightely modified actor's line in the movie Transformer might describe the circumstance---"Before our life began, there was a system. We don't know where it came from, but it only holds the power, to create or ruin our lives..." So changing ourselves to suit the system is wise. If a person chose his life to change or fight a system, he may be great like Lincoln or Washington, but also may be failing like President Bush----essentially, his mistake was not making a decision of invading Iraq, but was trying to change the system of the region or even the world that has existed hundreds years in the world.

In my opinion, the handling of China government in the event of F-8/EP-3 was not a mistake, it's really stupid. If I was them, I would not send a F-8 but a Y-8 with 20t broadcaster equipment and broadcasting some pacifists' sermon on all frequencies all the time. I guess no American spy plane would want to come again next time. Now Chinese government has learnt a lot from their earlier mistakes and has improved their strategy from then on. But what is that American government has leant from Iraq? Making a new war to Iran? I think history will not blame him because he is correct. It is to earlier to say history has judged his decision. It was those guys who dreamt a easy triumph in Iraqi blamed him. Perhaps it was not a joke. It's just what those common soldiers want. You would not expect every American soldier have the same ambitions as their president. The whole Big Mac is not as big as Iraq and Iran. I guess you would forgot---all of these American friends ruled by kings, not democracy. And the Bush administration's democracy paradigm is making American headache. All were returned to office before public knew them have made a big mistake. And where are them now?

I agree that suppressing Iran is a continuation of US foreign policy. But I meant that, if a new recruit throws a grenade to his enemy, he wounded one of his target's leg but also hurt one of his arm, can be considered as a mistake. 9/11 was not the only opportunity America had. Another President Bush, I mean the father of this President Bush , had ever had a good opportunity to knock down Sadaam when American troop dispeled Iraqi army out of Kuwait. But why he did not do it? I think it was because he is wise than his son. I understand how inconvenience it is to American soldiers living in a country with ban of casino and unhooded women. Sorry, it's only a joke. I understand how eagerly America government wants to find or make a Arab country as the same as UK or AUS but it is ony a dream not reality. These guys do not agree or disagree anything. They just wanted to hitchhike the American triumph train but they also made a mistake. Now they are managing to jump off the train.

With huge territory, advanced technology, better system and 300 million creative people, America is not weak. No one outside could knock down America except American themselves. In fact, the handling of Bush with 911 event and invade Afghanistan later was correct. But in Iraq, He established two self-contradictory goals, establishing democracy in Iraq and controling oil from Iranian influence, for the war. But to a country with population of 60% Shiah Muslim and only 20% Sunni, Mr. Bush could not reach the goal of manipulating its oil and keeping it from Iranian influence by democracy. So American soldiers was deeply involved into the conflicts between Iraqi Shiah and Sunni militants because Amercia wants to weanken those pre-Iran clergies but these guys are not the category whom can be easily dealt with. I guess this is the problem that American have to face now and this is the bigest mistake Bush administration have made.

It is not entirely a joke. At least American munitions industry has got the strongest employment since the end of Vietnam War, I guess. What matters now is----Whatever who will be the next president, Bush administration has changed the history of the world. Gorbachev pulled the world into unipolar and Bush administration has partly pulled it back.

Perhaps I did not express my mean clearly. According to some post, Hong Kong total loss in this event is only US $5,000,000, the influence to her whole economy is very slight. I meant there were a certain group of people whose businesses as suppliers of American Navy had begun during British time , and China government had guaranteed Hong Kong citizens their life would not be changed by the event of Hong Kong being returned to China. I reckon that Amercia government wants to continue these port call for two reason: 1.Though Japan government is an ally of America, but most Japanese treat American troop as occupier and the relationship between American soldiers and local Japanese people is not harmonious. Some conflicts and protests can be seen in newsletters that American army officers and soldiers commited crimes such as rapes and were arrested by Japenese police. But the records of Amercian sailors in Hong Kong were good (I guess it because a drunk might enroll into army but could not get a job on a warship. ) so American sailors can spend their vacation more comfortablely in a hostile-less environment. 2. American government wants to present their "existence" in Hong Kong by these port call. A warship is not only a military weapon but also a political weapon. You would remember President Bush dispatched a carrier outside New York harbor after the terrorists attack. American government also wants to apply the same effect on Hong Kong citizens especially after Hong Kong democratic politicans has just lost a vote in local legislature election. This is why China government thinks they can revenge Amercia government by halting these port call. Who would be convinced by an American navy warship could be stranded by a little storm? What is the function of those meteorologic satellites? There had ever been thousands of Russian warships sailed across the sea during Cold War, who would shelter them? The fact is American government applied the application and China government had never granted it until the last day, they said the port call was refused. The procedure of application of a port call is just like you apply a China visa. You make out some forms to Chinese embassy, tell them which day and where you would visit, and then wait for the result. Considering the refusal came out too late, perhaps some officals of China government wanted to tease Amercian govenment. But I don't think they knew there were a lot of families waited in the port. Most of chinese do not know Thanksgiving Day. I think that they changed their mind later was really for humanitarian reason. For example. I have applied immigration application to Canada government. If I though I might be grant by Canada government so I shipped all my belongings to Canada. But when the ship arrived, Canada government told me I was refused. Could I complain Canada government for the situation? By the way, American government has never given a reason when they reafused a person visiting America. My wife's brother lived in America and his parents have visited Amercian several times. They also got the refusal one or two times. No reason was given. And several weeks later they was granted when they applied the application again. And most Chinese who have visited America suffered the same situation. It seems who would be granted depending upon the visa officer's mood.

Politicians want votes, environmental scientists want funds, enterprisers want new order forms, journalists want Pulitzer awards, everyone want to be the hero who save the earth..... Should we wish the global warming issue to be a truth, or a cheat?

This is right. And the raw material to produce ethanol is corn and the corn yield depends on how many chemical fertilizer is used, and chemical fertilizer is the production based on oil.The electric vehicles are just the ones which moves their exhaust pipes to a power plant. So whatever we fill into the tank of our car, we are burning oil.

I think you has misunderstand the reaction of Chinese government. The refusal means "we don't like some your government's action", and ther permission later means "we don't want to punish the innocents." Accorting another article I read, some journalists and familiy numbers waited at port, but the carrier did not arrive at time. When the journalist asked a American consulate official wheather the port call had been canceled and the official answerd it was just "delayed". If the article is the turth, it hints that the Kitty Hawk had left while Amercian diplomats were negotiating with Chinese government, it is interesting. Are you sure that the decision of the battle group left Hong Kong was made by American government, or just by navy, or only by the commander of the battle group?

According the information I has just searched from some Chinese unofficial web site, in earlier 1997 American government and Chinese Government reached an agreement that allow American warships making port call Hong Kong after Britain return Hong Kong to China, but each port call must be granted by Chinese government. This means China has the right to refuse any American warship port call Hong Kong. Chinese government allow these port call because these port call had kept for many years when British controled Hong Kong and if Chinese government stoped these port call some Hong Kong tourism industry would loss some interests. Usually Chinese government may refuse these port call several times when American government sells weapon to Taiwan and American government knows the game. This is not the first time American warship was refused by China for the same reason. This is why I think the event was odd. Why these families were still sent to Hong Kong? Was it a mistake, or some American officials wanted using them to blackmail Chinese government?---I don't think the second point was the truth, so I guess American government was just forgetting Kitty Hawk and Thanksgiving Day when they came out with the weapon deal. I think the action of Chinese government is correct and appropriate. They refused the port call first by political reason and then granted it several hours later by humanitarian reason, they properly distinguished the confliction between governments and the interests of these sailor families and Hong Kong citizens. American navy said the carrier could not come back is caused of weather. But which kind of weather could avoid a battle group going to Hong Kong while could not object it going to Japan? It's obviously that American navy sacrificed their sailor families' interests only for their "face". Perhaps, but by which way would China be looked good in American medium? Even if China sent 1 million troop to Iraq helping America, perhaps that would cheer American one month. Because the second month those Chinese soldiers would make all mistakes that American soldiers did---misshooting civilians, mistreatment prisoners, misbombing allies....., and I guess everyone here could imagine how American medium would condemn "brute Chinese". So China would become more bad than doing nothing.

I don't think that "no reason was given" is unusual. Usually governments do not give the reason or the real reason when they play those political or diplomatic games. But the event is realy unusual because there were a lot of familie numbers of sailors had flown to Hong Kong to meet their families. It is obvious that some American navy officers believed the carrier would be granted to visit Hong Kong. I think those troop families are the victims of bureaucratism of government officials. I guess the pentagon officials were fully aware that the carrier would be refused but they had just neglected its influence to those sailor families because informing those families to Hong Kong is not their job. I guess it's the job of a lieutenant commander or an ensign in fleet and the junior officer of course did not know what games the politicians or generals were playing so he sent out the information to those families. And when the refusal was known by fleet, someone must find the problem. So the fleet informed pantagon, and pantagon informed United State Department of state, and then they informed China embassador, and the embassador informed Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China, and who know whom the Ministry of Foreign Affairs would inform.....these bureaucratism processes spent 24 hours to make a decision and the carrier might move across 800 sea miles nearly reached Japan during this time and left behind those bureaucratists buckpassing each other....

I think that what kind of system or policy of a nation or a region for their own business was decided by a person or a group of people who lived far from them is wrong. Just imagine, if there was a person who lived in Havaii, and all traffic sign in his town was set by police in Washington by map, how would he expect that these facilities could convenience him? So America and Canada's system is good. States or provinces have their own legislature to modify their local laws. I think what Mao did in Tabet was wrong. Slavery is bad in modern moral criterian. But even if Mao tried to use democracy not communism replacing slavery just as Mr.Bush did in Iraq(if he did do these just as he said for democracy not for oil ), I also think he was wrong. If the people here had no will to pursue those "advanced system", who would have the right to enforce them?

Perhaps, but people would also remember J. Edgar Hoover, who had kept the job of FBI chief for 48 years when he died in his occupation, more longer than his KGB opponents. It is very weird to an official in a democracy country. I am not saying FBI was as the same as KGB. But if KGB wanted to uncrown their general secretary, they might just arrest him and throw him into prison. And FBI had the ability to crumple government by sent some dirt material of politicians from their secret archives to public media.

Sometimes we should conprehencd these phenomena from a historic view point. George Washington got hundreds of Africian slaves in his home, but we can hardly condemn he was a brute barbarian because nearly every rich white guys got slaves in their home then. The "genocide" after communists ruled China in 1950s were more like the revenge in my country's history rather than its communism property. Both my grandfather (my mother's father) and my wife's grandfather were officials of fomer Guomintang government. Her grandfather was executed in 1950s but my grandfather was survived and even got a job in new government. What is the different between them? Because my grandfather worked in a former government department in charge of administration water and electricity something so he had not opportunity to involve any business of surpressing communists. But my wife's grandfather was the head of a county, he had to do someting to support his government to suppress communist. Former government was not mercy to treat those communists and most western and China human rights activists always fogret our country only kissed off our emperor less than 30 years then, and they also easily forget the guillotines in Europe then white guys kissed off their kings. I think communism is wrong because it is based on hatred. It is not the hatred of foreigner like racism and Nazism, but it is a "selfhatred" in a nation by inciting the poor people to hate the rich people. This is another part of why there were a lot of persecution happened in communism country. If a person who was tought to believe his good live was stolen by another guy and he made him lived in beggary and nasty, what would he react to this one whom he believed hurt him so lot?