I miss Reagan

One thing to remember in the aftermath: The primary objective of these kinds of terrorists is to provoke democratic states into over reacting to their attacks. Al Queda succeeded beyond their wildest expectations when the 9/11 attacks provoked the US into invading Iraq. I am sure that a whole host of people will call for further restrictions on the freedom of citizens in order to prevent this kind of tragedy from happening again. We must resist such attempts - turning our society into a police state due to fear of terrorism would simply hand victory to the terrorists. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Are you kidding? The last thing they wanted was us "infidels" in their "Holy Lands". They figured we'd just sit on our hands like the WTC attack in '91 or flee like we did in Mogadishu. They want to control our countries through fear. They tasted success when they alter Spains elections. They tasted success when they obliterated the US economy in 2001. Unlike the Spaniards, the Brits will not back down. Although Brits are progressive, they have little tolerance for terrorism and will have even more resolve in hunting the Islamo- facists down.

Geldof deserves better than being put in with likes of Mandela and Arafat. He's not too bright either.

Ah... what have here, an idealist. An anarchist perhaps? Hey shouldn't you be in Glen Eagles right now ripping sh*t up for peace? Anyway, your type type really annoys me. Here you sit self righteously typing on that computer manufactured in Korea by some multi-national corporation useing raw materials from the Congo and mercury and lead that will eventually be shipped to Michigan landfills to pollute Canadian groundwater. Perhaps we should talk about the fossil fuels being used to run your computer. To fuel the bus/car that takes you to work. The fossil fuels produced by these "evil" companies which heat your house in this cold country. A country, which by the way, you live in because of the theft and genocide of aboriginal peoples. While you sit taking up the biggest ecological footprint in the world. So while you're up there on your high horse; tell me what percentage of your income do you give to Africa?

Wasn't there talk of her moving to Edmonton at one time?

First, there are several million Quebecers, so generalisations are weak. (I have read comments that if Quebec were independent, Canada wouldn't be able to "dump" such people as Homolka in Quebec.)Second, bear in mind that the details of this case are generally new to people in Quebec - many are reacting the way some in Ontario first reacted. (Homolka's interview in French with Joyce Napier certainly raised her profile.) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> August you do realize that you are one in a million don't you? But I will say I'm taking the media's point of view. However, there doesn't seem to be any huge outcry in Montreal. Anyway, I love Quebecers individually. Collectively I'm not sure I can figure them out on all levels. LOL good point. If Holmolka had committed her crimes in Texas and wanted to seek asylum in Canada, I'm sure Ontarians would be clamouring to keep her just to spite the US and Bush.

I appreciate your thoughts BD. If we agree that throwing money at them isn't going to solve the problem, what is the solution? I don't think there is one. I think Africa will always be Africa because there is an endless supply of despots to take the place of the last one. With respect to western corps. and mercinaries, companies like Shell have to have protection against the ruthless criminal elements. You should see what these thugs do to people who have money. There are people who'll kill you for a buck and won't even give your dead corpse a second thought. As for the decent people, they are begging for western business to come to their villages and exploit their resources. Why? because the west has the knowledge, money and equipment to do it. But westerners aren't always eager to jump in because first they have to grease every cop and leader in town to assure that they aren't robbed, kidnapped or blown up. But then when a company like Shell comes in and actually spends their money, they are slammed for hiring protection and giving money to shady elements. It truly is a no win situation.

Not going to happen at all. Sociopaths do not experience fear. If anything Karla would experience a "rush" from the danger. She is in her glory, she's manipulated the system and is now free to drink her ice caps. What frightens me most is that the radical left will use her as an example that even psychopaths can be rehabilitated, as she will likely not be able to re-offend, being under the microscope for the rest of her life. What I want to know is what the hell is wrong with Quebecers and their indifference and even acceptance of her. I'm all for the "Les Miserable" type of forgiveness but I figured even Quebecers would draw the line at serial killers. Oh well, they can have her.

Nigeria's a prime example of how western interests facilitate the continued oppression of African people and the corruption of their leadership. Nigeria collects millions of dollars a year in oil riches, yet seventy percent of Nigeria's population lives on less than $1 dollar a day, and the poorest fifth of the population received only four percent of the nation's wealth. However western oil companies like Shell and Chevron turn a blind eye and, in some cases, actively take part in the suppression of dissent. No discussion of Africa's endemic corruption can take place without mentioning western complicity, nor can any talk of refrom take place without aknowledging the barriers "our" interests present to real positive change. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> BD, you have a pretty simplistic view of Africa, similar to the Live 8 bands. Shifting the personal responsibility from African leadership and placing it on western corporations is foolish and misguided. It's understandible why people think this way though. We grow up berated by lectures about how people are starving in Africa because of our wealth. Every other infomercial is some church organization showing starving Africans. The first time I went to Africa, I went with this attitude. But when I got there I was shocked to see how much money was going in but the people were still in rags. It soon became obvious where all the money was going, to the corrupt governments. I have seen first hand that there is plenty of wealth in Africa to feed the people. The problem is corruption that will never end. Aid shipments of medicine and technology are sold by the governments and end up in Europe. Many African governments put taxes on donated clothes and goods as a disincentive so people will send money instead which has to be funneled through the corrupt governments. Of course every once in a while you'll get a success story like Uganda right now, with a leadership that is headed in "the right direction". But history reminds us that this is short lived with a hundred corrupt guys ready to pounce at any sign of weekness to take their turn. Look at Zimbabawe or pre-massacre Rwanda, other countries that were once "headed in the right direction". Debt forgiveness is a good idea in an ideal world. Unfortunately in Africa, debt forgiveness just encourages more corruption and discourages self reliance. I agree with Argus regarding Nigeria. They have plenty of oil wealth to fix their problems. Isn't that your argument about Alberta all the time BD? That we are so successful because of our oil wealth? Then what's the problem with Nigeria. Hell even Nigera agreed with Gaddafi the other day when he said Africa needs to quit depending on the West.

Why does Alberta want to undermine such an important social institution as marriage? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm thinking the best way to go would be for all levels of government to stay out of the business of marriage. That way they are not favoring either side. Let the churches marry who they will. If they want to marry gays, fine. The government can legally recognize both with out performing the marriages. I think that's pretty fair. I don't know, make the case against BD.

Sounds fair. No marriages for anyone. Leave religious institutions to the churches.

Question: How's this going to work in Alberta? Is Alberta going to do the same as they did with the gun registry and just refuse to comply? Curious.

Cyber beat me to the punch. Because the courts have decided that people should have the right to marry whomever they choose. I'm not saying there is anything wrong with it. And I appreciate your being consistant. But I'm saying that right now politicians are saying "never" about polygamy because right now there isn't popular support for the movement, just like 6 years ago they said "never" to SSM because people were mostly opposed. It wasn't a legal decision, it was a decision based on pressure from the SSM lobby.

Yes it's unlikely that man and dog will ever be permitted to marry for the reason that there isn't a large beastiality lobby. But say a movement started, and they started public campaigns and appealing to peoples emotions. More plausible is the legalization of polygamy. Just wait a few years when they take it to the surpreme court. There is now a precident and there is no legal reason why they would not allow it. (Although the SCC doesn't seem to make it's decisions based on law) Of course right now, the answer is no and they say never but once again a mere six years ago it was:

Jack Layton isn't very pretty. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I was talking about Scott Brison... Ohhhhhhhhhh. I'm bad, I'm a bad guy.

Yes people often change their views as they get older or gradually over long periods of time. The problem with Martin is he is so obviously 'changing his mind' for the purpose of holding on to power. The problem is his statements were very black and white only a few years ago. They lead the people to believe he was solid and resolute in his stance on SSM. Now only a few years later he is solid and resolute on the total opposite side of the issue. It's dithering in it's purest form. The man has no principles.

Actually I disagree with the good Senator from Iowa. But Bush is far less protectionist than Kerry or the Dems are. We're entering a new era here with China in the picture. In fact I think the US has a lot to worry about, if it doesn't wake up here. Anyway, the China threat would make for a good topic elsewhere. Canada should be even more worried because we are further behind, and if the US goes down, they're taking us with them. Our over spending and regressive tax policies are only putting us further behind. I agree. I guess if you're a Senator where your voter base is an aging rural population in Iowa that probably has little means or motivation to retrain themselves, your best bet is to go protectionist.

TERRIBLE TOPIC. And a terrible comparison. Bush will be remembered for finally liberating the Middle East. Martin will fade into history as a weak dirty ditherer, remembered as the sad looking guy who bought off the pretty lady.

Obviously Scott Brison is having a hard time comprehending freedom of speech. Anyway Martin will go down in history as a lousy leader with little character. True he may have accomplished getting the SSM through, but he did it through slimey means. I was happy when Martin finally ousted "da little guy", now I'm not sure which is worse, a guy who will be jerk to your face or ditherer who will do or say anything to stay in power. Not surprisingly, one who supports an equally unethical turncoat is rabidly defending the dirty ditherer.

I don't think this comment from Martin can be emphasised enough. Today: Cherry Picker!

If I can vote for I MISS REAGAN, I'm not voting for anyone! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Cyber, you are a gentleman and a scholar my friend.

Thanks, Flea, for reminding us that the USA is responsible for all of the World's ills. The problem with the Live 8 folks, is they don't learn from their mistakes. The millions Geldof raised in '84 hardly made it to the starving people of Ethiopia but went it's ruling dictatorship.

I've never lived in the U.S. so I'll take your word for it, but I just enjoy living in a country where they don't ask for my credit card when I go to the hospital. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ya you'd rather die waiting in line for "free" health care. Please, is that the best you can come up with, some regurgitated Liberal propeganda? Give me a break.

Corporate leaders are warning about what I've been saying all along: The Left is Killing the 'Golden Goose'.

Yes it's quite deflating when I turn on the news and see some unknown Conservative MP spouting off about how homosexuality is evil, for example. Fine if they believe that everyone is entitled to an opinion, but they must be stupid to actually publically express this. I often wonder how the CPC can be so ignorant with respect to strategic planing. Why, in the last days of the last election campaign, would Harper come back to Alberta and make statements along the lines of: finally Alberta will be running the county, is beyond me. Harper's recent comments about the Bloc are pretty hypocritical as well. Nevertheless, the media sharks take advantage of the blood in the water and overplay any statement deemed by them to be politically incorrect.